Its eerie that ZOS doesn't communicate regarding the latency issue, other than 1 post in March....

stefan.gustavsonb16_ESO · April 2015

While my guess may be as bad as anybody's, I think the most likely explanation for the lag problems, and the lack of a solution so far, is this. Wall of text, so please bear with me:

In terms of server latency, Cyrodiil was actually working just fine at launch. The game was unfinished, buggy and unbalanced, and vampire bat-spammers ruled the land and made everybody else feel like idiots, but massive battles were a reality, and the servers performed well. Their beta tests had already confirmed this, the developers were proud of their creation. This is the reason why they chose to market the game as being capable of handling "hundreds of players onscreen". They actually had it working at one point.

Then, once the game was released, a small army of hackers started finding exploits for bots and cheats, and it dawned on ZOS that they had failed to build any kind of security into their client-server communication. The client was tasked with computing its own movement and collisions, and the position data it sent to the server was blindly trusted. As a result, we saw teleporting underground harvesting bots everywhere. They scrambled to add detection of strange client behavior, but then the server had to perform more work for each client, and more data had to be sent back and forth. The hackers and bots got more clever, and ZOS had to add more detailed checks and countermeasures to prevent cheating and botting. Before long, the server had to duplicate or even take over most of the computations related to collision and movement. The server was choked with all the extra work and data, and the situation got worse when lots of damage computations were added to the mix, i.e. whenever there was a fight between many people in the same location. Cyrodiil is their most vulnerable spot. Other zones could handle the changes reasonably well.

Removing the security checks is not an option, because it was a stupid decision not to include them. The PC/Mac platforms are infinitely hackable, and any solution that relies on blind trust between server and client is bound to end in failure.

Consoles, on the other hand, can only run signed binaries, so the server can trust the clients. The software running on each client is guaranteed to be the official, unmodified game. Hackers are not a problem, and the server can be relieved of doing all the extra checks. The clients can be trusted to perform most of the per-client computations, and ZOS can use the design they had around launch.

TL;DR:
Cyrodiil on consoles might be just fine.
Cyrodiil on PC/Mac might never be fixed.

They are two very different problems. They don't know how to fix Cyrodiil on PC/Mac, but for consoles they have already presented a working solution, namely the PC/Mac game from April 2014.

(Edit: typos)

wrlifeboil · April 2015

stefan.gustavsonb16_ESO wrote: »

While my guess may be as bad as anybody's, I think the most likely explanation for the lag problems, and the lack of a solution so far, is this. Wall of text, so please bear with me:

In terms of server latency, Cyrodiil was actually working just fine at launch. The game was unfinished, buggy and unbalanced, and vampire bat-spammers ruled the land and made everybody else feel like idiots, but massive battles were a reality, and the servers performed well. Their beta tests had already confirmed this, the developers were proud of their creation. This is the reason why they chose to market the game as being capable of handling "hundreds of players onscreen". They actually had it working at one point.

Then, once the game was released, a small army of hackers started finding exploits for bots and cheats, and it dawned on ZOS that they had failed to build any kind of security into their client-server communication. The client was tasked with computing its own movement and collisions, and the position data it sent to the server was blindly trusted. As a result, we saw teleporting underground harvesting bots everywhere. They scrambled to add detection of strange client behavior, but then the server had to perform more work for each client, and more data had to be sent back and forth. The hackers and bots got more clever, and ZOS had to add more detailed checks and countermeasures to prevent cheating and botting. Before long, the server had to duplicate or even take over most of the computations related to collision and movement. The server was choked with all the extra work and data, and the situation got worse when lots of damage computations were added to the mix, i.e. whenever there was a fight between many people in the same location. Cyrodiil is their most vulnerable spot. Other zones could handle the changes reasonably well.

Removing the security checks is not an option, because it was a stupid decision not to include them. The PC/Mac platforms are infinitely hackable, and any solution that relies on blind trust between server and client is bound to end in failure.

