Will Cyrodiil ever work

PunkAben

The two GUINNESS WORLD RECORDS titles now held by EVE Online are: largest multiplayer video game PvP battle (8,825 players) most concurrent participants in a multiplayer video game PvP battle (6,557 participants)

Some know how to make large battles.
Zenimax have reduce players in Crodiil many times and it is still unplayable.
I thinks Zenimax going the wrong way.
Why start with 2000 players at each side and keep reduce numbers of players, it dont work it still lag.
I thinks it will be better to mane Cyrodiil with 12 players at each side and then slowly increase the numbers of players.
Maybe it will still lag with 12 players at each side but then we know it is the map who are bad constructed.

Will Cyrodiil ever work ?

Amottica

Eve is hardly comparable to games like this. It’s an extremely different type of MMO. As such I would not expect Zenimax or GW to be concerned about what Eve has done.

Kartalin

The short answer is no.

The long answer is nnnnnoooooooooooooo.

I suppose it is possible they could actually fix it but the more likely scenario is that eventually enough people will quit that it becomes mostly stable. And then the game will fold shortly thereafter.

If I’m proven wrong I will be pleasantly surprised.

PunkAben

Amottica wrote: »

Eve is hardly comparable to games like this. It’s an extremely different type of MMO. As such I would not expect Zenimax or GW to be concerned about what Eve has done.

Indeed but what is the big difference ?
There software development know what the are dealing with ?
The have better server ?
The have better internet ?
The plan and what Zenimax told was possible was 2000 players at each side.
Anyway it still lag and the should not start from top with many players and keep reduce everything.
Th should start from buttom and see how much it was possible to have at same map.

Thraben

PunkAben wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

Eve is hardly comparable to games like this. It’s an extremely different type of MMO. As such I would not expect Zenimax or GW to be concerned about what Eve has done.

Indeed but what is the big difference ?
There software development know what the are dealing with ?
The have better server ?
The have better internet ?
The plan and what Zenimax told was possible was 2000 players at each side.
Anyway it still lag and the should not start from top with many players and keep reduce everything.
Th should start from buttom and see how much it was possible to have at same map.

Well, Cyro DID work once. It was breathtaking.


EVE does not nearly have the hardware requirements.

If you need a comparison, it's Planetside 2 - which is ESO Cyro as a FPS game.

And indeed, Planetside 2, though with detoriating graphics, still allows for hundreds of players in a battle. What do they different? Well, at first there is no real itemization and no PvE progress. If you don't add much to a game, there is not much code to slow it down. Secondly, there are only limited options to modify player appearance. It's more or less like most players look the same to you, and they are individually rendered only when you are close enough.

The first thing could be solved by totally separating the PvE from the PvP game. Every fluff that is being added would not affect PvP in any way, and would not even affect the PvP code.

The second thing could be applied by a "every player farther away than 10m looks like a generic alliance player to me, and is only rendered correctly if closer to me than this" option.

Sanguinor2

Zos could probably make cyro work like it used to. The problem is that they would have to put all calculations and checks clientside again and everyone could cheat with 0 effort. Because you could do that back when cyro worked.

Thraben

Sanguinor2 wrote: »

Zos could probably make cyro work like it used to. The problem is that they would have to put all calculations and checks clientside again and everyone could cheat with 0 effort. Because you could do that back when cyro worked.

Oh, this as well.

Of course, it leads to more cheating (and some other weird problems), but it would still be the better alternative if the ban hammer would swing decisively enough - ESO's core players base is not prone to cheating, it's mostly new players and the same 20 usual suspects everyone has known for years.

Sedare38

To answer OP author:

No it won't ever work b/c it takes a miracle for ZOS to respond with any speed to any toxicity (I'm talking racist, bigotted nasty crap here), cheating reports, or ability failure. They can't even do experiments correctly: let's remove procs to test lag, but reintroduce out of group healing that completely invalidates any findings of said proc-removal test rather than do 2 tests of no-procs--with and without group healing--to see if the proc calculations are indeed the culprit (hint they aren't as lag still persists and max frames still drop over time). However, if someone is blatantly AP farming they're sorted in an hour or so . . .

Without better management of reports by players that actually lead to any resolution in a timely fashion, without any standards they uphold with regards to cheating and macros, the latter allowing 5 abilities 1 button to go off in under a second (oh but they're animating cancelling right?), without better add-on management which has resulted in homebrewed add-ons to circumnavigate core principals of the mechanics, and without REAL game balancing to sets rather than over and under corrections, the PVP side of things will remain as they are.

On the PVE side it's not nearly as noticeable or consequential to players b/c it's not happening to you but rather mobs, and if you're in a dungeon group or raid, the OP sets, the macro user, and the cheater all are helping you out making the run that much smoother. Take that to PVP though where you have to fight the same person and you'll pull your hair out.

Now watch this overly critical post of ZOS and the game be flagged and deleted, me given a warning or a boot from the forums, because we also aren't allowed to post overtly critical opinions of the company we PAY to play a game.

TLDR: No it won't ever work without real solutions by the game company.

LightYagami

I'm not sure about the precise answer to your question but let's take a look at how ZOS handle PvP comparing to PvE.

1. When Cyrodiil is suffering from basic performance issues like disconnection, ping spike, desync, unable to cast skills, unable to break free, unable to light attack, unable to swap bars... ZOS keeps putting resources in PvE, for example adding PvE contents, PvE DLC, PvE chapters, PvE companion, PvE Dungeons, PvE trials, etc. What they did to PvP is adding restrictions to Players (although personally I like no-proc). How many PvP zones do we have and how many PvE? Allocation of resources tells the answer.

2. Instead of designing better BG to attract more players, they removed the function of selecting BG game mode. It's all random now... I don't think they will remove the abiliy of selecting which dungeons PvEers want to enter.

3. They are adding monster sets in IC. Sounds good, right? The problem is that the monster sets are obtained by killing NPC bosses instead of say killing a number of players. They futher tweak IC to be PvE oriented.

4. Even during MYM (PvP event), event tickets drop by doing PvE tasks like killing NPCs, recusing NPCs, etc. Will they allow killing players in dungeons to drop event tickets? Of course not.

5. During MYM event, more players visit PvP zones and amazingly performance in PvP zones during MYM is better than usual. There are methods to improve PvP performance temporarily, but whether long-term change can be done / will be done is another story.

You can get the answer indirectly, right?

(Edit: typo)

Togal

PVE makes rl money, PVP doesn't.