Forum Settings
       
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

UPDATE* Server fixes 09/03 5:00PM-3:00AMFollow

#52 Sep 02 2013 at 7:38 PM Rating: Decent
Buffylvr wrote:
Except for the fact that a quick google search will tell you that Eve's Tranquility "1 Server" is actually a server cluster of 70 to 100 servers.


Every MMO uses multiple servers to accomplish just about anything so pointing this out is not really helping illustrate your point.

In what you quoted from SE they even stated that each WORLD SERVER was comprised of multiple servers. I think the point the other poster was trying to make with EVE is that they could deal with 60k people on a single WORLD SERVER (regardless of how that infrastructure/instancing is setup) while the FFXIV WORLD SERVER each only holds 5,000 max.

Many times you can login to EVE and in a single ZONE they will have more than 10% of the entire WORLD SERVER cap that Square Enix has established.

Edited, Sep 2nd 2013 9:42pm by chovexani
#53 Sep 02 2013 at 7:42 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
The difference is that EVE's one server was engineered to handle 60K+ connections, whereas the XIV servers were deliberately capped at 5K.

Here's why: One of the chief complaints at the height of FFXI was over crowded on servers. Odin was locked down to new character creation for almost a year, because the existing players were unable to complete content. Dynamis was constantly clogged, competition for exp camps was miserable, and there was just an insane amount of drama because there were too many people trying to do too many of the same things.

Later in FFXI's life we actually warned people against going for the most crowded servers, because a server with a lower population meant you had a better chance of standing out amoung the crowd and claiming NMs and such. Bismarck, my current home, is not very well populated, but I know almost everyone in NA endgame. (Every other week or so I get an "gee Cat you really do know everyone!" from someone seeing me wave to someone else...)

The hard cap of 5K concurrent players sucks for people who aren't in the chosen 5K. But from a programming standpoint, it makes sense.

EVE is a completely different game and having 60,000 players logged into one mega server works for it. For one thing, there are far fewer real time data points being transmitted aside from battles.

Edited, Sep 2nd 2013 9:43pm by Catwho
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#54 Sep 02 2013 at 7:49 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
27 posts
I'd just like to login sometime today. Got home from work 4 hrs ago and been semi afk trying to login with no luck, this is killing me.
____________________________
Dufer Bloodmoon of Cactuar
http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/character/2391209/
#55 Sep 02 2013 at 7:54 PM Rating: Default
Catwho wrote:
The hard cap of 5K concurrent players sucks


QFT Smiley: grin
#56 Sep 02 2013 at 7:54 PM Rating: Good
****
4,146 posts
Catwho wrote:
The difference is that EVE's one server was engineered to handle 60K+ connections, whereas the XIV servers were deliberately capped at 5K.

Here's why: One of the chief complaints at the height of FFXI was over crowded on servers. Odin was locked down to new character creation for almost a year, because the existing players were unable to complete content. Dynamis was constantly clogged, competition for exp camps was miserable, and there was just an insane amount of drama because there were too many people trying to do too many of the same things.


That's much less of an issue in FFXIV though. Mob claims are shared as long as you can do enough damage and guildleves are mobs that are only able to be attacked by the player or group who initiated them. If anything, it's a bonus to those who would prefer to do dungeons with people on their server and has no impact on those looking to complete them through the DF.

XI was a different beast mostly due to NMs and HNMs being world spawn. I'd probably still be working on my Ridill if there were 65k people on Seraph Smiley: glare
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#57 Sep 02 2013 at 8:34 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,658 posts
Let me tell you this better make thing significantly better because if they don't people are going to go ballistic. For those that sat and said wait for Wednesday and defended SE if its not better, you better go hide in the corner because you think it was bad before, just wait.

And if it is better you probably never hear anything again from anyone... LOL

Edited, Sep 2nd 2013 10:34pm by Nashred
____________________________
FFXI: Nashred
Server: Phoenix

FFXIV : Sir Nashred
server: Ultros
#58 Sep 02 2013 at 8:47 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
751 posts

Just to give this some context, if my memory serves me correctly, I read an interview with someone from Blizzard shortly after the launch of BC where they had cracked 750,000 concurrent connections.

