Server Wipe

[DeningWei]

17 hours ago, powerstuck said:

I agree. 

A player is one set of pixels to be generated by the server.

A player on a dino is two sets of pixels to be generated by the server.

A player on a dino in a 10 foundations long by 10 foundations large by 10 walls high base is 1000+ sets of pixels to be generated by the server. 

No that is very simplistic.  Things that exist are just on the save file which is saved every 20 min to half an hour causing a little bump to the lag for a second or so.  That's everything saving, buildings, trees, rocks, inventories, wild and tamed dinos, stats, and states etc.  The bigger the difference between the last save and the new save, the bigger the lag bump.  So if a buttload of trees get knocked down then the lag bump could be half a second longer as the server saves.

 

The real performance issues come from LOS (line of sight) and also the number of LOS that there are on the server at once.  The more players the more LOS.  Everything a player sees is rendered and the server increases load depending on what is rendering.  Static objects, low load.  Moving and AI objects, higher load.

You see that Raptor?  What's it doing? It's wandering around, it's AI is scanning for compatible targets using its own LOS, it's monitoring damage states and the status of its allies and a host of other AI processes on top of the graphical animation.  The server is processing all this.  What happens when you leave the area what does the raptor do? Well that depends on if someone else is viewing it.  If nobody is then it freezes.  Yup it does absolutely nothing.  This relieves the server load caused by you viewing it.  And there's usually plenty of dinos in people's line of sight.

And this is compounded by everybody that joins and every new LOS that is created by a player joining. 

 

Static objects cause minimal lag compared to the server load created by LOS and dynamic objects and AIs.

[YUSHOETMI]

25 minutes ago, DeningWei said:

No that is very simplistic.  Things that exist are just on the save file which is saved every 20 min to half an hour causing a little bump to the lag for a second or so.  That's everything saving, buildings, trees, rocks, inventories, wild and tamed dinos, stats, and states etc.  The bigger the difference between the last save and the new save, the bigger the lag bump.  So if a buttload of trees get knocked down then the lag bump could be half a second longer as the server saves.

 

The real performance issues come from LOS (line of sight) and also the number of LOS that there are on the server at once.  The more players the more LOS.  Everything a player sees is rendered and the server increases load depending on what is rendering.  Static objects, low load.  Moving and AI objects, higher load.

You see that Raptor?  What's it doing? It's wandering around, it's AI is scanning for compatible targets using its own LOS, it's monitoring damage states and the status of its allies and a host of other AI processes on top of the graphical animation.  The server is processing all this.  What happens when you leave the area what does the raptor do? Well that depends on if someone else is viewing it.  If nobody is then it freezes.  Yup it does absolutely nothing.  This relieves the server load caused by you viewing it.  And there's usually plenty of dinos in people's line of sight.

And this is compounded by everybody that joins and every new LOS that is created by a player joining. 

 

Static objects cause minimal lag compared to the server load created by LOS and dynamic objects and AIs.

So the more people on a server the higher the strain and more lag?

[Irk]

1 hour ago, BobRoss said:

What they should do is limit structures and dinos more. Make it so we are not required to building so big and taming so much.

This is exactly what needs to happen. There needs to be stricter tame and build limits; the game is too big now for the current build/tame caps. Each tribe should be kept small in presence. I believe this is the only way to fix any of the current issues. This also forces more player interaction which is a good thing.

[Arrclyde]

2 hours ago, BobRoss said:

Are you serious? Shows and big reviews are THE most important thing for up and coming gaming companies.

Sorry but you vastly overestimate the influence reviews have on the wide masses of consumers. If they would have, some of those really bad or misleading advertised games wouldn't have sold in the millions. 

[Arrclyde]

19 hours ago, Volcano637 said:

Definitely gotta disagree with you on that one. I still to this day don't bother going and looking for player reviews. That's what I have my game informer subscription for.

and most people don't either. If most of the people don't even bother to come to the forums, what makes you think they will take the time to look up reviews. Gaming magazines paper or digital is how almost everyone looks for games.

for the most part the only people that look at player reviews and the ones that do it for every game. Either that or to go there and write a bad review

So you "trust" a paid magazine more than honest user-rage-reviews or positive reviews to correct an unfair stance made by others? Sorry but all those game magazines are all but honest and deliver a limited picture that is lacking diversity in so many ways. There have been many many many examples of the newest past where game magazines made positive reports about games that falsely advertised their products in order to bail as many customers as possible into buying. Either they have been paid, lacked professionals that are able to look at a game from many different perspectives or they just fear they won't get to review future products from that particular company. 