Consoles, on the other hand, can only run signed binaries, so the server can trust the clients. The software running on each client is guaranteed to be the official, unmodified game. Hackers are not a problem, and the server can be relieved of doing all the extra checks. The clients can be trusted to perform most of the per-client computations, and ZOS can use the design they had around launch.

TL;DR:
Cyrodiil on consoles might be just fine.
Cyrodiil on PC/Mac might never be fixed.

They are two very different problems. They don't know how to fix Cyrodiil on PC/Mac, but for consoles they have already presented a working solution, namely the PC/Mac game from April 2014.

(Edit: typos)

So basically you're saying they designed their mmo to run as a lan game where everybody is a known acquaintance or friend and wouldn't cheat? Interesting theory but I remember I had massive lag in Cyrodiil, worse than now. It's much better now. I get the occasional lag spike, not a running in place or as slowly as walking through molasses like back then. Playing on the NA megaserver.

My guess is something like yours. They ran Cyrodiil battles fine on an internal network with dozens of employees and friends and family, maybe more, as proof of concept but it didn't scale and definitely didn't account for the differences between lans and the Internet. By the time they realized that 1,000-2,000 players would not actually be able to play in a Cyrodiil instance, it was too late in the development and marketing cycle to do anything except spot fixes here and there and do live testing,emergency kludges and fixes after launch and downsizing the number of people allowed in each Cyro instance.

tordr86b16_ESO · April 2015

Console release > new content atm.

RazzPitazz · April 2015

If itis a coding issue, more people doesn't mean fatter our more efficient work. If they have to go back and check, clean and optimize code it is a daunting task especially when modules, Booleans, and whens are everywhere. Everything has to be checked, double checked, triple checked, cleaned up and then checked again. The fact that there is improvement is a good sign on this front, even if the problem is still technically there.
I agree it is an issue that deserves full attention, but putting the wrong people on the task could impair progress rather than furthering it.

Obscure · April 2015

They don't have anything to say because there's nothing to be said.

Asking again doesn't change the answer. Just do what I do and presume they're incapable of ever fixing it, though they know full well what to do in order to fix it (which is likely more resource dedication than they can afford to allocate and/or justify allocating). That way if they ever do fix it, you can be vindicated for sticking with ESO despite her flaws, and if they never do, you get to be officially justified in having called them incompetent all along.

Fix it: Vindication for my dedication
Don't fix it: Justification for my contempt

The real questions ZOS needs to answer are questions they need to ask to themselves: "How much damage have we done by letting this quality issue linger? Even if we fix it now, how much of the market will still think we're just a bunch of incompetent fools? Will the Zenimax name itself help or hinder the sale of future products with that name attached to it?"

Razzak · April 2015

Rescorla_ESO wrote: »

If ZOS can't solve the latency problem with the PC version of the game, the console version will have it significantly worse considering there will be a lot more console players than PC players.

The lack of keyboard text chat support may help decrease lag in Cyrodil since there won't be a way to issue out orders via zone chat to coordinate movement of the Zerg. In theory that means the PVP activity in Cyrodil will be more spread out instead of concentrated like we see in the PC version.

It's probable they've already designed console version with fixes and improved latency. They are just waiting to see if it works on live and then, maybe, we will get it. If ESO sells well on console, PC players will become even less important to ZOS.

RazzPitazz · April 2015

You also need to realize that coding for multiple types of machine sis more difficult than for multiples of one type. Not excusing the issue, just hopefully some food for thought.

sirston · April 2015

you can't spell Zenimax without EA

still somewhat love zenimax for them trying.........not. they don't love us they want to watch the game burn and die it seems so this is where it starts is lag then poor coding and cash grabs and then finally failer to update critical needs.. it seem to be so sad but perfect in their eyes..

pharstrider_ESO · May 2015

I've been experiencing extreme latency issues even when not in Cyrodiil. This really needs to be fixed.

Cody · May 2015

did I already comment? whether I have or not...

#ARGONIANMASTERRACE