A number approaching 300,000 for this game is a big endorsement of its popularity given its very recent launch.

300,000 current connections, 1.7m box sales to date and there is a lot of support for this.
____________________________
FFXIV: Crafty Hallie, Ultros





#59 Sep 02 2013 at 8:49 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,948 posts
Guild War 2 boasted 3.5m sales and 400,000 concurrent users peak. Let's not forget there are free weekends for GW2, but probably that 400,000 peak was way prior to them giving free weekends.
____________________________




#60 Sep 02 2013 at 8:53 PM Rating: Good
chovexani wrote:
Catwho wrote:
The hard cap of 5K concurrent players sucks


QFT Smiley: grin


If I remember correctly, it was said that after players spread out a bit more (level spreads), the cap wouldn't be so low. Perhaps they could expand the servers and increase the cap to 10k. That would be much more realistic.


Edited, Sep 2nd 2013 10:54pm by Transmigration
____________________________
Eithne Draocht
My IG: archaicmachinery - Friend me!
#61 Sep 02 2013 at 9:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
***
3,653 posts
Transmigration the Charming wrote:
If I remember correctly, it was said that after players spread out a bit more (level spreads), the cap wouldn't be so low. Perhaps they could expand the servers and increase the cap to 10k. That would be much more realistic.


To be honest I think they've capped it much lower right at the moment to avoid everything turning into a melted heap.
____________________________
I tell you, we are here on Earth to **** around, and don’t let anybody tell you different.
#62 Sep 02 2013 at 9:02 PM Rating: Good
blowfin wrote:
Transmigration the Charming wrote:
If I remember correctly, it was said that after players spread out a bit more (level spreads), the cap wouldn't be so low. Perhaps they could expand the servers and increase the cap to 10k. That would be much more realistic.


To be honest I think they've capped it much lower right at the moment to avoid everything turning into a melted heap.


I think the same.
____________________________
Eithne Draocht
My IG: archaicmachinery - Friend me!
#63 Sep 02 2013 at 9:10 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
**
751 posts
Transmigration the Charming wrote:
blowfin wrote:
Transmigration the Charming wrote:
If I remember correctly, it was said that after players spread out a bit more (level spreads), the cap wouldn't be so low. Perhaps they could expand the servers and increase the cap to 10k. That would be much more realistic.


To be honest I think they've capped it much lower right at the moment to avoid everything turning into a melted heap.


I think the same.


Originally cap was much higher and the instance server kept crashing. I remember back when every time I clicked to enter an instance of the main quest, the game crashed and I got a 90k error. Either that or the game locked and I had to Ctrl+Alt+Del out.

So they limited cap to 5,000 - instance servers are fine because of the control over the number of people hitting them.

Fix the instance servers to take more capacity, and SE can release the cap.
____________________________
FFXIV: Crafty Hallie, Ultros





#64 Sep 02 2013 at 9:13 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
751 posts
Khornette wrote:
Guild War 2 boasted 3.5m sales and 400,000 concurrent users peak. Let's not forget there are free weekends for GW2, but probably that 400,000 peak was way prior to them giving free weekends.


True and I was one of those 3.5m but then everyone got to endgame....and quit due to lack of quality content.

FFXIV is a pay to play MMO so will generate income each month, and quality content at each patch. If it gets even close to the player base of GW2, it would have been a massive success.

I think SE are hoping for 750,000 ongoing players - 3.5m would be beyond their wildest dreams!
____________________________
FFXIV: Crafty Hallie, Ultros





#65 Sep 02 2013 at 9:19 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*
150 posts
Totally different beasts when you compare EVE to a normal mmorpg.

You wouldn't want one server technology for FFXIV. There would be thousands of character all jam packed across the land, it would be a sea of people with some trees sticking out. Mob spawns would be impossible to farm ect. Not to mention you would need a supercomputer to get acceptable FPS.

When you are talking about tiny ships with no animations, and a sort list to manage multiple targets...as well as an easily expandable world since its more or less just a backround of space and a few objects (rather than highly detailed and unique vegetation)

It makes sense for eve...FFXIV would be unplayable with the same set up. Also they choose a number like 5k per server because any more and the world will be more packed than a Japanese subway car (see what I did there?)

Edited, Sep 2nd 2013 11:20pm by Strangerous
#66 Sep 02 2013 at 9:33 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,948 posts
HallieXIV wrote:
Khornette wrote:
Guild War 2 boasted 3.5m sales and 400,000 concurrent users peak. Let's not forget there are free weekends for GW2, but probably that 400,000 peak was way prior to them giving free weekends.


True and I was one of those 3.5m but then everyone got to endgame....and quit due to lack of quality content.

FFXIV is a pay to play MMO so will generate income each month, and quality content at each patch. If it gets even close to the player base of GW2, it would have been a massive success.

I think SE are hoping for 750,000 ongoing players - 3.5m would be beyond their wildest dreams!


My point was that if FFXIV had 300,000 CCU, that's not far fetch to assume 2m+ sales. Even if the subs dropped to 50% of the sales after a few months, that's still more than they thought they would have.

Also SWTOR who claimed 3m subs (when it was still P2P) top 350k CCU. Though I doubt FFXIV even with the 2 years+ revamp would have cost as much as SWTOR, which is still wildly believed to be the most expensive game ever made.


Edited, Sep 2nd 2013 11:35pm by Khornette
____________________________




#67 Sep 02 2013 at 9:43 PM Rating: Excellent
HallieXIV wrote:
Transmigration the Charming wrote:
blowfin wrote:
Transmigration the Charming wrote:
If I remember correctly, it was said that after players spread out a bit more (level spreads), the cap wouldn't be so low. Perhaps they could expand the servers and increase the cap to 10k. That would be much more realistic.


To be honest I think they've capped it much lower right at the moment to avoid everything turning into a melted heap.


I think the same.


Originally cap was much higher and the instance server kept crashing. I remember back when every time I clicked to enter an instance of the main quest, the game crashed and I got a 90k error. Either that or the game locked and I had to Ctrl+Alt+Del out.

So they limited cap to 5,000 - instance servers are fine because of the control over the number of people hitting them.

Fix the instance servers to take more capacity, and SE can release the cap.


This is exactly why I interpreted the earlier statement as a fix for 1017. Some people just don't see it that way I guess.
____________________________
Eithne Draocht
My IG: archaicmachinery - Friend me!
#68 Sep 02 2013 at 9:49 PM Rating: Good
HallieXIV wrote:
A number approaching 300,000 for this game is a big endorsement of its popularity given its very recent launch.


Adding to the context should we not remember this is a massively successful 26 year old franchise? It's such a success that they decided to try and rebuild the ENTIRE game from scratch to re-release it after an epic failure that lost them tons of money. So why is it so surprising that it's still a success after making decisions based off that very idea? Regardless of any of this, they could have implemented a proper system to queue or turn people away, rather than having them hopelessly spam to login (Which will let you in completely out of order, wait 3 hours or 3 minutes regardless of who was before or after you).

Seems like this just creates more unnecessary congestion for them which is the very problem they are complaining about. And the fact that they had to put these caps in place or the servers start to become unstable is not a sign that the game engine is "rock solid" :) It may function without many exceptions/errors once you can get in, but that doesn't mean it is well optimized as you can clearly see.

That being said, I do love the game when you can login but I am not ready to dismiss these issues so easily, because simply adding more highway lanes is not the solution to a poorly designed transit system.

Edited, Sep 3rd 2013 12:11am by chovexani
#69 Sep 02 2013 at 10:15 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
751 posts
chovexani wrote:


That being said, I do love the game when you can login but I am not ready to dismiss these issues so easily, because simply adding more highway lanes is not the solution to a poorly designed transit system.

Edited, Sep 3rd 2013 12:11am by chovexani


No disagreement from me. As someone who spent over 12 hours intermittently spamming the log in screen, I was fuming and ready to rage quit.

Then I remembered how good the game is. First I was like "RAGE" and then I was, like "THIS IS AWESOME".
____________________________
FFXIV: Crafty Hallie, Ultros





#70 Sep 02 2013 at 10:26 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
491 posts
Wow, if this means that I will be able to casually log in the game at any time, then I'd say that is a great birthday present for me. (And yes, Sept. 03 really is my birthday, just don't expect an age. ;))
#71 Sep 03 2013 at 1:44 AM Rating: Decent
****
4,146 posts
DragonBourne wrote:
Wow, if this means that I will be able to casually log in the game at any time, then I'd say that is a great birthday present for me. (And yes, Sept. 03 really is my birthday, just don't expect an age. ;))


I wouldn't count on being able to log in at any time, but happy birthday anyway Smiley: cake
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#72 Sep 03 2013 at 3:30 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
12,622 posts
The only way they could have avoided this issue is to have about a month's time between the open beta and the official release. That would have given them time to mull over the boost in preorders and anticipate server population slightly better.

Live and learn, I suppose. FFXIV was supposed to be a dead MMO. The only reason why people are truly mad about not being able to get in is because they want to play the game. That interest and love for the game will keep it alive for years and years to come. The fact that it is a problem getting into a game to play with your friends means there is a game there to begin with.

Now, I'm not saying we should be grateful for having issues playing a game for days at a time. I just think that being mad at SE for this is a **** of a lot better than being mad at them for selling you a game you wouldn't want to play.
____________________________
Blah
#73 Sep 03 2013 at 3:57 AM Rating: Decent
I'm posting for no other reason than to rant, I started trying to log in at 9:00 AM on Monday all the way till 10PM and never got in. Just tried again at 6AM, server is STILL full.

Grumble.
____________________________
99RDM, 99BST, 99SAM, 99MNK,
99BLM, 99THF, 99NIN.
#74 Sep 03 2013 at 5:50 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
488 posts
People better be ready to log quickly once servers come up. I have a feeling the restrictions will still be here, but you people that cannot log into your established character will still be forced to wait OR roll a new character on a new server.
#75 Sep 03 2013 at 8:01 AM Rating: Good
***
2,232 posts
SingBismark wrote:
I'm posting for no other reason than to rant, I started trying to log in at 9:00 AM on Monday all the way till 10PM and never got in. Just tried again at 6AM, server is STILL full.

Grumble.

Attempted logging in from 4am until 1130pm yesterday with no luck. Tried again at 630 this morning and I'm not even going to bother again until tomorrow.
____________________________
Character: Urzol Thrush
Server: Ultros
FC: The Kraken Club

Outshined

Teneleven wrote:
We secretly replaced your tank wemelchor with Foldgers Crystal's. Let's see what happens.

#76 Sep 03 2013 at 8:11 AM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
30 posts
i wouldn't mind moving to a new server if they were giving out one free move to a new one. :o
otherwise I'll keep my current server, so i don't have to restart my character from scratch.
#77 Sep 03 2013 at 8:30 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
108 posts
Mopdaddy wrote:
Thayos wrote:
Yay for the fixes... I've been trying to get in for pretty much an hour straight now with no luck.

I did get tossed into a queue with a line of just 14 people at one point... than went down to 10... and then I got 1017'd. Haven't gotten a queue since.

Just be ready to try and log on as soon as servers are up. Do not let your guard down.

Edited, Sep 2nd 2013 9:03pm by Mopdaddy


Yup eveyone will log on after the fix. I think after a week or two players will show down on their log in.
#78 Sep 03 2013 at 8:35 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
18 posts
Buffylvr wrote:
I played FFXI too long to think tomorrow's maint fixes everything.
Now the emergency maint on Wednesday? Then we might get somewhere.


Call me a pessimist, but I had the exact same thought =)
____________________________
Lurking is an art form. I am a master.
Piminto Pim, Lalafell Plainsfolk, Ultros
#79 Sep 03 2013 at 8:39 AM Rating: Good
***
3,178 posts
Kodatei wrote:
i wouldn't mind moving to a new server if they were giving out one free move to a new one. :o
otherwise I'll keep my current server, so i don't have to restart my character from scratch.


I hope you are right. Free world transfers would be very helpful to the new worlds being effective. I'll bet entire Free Companies would be willing to move if there was enough notice and coordination. For example, the new worlds would perhaps benefit from a friend code of some sort so they don't fill up before everyone from a specific FC can transfer.

If they are doing transfers, some features for moving an entire free company successfully would be ideal.

Considering the possible 5,000 concurrent users per server, I'm very curious how many accounts are allowed to be assigned to each server. 10,000? 20,000?
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 69 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (69)