NationStates Jolt Archive

Does anyone else think it is time that game developers and Xbox step up to the plate and provide competition to the online PC market. I've always wanted to play games like PlanetSide and Battlefield Europe but never had the PC power to play them. With the next generation of Xbox coming out this fall I feel that I am that much closer to my dream of a Massively Multiplayer Online Consol Shooter.

How hard would it be for Xbox and publisher to have servers for these games? I even think the Game Delta Force: Black Hawk down uses its own servers for games over 24 people. I want to break the limit on 16 and 24 player matches and play with dozens or even hundreds of people at once. It would even be worth it if the graphics were not truly up to date.

(Please dont turn this into a Xbox 360 vs PS3 vs Revolution thread)

Does anyone else think it is time that game developers and Xbox step up to the plate and provide competition to the online PC market. I've always wanted to play games like PlanetSide and Battlefield Europe but never had the PC power to play them. With the next generation of Xbox coming out this fall I feel that I am that much closer to my dream of a Massively Multiplayer Online Consol Shooter.

How hard would it be for Xbox and publisher to have servers for these games? I even think the Game Delta Force: Black Hawk down uses its own servers for games over 24 people. I want to break the limit on 16 and 24 player matches and play with dozens or even hundreds of people at once. It would even be worth it if the graphics were not truly up to date.

(Please dont turn this into a Xbox 360 vs PS3 vs Revolution thread)
I think the challenges would be daunting … not only in the server side aspect but namely human interaction

Right now how do Massive multiplayer game users communicate as a primary means? If you said in game chat you are right

And what does that require for effective multi-tasking? If you said a keyboard you would be right


To provide a good means of communication consoles will either have to start incorporating a keyboard more standardized or go to an all voice communication system, which provides a massively daunting server side task (hundreds of users using a voip system …) not to mention organizing things … keeping the hundreds of people from interfering with each others important team communications but allowing them to contact people on a larger scale

All while pushing their servers and bandwidth off the charts…

I think it might be a bit for a good MMFPS

Free online Smash Brothers sound good? (if you don't want a pissing match try not saying Xbox every chance you get eh?)

PC gaming online is no longer any kind of monopoly. Games like Counter-Strike are already heading to console (Xbox inthe case of Counter-strike). All that really needs doing is an effective voice system (Xbox Live anyone?) and it's down to the developer to make use of the hardware.

Free online Smash Brothers sound good? (if you don't want a pissing match try not saying Xbox every chance you get eh?)

PC gaming online is no longer any kind of monopoly. Games like Counter-Strike are already heading to console (Xbox inthe case of Counter-strike).
But those are not massive multi-player he is talking about large scale online gaming … that’s a whole different beast

(at least for support)

But those are not massive multi-player he is talking about large scale online gaming … that’s a whole different beast

(at least for support)

Depends really. How massive do you really want? 32 is a crowd for most games as it is. Personally I think there are far more interesting things to try out online than FPS games but that's me...

Ior go to an all voice communication system, which provides a massively daunting server side task (hundreds of users using a voip system …) not to mention organizing things … keeping the hundreds of people from interfering with each others important team communications but allowing them to contact people on a larger scale

but hold on... the current Xbox Live uses the voice communicator as the primary means of communication as it is. the technology is there, in use - the problem would be, as you say, developing it for having larger and larger numbers of players on the same server. already you can have (i think) 32 players in unreal championship 2 over xbox live, all communicating using the headsets... is expanding this to a hundred really going to prove impossible?

besides, i'm sure there are relatively simple ways of achieving this, technologically speaking (or at least, possible ways, if difficult!). like dividing each map of an MMORPG or even large-scale maps of FPS's into different, linked zones, each with its own server - intelligently spreading the bandwidth as to not overload one server. this might be expensive of course, but for XB:Live you do pay a fee...
or how about having a dedicated server for voip traffic?
then again i know nothing about how the server side of online games work so i could just be talking out of my ass here!


and as an aside, a MMORPG version of Fable with 100s of players running round a freeform, uninhibited map on Xbox360 graphics would be a fuckin cream dream :P

Depends really. How massive do you really want? 32 is a crowd for most games as it is. Personally I think there are far more interesting things to try out online than FPS games but that's me...
The original poster was talking into the hundreds

The original poster was talking into the hundreds

I that case,as Pure Metal said, spread servers, Microsoft could pull the resources for that no trouble. Rout the voice through a dedicated chat server.

but hold on... the current Xbox Live uses the voice communicator as the primary means of communication as it is. the technology is there, in use - the problem would be, as you say, developing it for having larger and larger numbers of players on the same server. already you can have (i think) 32 players in unreal championship 2 over xbox live, all communicating using the headsets... is expanding this to a hundred really going to prove impossible?

besides, i'm sure there are relatively simple ways of achieving this, technologically speaking (or at least, possible ways, if difficult!). like dividing each map of an MMORPG or even large-scale maps of FPS's into different, linked zones, each with its own server - intelligently spreading the bandwidth as to not overload one server. this might be expensive of course, but for XB:Live you do pay a fee...
or how about having a dedicated server for voip traffic?
then again i know nothing about how the server side of online games work so i could just be talking out of my ass here!


and as an aside, a MMORPG version of Fable with 100s of players running round a freeform, uninhibited map on Xbox360 graphics would be a fuckin cream dream :P


I am not saying they could not do it but the cost would be insane … they defiantly would not be free online games.

