1000-Player FPS World Record Attempt This Month

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
This news is just in time for me to feel pathetic about my own attempts to create game within any sort of game engine.

Kudos to them. I have absolutely no clue how them came about doing this.
 
Interesting and brings hope that someday that the average game someday will be on such a massive level. Team based first person shooters should feel like a actual war-zone and even modern games like Battlefield 3 while they try they fall short mainly due to player limits.

I also thought of a way to revise the method and make it easier to beat MuchDifferent's goal. A FPS simply just needs to be just that a first person shooter. It would be much less stress if this was also combined with a turn base element but restricting the player to the first person view. If movement and combat were turn based the stress on the severs and engine would be much less as only half the action is taking place.
 
PlanetSide on steroids, I love it!

But if you have a sub-par system, you will be left in the dust. Strait from their website:

"What are the system requirements for the game?

The exact minimum requirements will be made available soon. If you have a good enough machine to run Crysis 2 or any other modern FPS game you don’t need to worry."

I do wonder what the games objectives will be though. I can't seem to find any information. Doesn't seem like it has RPG elements, so it might actually be just a huge battlefield with no objectives, only carnage.

Can't wait to see some in-game footage once this day in gaming history is made. It will be interesting.
 
so how meny ppl can simultanius be in wow at a single spot ? well ofc its a mmorpg da! and dont take the kind of pressision needed, a fps has to update lokation and pointing axes alot more often. but it be cool to c how meny ppl you can scram in a place before wow servers go balistick and cant be played smothly eny more.
 
What about World War 2 Online / Battlegrounds Europe?

It's not exactly the most popular game in the world, but I'm sure they did that 1000 players on the same map many years ago.
 
[citation][nom]molo9000[/nom]What about World War 2 Online / Battlegrounds Europe?It's not exactly the most popular game in the world, but I'm sure they did that 1000 players on the same map many years ago.[/citation]
You would be right. But with WWII Online the battlefield is split up in to different zones/areas.

The point of Man vs Machine is to have 1000 players in the same zone/area at once. As in, theoretically, you could have 500 vs 500 battle on your screen. Not little battles split up on the battlefield.
 
[citation][nom]rabidface[/nom]You would be right. But with WWII Online the battlefield is split up in to different zones/areas.The point of Man vs Machine is to have 1000 players in the same zone/area at once. As in, theoretically, you could have 500 vs 500 battle on your screen. Not little battles split up on the battlefield.[/citation]

I think WW2OL limits the maximum number of players a client can receive/display (probably something like the 256 nearest players), but apart from that everyone plays on the same map that covers a large chunk of western Europe.

This all depends on how u define "1000 player FPS".
 
[citation][nom]NuclearShadow[/nom]Interesting and brings hope that someday that the average game someday will be on such a massive level. Team based first person shooters should feel like a actual war-zone and even modern games like Battlefield 3 while they try they fall short mainly due to player limits. I also thought of a way to revise the method and make it easier to beat MuchDifferent's goal. A FPS simply just needs to be just that a first person shooter. It would be much less stress if this was also combined with a turn base element but restricting the player to the first person view. If movement and combat were turn based the stress on the severs and engine would be much less as only half the action is taking place.[/citation]

like valkeria chronicles...
sounds fun, but could it work multiplayer?
 
Pre-Time Dilation EVE Online could support over 1000 people in fleet fights. With Time Dilation... I have no idea. No, it's not FPS, but the calculations on the server end may be more intensive. The server not only has to calculate movement for each ship, but a combination of up to 24 weapons/tank/utility modules as well as fleet bonuses, drones and area effects per ship. Just the calculations for a hit (tracking/transversal velocity/signature radius/explosion velocity/explosion radius/range/etc) are pretty daunting and that's per gun/missile/drone with thousands active.

The back end for the Guinness record shouldn't be that bad... it's the client dealing with the info and rendering 999 other humanoid players in detail. Something not necessary in EVE as you can zoom out to the point each ship is just a few pixels.
 
This. This is the future of professional gaming. And possibly warfare. And maybe gaming as we know it.

/hyperbole

I have to say though if they get this working it will be pretty darn cool.
 
I think Planetside pushed around 1,200 people live at SOE Fan Faire 2007 to introduce Black Ops to the game. Everyone logged on as TR and NC for the event, the devs could hardly keep the black ops testers alive as they were being chased down by an insane amount of people. They had to end the event when one of the devs used a meteor shower and it finally did the servers in.

Planetside 2 should be going to BETA soon and from what I understand it will be 1,500 players per continent (server). All I know is I can't wait for PS2, once you have played big no other FPS is the same.
 
I'm a little wary here; is the "10 movements and 1 firing command" per SECOND seems rather sparse for an FPS. The former could POTENTIALLY cut it, but it would invariably be laggy regardless of whatever smoothing algorithms are applied, and only 1 firing command per second would be horrendous. Assuming that the "420kbps downstream data" would apply to a fully-loaded 1k-player server, that means a measly 420 bits per second of data per player; in other words, it almost sounds like the game's solution to this issue with tons of players at once is to cut precision and fidelity to 1990s-era levels.

The end result is that this may likely wind up looking more akin to a typical "rubber-band-y" MMO than a smooth-running action-packed FPS. If smooth action was desired, I'd have to think that at least 20-30 movement frames would have to be transmitted for each player per second, with, similarly, more status frames for firing and other actions than just one every second.
[citation][nom]nicodemus_mm[/nom]No, it's not FPS, but the calculations on the server end may be more intensive. [/citation]
Actually, at least on a player-by-player comparison, EVE Online's serverload isn't as intensive as it is for a modern FPS. While all the "spreadsheets" for those Internet Spaceships may seem daunting to look at, remember that this is ALL of the information the server has to deal with; it's a non-action strategy/RPG. Contrast this to server-backed FPS games, where it has to handle complex physics calculations, and more rapid movement.
 
I was interested in helping them out but then I saw the 23 euro price tag for just participating and that ended up killing all interest.
 
[citation][nom]briteball[/nom]X-WING vs. TIE FIGHTER[/citation]
I thought that too and also the Freespace series taking on capital ships with hoards or fighters/bombers... this NEEDS to happen!

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom