Performance is bad okay, Zos is unable to fix it okay too, but you guys keep playing in that campaign with all those ball groups and such, meanwhile Blackreach and Imperial City are dead empty.
Blackreach is lag free in any time of day until high pop for all factions, which is very rare. If you are solo/duo/trio queue for somewhere else than Gray. Easy as that.
AJones43865 wrote: »Performance is bad okay, Zos is unable to fix it okay too, but you guys keep playing in that campaign with all those ball groups and such, meanwhile Blackreach and Imperial City are dead empty.
Blackreach is lag free in any time of day until high pop for all factions, which is very rare. If you are solo/duo/trio queue for somewhere else than Gray. Easy as that.
Telling people to swap campaigns to fix performance is starting to feel like trolling at this point. For starters, it will do nothing to fix performance issues.
Don't you think the problem is ZOS and anemic server investments? The problem certainly is not what campaign we decide to play in.
_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »AJones43865 wrote: »Performance is bad okay, Zos is unable to fix it okay too, but you guys keep playing in that campaign with all those ball groups and such, meanwhile Blackreach and Imperial City are dead empty.
Blackreach is lag free in any time of day until high pop for all factions, which is very rare. If you are solo/duo/trio queue for somewhere else than Gray. Easy as that.
Telling people to swap campaigns to fix performance is starting to feel like trolling at this point. For starters, it will do nothing to fix performance issues.
Don't you think the problem is ZOS and anemic server investments? The problem certainly is not what campaign we decide to play in.
The problem was identified at the release of the game, the game engine that they modified was not fit for purpose, it was called out by many at the time. This is why they have failed in all attempts to 'fix' performance and why improvements in hardware over time has not improved anything.
AJones43865 wrote: »_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »AJones43865 wrote: »Performance is bad okay, Zos is unable to fix it okay too, but you guys keep playing in that campaign with all those ball groups and such, meanwhile Blackreach and Imperial City are dead empty.
Blackreach is lag free in any time of day until high pop for all factions, which is very rare. If you are solo/duo/trio queue for somewhere else than Gray. Easy as that.
Telling people to swap campaigns to fix performance is starting to feel like trolling at this point. For starters, it will do nothing to fix performance issues.
Don't you think the problem is ZOS and anemic server investments? The problem certainly is not what campaign we decide to play in.
The problem was identified at the release of the game, the game engine that they modified was not fit for purpose, it was called out by many at the time. This is why they have failed in all attempts to 'fix' performance and why improvements in hardware over time has not improved anything.
What hardware improvements?
AJones43865 wrote: »_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »AJones43865 wrote: »Performance is bad okay, Zos is unable to fix it okay too, but you guys keep playing in that campaign with all those ball groups and such, meanwhile Blackreach and Imperial City are dead empty.
Blackreach is lag free in any time of day until high pop for all factions, which is very rare. If you are solo/duo/trio queue for somewhere else than Gray. Easy as that.
Telling people to swap campaigns to fix performance is starting to feel like trolling at this point. For starters, it will do nothing to fix performance issues.
Don't you think the problem is ZOS and anemic server investments? The problem certainly is not what campaign we decide to play in.
The problem was identified at the release of the game, the game engine that they modified was not fit for purpose, it was called out by many at the time. This is why they have failed in all attempts to 'fix' performance and why improvements in hardware over time has not improved anything.
What hardware improvements?
AJones43865 wrote: »_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »AJones43865 wrote: »Performance is bad okay, Zos is unable to fix it okay too, but you guys keep playing in that campaign with all those ball groups and such, meanwhile Blackreach and Imperial City are dead empty.
Blackreach is lag free in any time of day until high pop for all factions, which is very rare. If you are solo/duo/trio queue for somewhere else than Gray. Easy as that.
Telling people to swap campaigns to fix performance is starting to feel like trolling at this point. For starters, it will do nothing to fix performance issues.
Don't you think the problem is ZOS and anemic server investments? The problem certainly is not what campaign we decide to play in.
The problem was identified at the release of the game, the game engine that they modified was not fit for purpose, it was called out by many at the time. This is why they have failed in all attempts to 'fix' performance and why improvements in hardware over time has not improved anything.
What hardware improvements?
I thought the same thing, they haven't improved any hardware since the games release as far as I can tell... they even keep dumping the new zones and everything else on the same old hardware they launched with spreading it thinner and thinner. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if they are simply repurposing the Cyrodiil servers for the new zones as they release them.
_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »AJones43865 wrote: »_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »AJones43865 wrote: »Performance is bad okay, Zos is unable to fix it okay too, but you guys keep playing in that campaign with all those ball groups and such, meanwhile Blackreach and Imperial City are dead empty.
Blackreach is lag free in any time of day until high pop for all factions, which is very rare. If you are solo/duo/trio queue for somewhere else than Gray. Easy as that.
Telling people to swap campaigns to fix performance is starting to feel like trolling at this point. For starters, it will do nothing to fix performance issues.
Don't you think the problem is ZOS and anemic server investments? The problem certainly is not what campaign we decide to play in.
The problem was identified at the release of the game, the game engine that they modified was not fit for purpose, it was called out by many at the time. This is why they have failed in all attempts to 'fix' performance and why improvements in hardware over time has not improved anything.
What hardware improvements?
Oh i don't mean ZOS has upgraded the relative power of their hardware, what I mean is cpu compute power in general has increased significantly since 2014 but PVP in ESO has not managed to increase 1 jot, which also points to poor coding/net code/engine design. Hero engine was not fit for purpose, and no amount of modification will fix that - which is pretty evident now to even the most staunch denialists.
AJones43865 wrote: »_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »AJones43865 wrote: »Performance is bad okay, Zos is unable to fix it okay too, but you guys keep playing in that campaign with all those ball groups and such, meanwhile Blackreach and Imperial City are dead empty.
Blackreach is lag free in any time of day until high pop for all factions, which is very rare. If you are solo/duo/trio queue for somewhere else than Gray. Easy as that.
Telling people to swap campaigns to fix performance is starting to feel like trolling at this point. For starters, it will do nothing to fix performance issues.
Don't you think the problem is ZOS and anemic server investments? The problem certainly is not what campaign we decide to play in.
The problem was identified at the release of the game, the game engine that they modified was not fit for purpose, it was called out by many at the time. This is why they have failed in all attempts to 'fix' performance and why improvements in hardware over time has not improved anything.
What hardware improvements?
I thought the same thing, they haven't improved any hardware since the games release as far as I can tell... they even keep dumping the new zones and everything else on the same old hardware they launched with spreading it thinner and thinner. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if they are simply repurposing the Cyrodiil servers for the new zones as they release them.
The ESO EU and NA Datacenter hardware refresh is ongoing, but our timelines have been greatly extended by the global shortage of computer hardware. To give you all an idea of the impact, some key hardware devices are delayed by one year, most are delayed by 3-5 months. We had intended to have this process complete this year, but it has taken us far longer than we thought it would.
McTaterskins wrote: »_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »i'm in a game right now
What game is that? Platform?
DirtyWizard wrote: »Accept that performance in Cyrodiil will never improve. I check these boards every few months just to see what's up, always the same posts. Quit the game or accept it.
Well of course they do. The (still) broken sets like Dark Convergence weren't dreamed up and implemented by PvE content creators.
_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »DirtyWizard wrote: »Accept that performance in Cyrodiil will never improve. I check these boards every few months just to see what's up, always the same posts. Quit the game or accept it.
Very true. There comes a point in in a games lifecycle where performance is what it is, and all that's left is rewriting the core engine, which is basically a total game rewrite, so obviously won't happen. If you look back through the years, the chat has never changed, the performances has never improved, and the same problems exist and are worse in many ways due to the decimated PVP population.
McTaterskins wrote: »The fact that it all runs better when they bolster server strength during MYM is a testament against the "its the engine" argument.
Upgrade hardware.
Add graphical settings for console (so you can turn down graphic detail etc.)
Other huge item?
Since there seems to be a memory issue, and has been mentioned in streams/interviews in the past about how it gets difficult to add new animations etc....
Ever noticed the wall of non-performance that hits as soon as you approach a resource or full spawned keep? The Cyro NPCs need their skills and animations updated to be the same as the current class representations and not the old versions of skills. It's extremely unlikely that this isn't eating up memory and process power.
McTaterskins wrote: »The fact that it all runs better when they bolster server strength during MYM is a testament against the "its the engine" argument.
Upgrade hardware.
Add graphical settings for console (so you can turn down graphic detail etc.)
Other huge item?
Since there seems to be a memory issue, and has been mentioned in streams/interviews in the past about how it gets difficult to add new animations etc....
Ever noticed the wall of non-performance that hits as soon as you approach a resource or full spawned keep? The Cyro NPCs need their skills and animations updated to be the same as the current class representations and not the old versions of skills. It's extremely unlikely that this isn't eating up memory and process power.
_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »McTaterskins wrote: »The fact that it all runs better when they bolster server strength during MYM is a testament against the "its the engine" argument.
Upgrade hardware.
Add graphical settings for console (so you can turn down graphic detail etc.)
Other huge item?
Since there seems to be a memory issue, and has been mentioned in streams/interviews in the past about how it gets difficult to add new animations etc....
Ever noticed the wall of non-performance that hits as soon as you approach a resource or full spawned keep? The Cyro NPCs need their skills and animations updated to be the same as the current class representations and not the old versions of skills. It's extremely unlikely that this isn't eating up memory and process power.
It doesn't, because it only temporarily improves performance relative to its own average performance, which is still a million miles away from where it should be, i.e other AAA games that offer open world pvp.
An 'engine' refers to the core logic and development platform package that is meant to provide an abstraction over the programming language(s) to allow developers to compose games and focus on design rather than low level concerns. An engine not fit for purpose will not scale well among other things, which inevitably means either maxed out CPU or memory, or timeouts/message backlogs/bad response times. npc's are not the problem as they are scripted and therefore measurable and controllable - if that was the cause, they would be removed overnight. The problem is that the core code simply cannot scale properly with X number of players, and its clear X is extremely low. There was an early indication with this when ZOS did not realise trusted clients is not a suitable model for mmorpg, so they were forced to do what all other mmorpg do and that's move critical calcs to the server. If the engine was designed with this in mind from the start then it would not have had the impact that it had.
EdmondDontes wrote: »_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »McTaterskins wrote: »The fact that it all runs better when they bolster server strength during MYM is a testament against the "its the engine" argument.
Upgrade hardware.
Add graphical settings for console (so you can turn down graphic detail etc.)
Other huge item?
Since there seems to be a memory issue, and has been mentioned in streams/interviews in the past about how it gets difficult to add new animations etc....
Ever noticed the wall of non-performance that hits as soon as you approach a resource or full spawned keep? The Cyro NPCs need their skills and animations updated to be the same as the current class representations and not the old versions of skills. It's extremely unlikely that this isn't eating up memory and process power.
It doesn't, because it only temporarily improves performance relative to its own average performance, which is still a million miles away from where it should be, i.e other AAA games that offer open world pvp.
An 'engine' refers to the core logic and development platform package that is meant to provide an abstraction over the programming language(s) to allow developers to compose games and focus on design rather than low level concerns. An engine not fit for purpose will not scale well among other things, which inevitably means either maxed out CPU or memory, or timeouts/message backlogs/bad response times. npc's are not the problem as they are scripted and therefore measurable and controllable - if that was the cause, they would be removed overnight. The problem is that the core code simply cannot scale properly with X number of players, and its clear X is extremely low. There was an early indication with this when ZOS did not realise trusted clients is not a suitable model for mmorpg, so they were forced to do what all other mmorpg do and that's move critical calcs to the server. If the engine was designed with this in mind from the start then it would not have had the impact that it had.
You make it sound like ZOS should have gotten to work on a new version of the game around a different engine from the beginning. They certainly have had enough time to realize what needs to be done and to get started on it.
_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »
Comrade_Ogilvy wrote: »What players mean by performance improvement: minimal lag, fast responsive controls/interface with no glitching, stutter or delay.
What zos means by performance improvement: optimised server-side code so more players can run concurrently in extant hardware where x% of all players with y-apm(actions per minute) function acceptably. (where x,y and 'acceptable' are internally defined, but, I imagine, x is high, y is low and 'acceptable' is anyone's guess)
Probably useful to get those definitons clarified by zos/us.
In the second case seems to me they've achieved a fair bit. In the first case hardly any progress has been made at all but that's obviously subjective.
Comrade_Ogilvy wrote: »What players mean by performance improvement: minimal lag, fast responsive controls/interface with no glitching, stutter or delay.
What zos means by performance improvement: optimised server-side code so more players can run concurrently in extant hardware where x% of all players with y-apm(actions per minute) function acceptably. (where x,y and 'acceptable' are internally defined, but, I imagine, x is high, y is low and 'acceptable' is anyone's guess)
Probably useful to get those definitons clarified by zos/us.
In the second case seems to me they've achieved a fair bit. In the first case hardly any progress has been made at all but that's obviously subjective.
No, what ZOS means by performance increase is the optimization of the game code in order to be able to use less hardware resources to get the same gaming results