No user reviews are still the best way to find out if a game fits your need. You just have to be able to tell which is a realistic review and which one is there to bash/promote a product. And to be honest: i actually know that most games get bought on sales or because of special promotions.... and of course your friend has it and tells you and other friends how cool it is. Ever had that happen? Yes, than tell me how many research did you do about the game your friend told you about? 

[BobRoss]

31 minutes ago, Arrclyde said:

So you "trust" a paid magazine more than honest user-rage-reviews or positive reviews to correct an unfair stance made by others? Sorry but all those game magazines are all but honest and deliver a limited picture that is lacking diversity in so many ways. There have been many many many examples of the newest past where game magazines made positive reports about games that falsely advertised their products in order to bail as many customers as possible into buying. Either they have been paid, lacked professionals that are able to look at a game from many different perspectives or they just fear they won't get to review future products from that particular company. 

No user reviews are still the best way to find out if a game fits your need. You just have to be able to tell which is a realistic review and which one is there to bash/promote a product. And to be honest: i actually know that most games get bought on sales or because of special promotions.... and of course your friend has it and tells you and other friends how cool it is. Ever had that happen? Yes, than tell me how many research did you do about the game your friend told you about? 

So you trust a biased user review based on a change that wont even affect you because you never experienced the before and after? Come on man be truthfull, last time I checked almost all user reviews were QQ flier nerf this movement speed nerf that, DLC this etc etc. Users barelt leave a full game review covering all areas. Thats what mags and shows do, they rate from frames to gameplay, content and mechanics. They even rate the community and talk in depth about all this. So yeah, I'll take THAT over 'WC sucks, give me back fliers!!!!!!' 

[GP]

Best way to review a game = play it yourself. After all, many of us bought ARK on June 2nd 2015 with no reviews.

In my history of looking at reviews, for anything, is you come across a bad one, then a good one, and so on. Reviews will just create doubt in your mind because many people will see 10 good reviews and 1 very bad review and that 1 bad one is enough to put doubt in people's minds. So best way to review a game is review it yourself. If you're not prepared to do that then reading other people's personal opinions isn't going to help much.

I never read gaming magazine reviews because the people that write the review haven't played the game like others have. I also never read Steam reviews because the review system is so flawed that people could write anything negative and post it.

[alexrider]

4 minutes ago, GP said:

Best way to review a game = play it yourself.

Most people aren't playing games to review them, but rather to have fun. And given the limited amount of time people have, even assuming that you are retired billionaire and can hit purchase button without checking a price. One have to develop some kind of guidelines on how to choose if this things worth hitting buy, install, play buttons.  And while steam reviews has they own flaws usually in top10 reviews there will be at least couple that state some valid points. Buying by just seeing something shiny is an option too, everyone does that I guess, sometimes it is worth it, sometimes it doesn't. But most people who are going to spend time and money on a game are going to perform some background check, one way or another.

[BobRoss]

6 minutes ago, GP said:

Best way to review a game = play it yourself. After all, many of us bought ARK on June 2nd 2015 with no reviews.

In my history of looking at reviews, for anything, is you come across a bad one, then a good one, and so on. Reviews will just create doubt in your mind because many people will see 10 good reviews and 1 very bad review and that 1 bad one is enough to put doubt in people's minds. So best way to review a game is review it yourself. If you're not prepared to do that then reading other people's personal opinions isn't going to help much.

I never read gaming magazine reviews because the people that write the review haven't played the game like others have. I also never read Steam reviews because the review system is so flawed that people could write anything negative and post it.

Thats true but for some people with limited resources a well rounded game review written by a reliable source is the key to either buying it or not. For example, I was really hyped for No Mans Sky but didnt have the time to test it would it suck. So after a week or so I read the first reviews and discovered what a fiasco it was and didnt buy it. And many people I know are like this. They wait for the first professional reviews to come through and then decide wether or not to buy it.

[DeningWei]

2 hours ago, YUSHOETMI said:

So the more people on a server the higher the strain and more lag?

Yup, that's exactly it at the moment.  Once upon a time WC had it so that wild dinos would despawn the more people were online to cope with the strain.  This would sometimes end up with dinos being pretty hard to find after a while when there was a lot of people online.  With other optimizations and continued server improvement WC relaxed the despawning so that even with plenty of people online there would still be decent numbers of dinos around.

Even still, when a lot of people online you can feel the strain.

[YUSHOETMI]

14 minutes ago, DeningWei said:

Yup, that's exactly it at the moment.  Once upon a time WC had it so that wild dinos would despawn the more people were online to cope with the strain.  This would sometimes end up with dinos being pretty hard to find after a while when there was a lot of people online.  With other optimizations and continued server improvement WC relaxed the despawning so that even with plenty of people online there would still be decent numbers of dinos around.

Even still, when a lot of people online you can feel the strain.

See i've noticed the strain lately but previously i've been in servers that where 70/70 or 100/100 for days/weeks on end, never having a problem finding dinos and minimal server lag... the lag only started hitting hard on those servers when the bases built up to stupid proportions.

[Trekt]

The amount of duped poop going around game has to be reset.

[DeningWei]

35 minutes ago, YUSHOETMI said:

See i've noticed the strain lately but previously i've been in servers that where 70/70 or 100/100 for days/weeks on end, never having a problem finding dinos and minimal server lag... the lag only started hitting hard on those servers when the bases built up to stupid proportions.

Which servers are they?  I'm curious to go look.  Ragnarok on all the servers I visited day one trying to find one with decent performance was terrible.  I've never seen any other official servers with those numbers.

[YUSHOETMI]

5 minutes ago, DeningWei said:

Which servers are they?  I'm curious to go look.  Ragnarok on all the servers I visited day one trying to find one with decent performance was terrible.  I've never seen any other official servers with those numbers.

i'm talking months upon months ago here lol, as far as i'm aware the hardware for the servers hasn't changed and optimization has got better.  Back when the game first came out on xbox the servers where capped with pop round the clock, used to take hours to get on to my home one, but it never suffered with lag or rollbacks regardless of how full it was, and we never had problems with finding dinos, even when the centre came out I never experienced sufficient lag to annoy me.  Only when the buildings started to turn to mini cities

[Tanchyon]

5 minutes ago, YUSHOETMI said:

i'm talking months upon months ago here lol, as far as i'm aware the hardware for the servers hasn't changed and optimization has got better.  Back when the game first came out on xbox the servers where capped with pop round the clock, used to take hours to get on to my home one, but it never suffered with lag or rollbacks regardless of how full it was, and we never had problems with finding dinos, even when the centre came out I never experienced sufficient lag to annoy me.  Only when the buildings started to turn to mini cities

Ahh, the Xbox performance has been degrading recently due to the increased detail in the textures that WC is trying to push through, although I think they are going to pull that back a bit to help the Xbox hardware cope.

[DeningWei]

4 minutes ago, Tanchyon said:

Ahh, the Xbox performance has been degrading recently due to the increased detail in the textures that WC is trying to push through, although I think they are going to pull that back a bit to help the Xbox hardware cope.

I was going to mention that.  Also some recent changes on PC has also cause a bit of performance suffering although thats all in the optimization process, they still have time to push out some good optimization.  It's far FAR better than the original performance.

[Volcano637]

2 hours ago, GP said:

Best way to review a game = play it yourself. After all, many of us bought ARK on June 2nd 2015 with no reviews.

In my history of looking at reviews, for anything, is you come across a bad one, then a good one, and so on. Reviews will just create doubt in your mind because many people will see 10 good reviews and 1 very bad review and that 1 bad one is enough to put doubt in people's minds. So best way to review a game is review it yourself. If you're not prepared to do that then reading other people's personal opinions isn't going to help much.

I never read gaming magazine reviews because the people that write the review haven't played the game like others have. I also never read Steam reviews because the review system is so flawed that people could write anything negative and post it.