And yes expanding from 32 up to lets say a hundred would make all the difference

Just think about it (assuming no filter) a general broadcast when one person talks 31 other people hear it. With a hundred 99 other people have to get that message. This effect can be reduced by good zone filtering and such but it all depends on how far you push it. VOIP is a hog … the bigger zones and the more people you have the massively harder the server side stuff gets … even worse then if you were only using text communication.

I that case,as Pure Metal said, spread servers, Microsoft could pull the resources for that no trouble. Rout the voice through a dedicated chat server.
I did not say it can not be done but the cost would be outrageous

I would say at least double the server capacity needed for a PC version of a similar game with just text communication (or using private VOIP applications such as Teamspeak or gamecom)

I'm suprised no one has mentioned Final Fantasy XI yet. For a while, Sony managed to keep an extrodinary MMORPG afloat, without any continuing fee. The only condition, of course, was that the players had to buy a hard drive so they could store there own files. If this sort of thing was possible with the PS2, imagine what the next gen systems would be able to do.

A side note: as far as communication, Sony did make a keyboard peripheral to be used in its online games.

Well as it is now all the data is transfered through the Xbox itslef. What could be done is that the Xbox could act as the Vocie side of the server and the dedicated servers could handle the game side of the chat.

When I talk about hundreds, they would mostly be spread out over a constant map. Instead of 1 small maps with 32 players, you would have larger maps split up. Or have a constant map that you are in the is being updated as you move and as people move into it. A game with a large map and even 100 players would be great.

Well as it is now all the data is transfered through the Xbox itslef. What could be done is that the Xbox could act as the Vocie side of the server and the dedicated servers could handle the game side of the chat.

When I talk about hundreds, they would mostly be spread out over a constant map. Instead of 1 small maps with 32 players, you would have larger maps split up. Or have a constant map that you are in the is being updated as you move and as people move into it. A game with a large map and even 100 players would be great.
Cant do … no easy way to distribute voice servers like that for console

Again PC’s can use supplementary VOIP and do essentially what you propose but all computer games fall back on text as a primary mode of communication

Without the keyboard or a similar easy human interface device (they could go voice recognition if they really wanted) the bandwidth will be extreme because voice will be the primary

I am not saying they could not do it but the cost would be insane … they defiantly would not be free online games.

And yes expanding from 32 up to lets say a hundred would make all the difference

Just think about it (assuming no filter) a general broadcast when one person talks 31 other people hear it. With a hundred 99 other people have to get that message. This effect can be reduced by good zone filtering and such but it all depends on how far you push it. VOIP is a hog … the bigger zones and the more people you have the massively harder the server side stuff gets … even worse then if you were only using text communication.
yeah i suppose the growth of bandwidth for each user is exponential... bummer.

i suppose its just not possible to use only voip till standard bandwidth's get bigger. theyr'e testing out Internet2 frameworks at the mo with speeds of 13Gbits/sec... that ought to do it :p

yeah i suppose the growth of bandwidth for each user is exponential... bummer.

i suppose its just not possible to use only voip till standard bandwidth's get bigger. theyr'e testing out Internet2 frameworks at the mo with speeds of 13Gbits/sec... that ought to do it :p
They could do it … it is all a matter of how much money they want to sink into it.

They could use speech recognition … and convert voice to text … that’s an idea maybe.

And yeah bandwidth availability will keep going up (hell we aint used half of the bandwidth of the fiber laid in the early 90’s yet)
What we need is to make some changes to TCP … and avoid this IPV6 hog that’s about to be placed on our back

SOCOM III will be out in 2 months on PS2, and you can play 16 VS 16. From what I've heard, there is little to no lag.

One can only imagine what will be possible on the PS3.....

SOCOM III will be out in 2 months on PS2, and you can play 16 VS 16. From what I've heard, there is little to no lag.

One can only imagine what will be possible on the PS3.....
Again I think it will honestly be more bandwidth and server trauma then individual console performance

If they could get server side support and the communication thing figured out it would be no big thing to make such a game

They could do it … it is all a matter of how much money they want to sink into it.

They could use speech recognition … and convert voice to text … that’s an idea maybe.

And yeah bandwidth availability will keep going up (hell we aint used half of the bandwidth of the fiber laid in the early 90’s yet)
What we need is to make some changes to TCP … and avoid this IPV6 hog that’s about to be placed on our back
yeah speech recognition is an option, but is it reliable enough? besides one of the best things about online gaming on pc's is being able to use voice chat (thinking WoW here), and this would be something of a cop-out i think

how do PC-based MMORPGs handle the VOIP problem then? :confused:
surely MS and the consoles could just copy this setup (whatever it may be)?



and you kinda lost me on the whole "IPV6" thing :confused:

yeah speech recognition is an option, but is it reliable enough? besides one of the best things about online gaming on pc's is being able to use voice chat (thinking WoW here), and this would be something of a cop-out i think

how do PC-based MMORPGs handle the VOIP problem then? :confused:
surely MS and the consoles could just copy this setup (whatever it may be)?



and you kinda lost me on the whole "IPV6" thing :confused:
They don’t have intergraded VOIP WOW has text as its primary communication mode with people using third party software and either renting or serving themselves

But they always have text to fall back on in the end

With a console if they do not distribute a keyboard they will not have the ability to use text as their primary communication mode … as such voice will have to be that said mode and therefore will have to be provided by the game creators (or Microsoft)


As far as the IPV6 they are moving addressing from 32 to 128 bits a field
Good if you want more ip addresses bad if you are trying to reduce overhead