|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Malkai Inos
Onikanabo Brigade
Caldari State
1178
   |
Posted - 2014.03.05 00:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
Assuming this supposed to be like titanfall (a player vs bots aka PVE mode would be great regardless of implementation):
The game couldn't even handle an extra 30 human players currently. What makes you think that adding 30 players plus their AI would be in any way feasible?
Also, the point of bots in titanfall is to get away with very few human players, so that every one of them can make a significant difference, without making the battlefield tiny or half empty. Our current team sizes already defeat their purpose, making them pointless overhead in such a scenario.
You can take a benign object, -you can take a cheeseburger and deconstruct it to its source...
|
Malkai Inos
Onikanabo Brigade
Caldari State
1179
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 01:03:00 -
[2] - Quote
Komodo Jones wrote:
30 NPCs are not the same as 30 players.
Correct. You need the models and their AI on top of that. Slapping them on our current matches would be as taxing to the console as just upping the player count unless you make them noticeably uglier and they're always more taxing to the server that has to simulate their AI in contrast to just computing player input. Komodo Jones wrote:Our current team sizes are tiny compared to the current size of the maps, the only reason the maps would need to be bigger would be to allow more vehicles but if the bots are infantry only (for now) then they're just filler
Yet the current team sizes are already way too large to enable the particular interactions that justify their existence in titanfall. So you're right. They're just filler. Expensive, near pointless filler.
I'm all in for Player vs Bot modes for our new blood to play around with. As an addition to our current matches, upping the playercount to 48 would be infinitely more important.
You can take a benign object, -you can take a cheeseburger and deconstruct it to its source...
|
Malkai Inos
Onikanabo Brigade
Caldari State
1179
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 01:47:00 -
[3] - Quote
Komodo Jones wrote:
I'm thinking in terms of lag and server stability, having more than 32 people in a room I can see causing problems because servers have trouble now as it is, but if you just have AI on the map...lemme put it this way, I've never seen a single player game lag except when things were graphically taxing, and there's ways around that. Bots I feel like would be less of a problem than people just because you don't need to match the player animations and hitboxes and aiming capabilities with the player's responses and controls, it's just built into the game.
I never doubted that it wouldn't be expensive but I figured if they were working on PVE this might as well be an element of it. But pointless? No, having someone else to fire at besides protostomping vets would be a breath of fresh air for alot of people.
And yes I'm talking about AI allies on either team supporting the battle.
Singleplayer games do not "lag" (as in network latency which has generally nothing to do with what is commonly referred to as "lag" i.e. low average frame rates) because player input only passes a few hundred meters of copper/silicon through the console as opposed to several thousand kilometers through international borders and dozens of intermediate servers which have to actively process and relay the data.
The only part of latency an AI circumvents is inbound server data as it is generated there (it has to be, unless you want the AI to constantly desync between the different clients due to, you guessed it, latency). The locally (server) processed information would still have to incorporate client actions and get back to the clients (your console) so there's still latency involved. So, in effect Bots are generally not a feasible way to up the perceived player count.
If an AI system is finally there, making a seperate gamemode with fewer players and a couple bots to mimic what titanfall does is a neat, while uncreative, idea. Using bots as a placeholder for numerically unbalanced teams is another possible use. It is, however, not a feasible alternative to just adding players and adds little gameplay value to 32 player matches.
You can take a benign object, -you can take a cheeseburger and deconstruct it to its source...
|
Malkai Inos
Onikanabo Brigade
Caldari State
1180
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 02:19:00 -
[4] - Quote
Komodo Jones wrote:Again I don't see why this is difficult, yes I'm not a game developer or a codewriter but I do understand that in terms how things function from player perspective there's no difference between playing mass effect 3 online and playing through the story, and in that case data does need to be sent to a server and then back to a system. I do know SOME programming and at least the structure of logic that it has to follow, it's not making the AI that's hard it's just having it in a game where it can interact with players, and we already have the game and the mechanics to facilitate that interaction so how hard could it be to write some code and slap a skin on it? It works in mass effect for the same reason it works in titanfall. Both games are designed from ground up to work with a set amount of players and a set amount of AI actors.
An AI will work perfectly fine in DUST if you make sure that both server and client have the resources available to process the data. But slapping them onto our current gamemodes which are generally said to be near the limit of what both can reliably handle right now will most likely not work.
Even if further optimization frees up the needed resources, using them to increase player count (dust was supposed to support 48 players at release. 64 players were hinted at!) or using the AI to add tangible gameplay (drones) seems like a much better use to me.
You can take a benign object, -you can take a cheeseburger and deconstruct it to its source...
|
Malkai Inos
Onikanabo Brigade
Caldari State
1181
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 02:38:00 -
[5] - Quote
Komodo Jones wrote:Guess we gotta wait for PS4 then, that or push CCP to get bigger servers (my image of a server is a big black box that looks like a supercomputer that could house sentient artificial life, don't mind my ignorance lol) but really I've seen ps3 do bigger and better things and that was years ago, I have trouble believing that the fault is with the hardware and not with the amount of resources CCP is delegating to dust. It doesn't get much bigger in terms of servers
Again, i've seen a blue post just recently that said they're trying to get PVE and, by extention, AI done asap*. We'll hopefully see some AI in action soonGäó enough. I just highly doubt that it will come in the form of random grunts all over our pub matches nor do i think that's even a particularly good use for this capability.
Checked the source, was talking about NPE. My bad.
You can take a benign object, -you can take a cheeseburger and deconstruct it to its source...
|
|
|
| |
|