I can agree with you on this one.

bur the main reason I read reviews isn't for their opinion, it's for the info. What type of game, multiplayer, single player so on and so on. I prefer the author to not really give his personal opinion even though it happens sometimes. Throw in some pictures of good graphics and I am ready to try it out for myself. I always judge for myself, I just want to make sure it is my cup of tea before I try it.

[Volcano637]

2 hours ago, alexrider said:

Most people aren't playing games to review them, but rather to have fun. And given the limited amount of time people have, even assuming that you are retired billionaire and can hit purchase button without checking a price. One have to develop some kind of guidelines on how to choose if this things worth hitting buy, install, play buttons.  And while steam reviews has they own flaws usually in top10 reviews there will be at least couple that state some valid points. Buying by just seeing something shiny is an option too, everyone does that I guess, sometimes it is worth it, sometimes it doesn't. But most people who are going to spend time and money on a game are going to perform some background check, one way or another.

Yeah but a couple of things people don't like aren't going to deter them from the game. If I honestly actually went and looked at the reviews and saw everything about dinosaurs and surviving and building etc. and then a bunch of people talked about the flyer nerf(which I would have no clue what they were talking about). I would say ok so they made a change people didn't like.

thats why I don't trust player reviews. I know how temperamental and entitled gamers are.

[YUSHOETMI]

40 minutes ago, Tanchyon said:

Ahh, the Xbox performance has been degrading recently due to the increased detail in the textures that WC is trying to push through, although I think they are going to pull that back a bit to help the Xbox hardware cope.

I dunno about that tho, the game to me seems to run smoother than it did and looks a hell of a lot better when it comes to xbox.  Graphically wise its pretty damn good for a console and performance wise it has got better over the last few months, never really seen any stress on the hardware and even on quite full servers the fps doesn't tend to drop.  Only time I get lag is when I play on my official home server, even tho it is PvP it has alot of large bases, and since the fighting stopped the bases get bigger and the dinos get more numerous, that's when the lag started. Just my opinion anyway,

[alexrider]

5 minutes ago, Volcano637 said:

Yeah but a couple of things people don't like aren't going to deter them from the game. If I honestly actually went and looked at the reviews and saw everything about dinosaurs and surviving and building etc. and then a bunch of people talked about the flyer nerf(which I would have no clue what they were talking about). I would say ok so they made a change people didn't like.

thats why I don't trust player reviews. I know how temperamental and entitled gamers are.

It is subjective thing for sure, as well as our own impressions and that's why it is impossible to predict if you will like anything or not based on some one else's experience, but still we have to choose what to do and where to go based on information that we get from lots of subjective sources, be it temperamental gamers, biased reviewers or sale figures concerned developers everyone has his own goals and motivation. But that's unfortunately all that we have prior to pressing buy/install/play button.

Thru I have to admit that in PvP games reviews are even less useful due to lots of people being unhappy with the game "score" rather than game itself. 

[bkrafty]

On 6/30/2017 at 8:13 AM, Volcano637 said:

Even out of all the rude people on here there are only a couple that actually call me a troll and you are one of them. Don't exactly see where you see that. I fully believe in everything I say.

what I am wondering is how do you sit there and say you know what I am thinking even more than I do? 

Just because I know that the wipe will be good for the game does not mean I am a troll. I k ow it has to suck for some people when the wipe comes but once again like I always say, people have to start thinking about other people and not themselves 

Says the guy that just stated he is idealistic and wants his version of reality to be the norm. If it sounds like a troll, acts like a troll, and smells like a troll, it might be a......?

[Arrclyde]

2 hours ago, GP said:

Best way to review a game = play it yourself. After all, many of us bought ARK on June 2nd 2015 with no reviews.

In my history of looking at reviews, for anything, is you come across a bad one, then a good one, and so on. Reviews will just create doubt in your mind because many people will see 10 good reviews and 1 very bad review and that 1 bad one is enough to put doubt in people's minds. So best way to review a game is review it yourself. If you're not prepared to do that then reading other people's personal opinions isn't going to help much.

I never read gaming magazine reviews because the people that write the review haven't played the game like others have. I also never read Steam reviews because the review system is so flawed that people could write anything negative and post it.

Yes... best way to review a game: play a game yourself. Riiiiight, better say "shut up and take my money" and potentially fund a bad game / unfinished product with your hard earn money and make somebody rich who never intends to deliver a quality product. Ever heard of War Z? Or as it seems some Space building game? 

I often have read (sorry to say that) in my opinion stupid comments like "if you want to know how it is buy the game and play it yourself", mostly from developers and people that don't have to worry about money since they buy games with daddies credit card. Sure people that have a job don't need to worry about money for computer games (in most cases). But does that have to mean, if you have the money you should throw it out the window for "bad products" just because you can? 

I say, NO. People buying games needed to earn that money before, why should developers (and i am clearly not talking about Wildcard here) be given money regardless if the game is good or not? I have enough money to fund 20 World of Warcraft accounts every month and still live my life without shortcomings. But i stopped paying (and playing) a couple of Years ago since it is not the game i like to play anymore. I am tiered of throwing money out the window just because i can. It also spoils the industry: to many bad games get rushed and sometimes never get finished. And possible good people don't get the support they deserve because people get more and more cautious where they spend there money. 

No, for me the best way to get reviews on a game is to know what kind of game you want, read infos carefully and look out for the key things in every bit of info. Plus it always helps to know the reviewers preferences. I like to name Angry Joe in this case. He makes a hilarious show, and he doesn't know everything. But he makes many many many points and gives a lot of details, and THAT is the key. I know what he prefers and what he hates. I don't even have to like all the things he finds good about a game. But i can gather many valuable infos even from the things i disagree with him.... He finds a mechanic bad that i find good, he doesn't like some things that i don't care, he loves content/a mechanic i don't really like... do that with a couple of reviews and i get the picture if i should buy a game or not. To bad most people don't do that, but buying a game day one (or worse, preorder) only to find out that you don't like so many things about the game is almost the MOST stupid thing you could ever do as a consumer and gamer. Too stupid and short sighted (since it influences the whole games market). 

Your example (10 good and one really bad review) is a good one. Yes it can make you doubt, and it SHOULD. That way you are thinking a bit more about all that. For example the one really bad review is talking about stuff being to easy, to accessible not enough work has to go into something.... is a positive review to me. As i said, my hardcore (or should i say nerdcore) days are over, and i don't need to play a game that demands more time from that i am willing to put into. It is just a game, an activity that i can spend my free time into, not a second job. And yes, that is the reason why i stay away from ARK official servers, since they revolve around a small group of players with certain preferences.... and looking at the numbers, they ain't many, not even a lot.  

Longs story short: reviews can be good for everybody, IF they know how to use various types of reviews. 

 

BTW.: are we not getting a little OFF topic? Isn't the subject "Serverwipe at official release"? I would still vote for yes, IF there are official servers for average people like me. If the mechanics stay the way they are now (extra ordinary time consuming activities, no offline protection and so forth...) i actually don't care if they wipe, since i wouldn't be playing on official. And in that case i can recommend to every body i know (and know they are not into this hardcore stuff) not to play on official servers. That would be my answer if its worth buying, because in the end they have to decide for them self. 

[Volcano637]

14 minutes ago, bkrafty said:

Says the guy that just stated he is idealistic and wants his version of reality to be the norm. If it sounds like a troll, acts like a troll, and smells like a troll, it might be a......?

God not you again. Yes we get it. A troll doesn't care about what he is saying he just wants to get the reaction from people. I care about what I say and do not care about the reaction. I am pretty much the opposite of a troll. But it's all good. You just keep on being you dude.

[bkrafty]

2 minutes ago, Volcano637 said:

God not you again. Yes we get it. A troll doesn't care about what he is saying he just wants to get the reaction from people. I care about what I say and do not care about the reaction. I am pretty much the opposite of a troll. But it's all good. You just keep on being you dude.

The "we" comment is pretty telling also. Someone thinks awful highly of themselves. I'm pretty sure after reading 52 pages of you working to incite a reaction from everyone and indicating you would be here even if you didn't play the game the jig is up. As you say, you keep being you, dude!

[Valys]

It's time. Official release is next month. @Jat Please just make an official announcement in regards to server wipes.