Slashdot Mirror
MMO-Like Quake Is Possible
An anonymous reader writes "OptimalGrid is a self-contained middleware designed for developers to create grid-enabled parallel applications without themselves becoming experts in grid or high-performance computing (article). The Linux compatible middleware now includes automatic distribution and provisioning on to Grid nodes. See how the first release of Quake II was made massively multi-player [pdf] by running on a Grid. Get modified Quake II from Sourceforge to run with OptimalGrid and let the massive Grid games begin." Update: 09/19 16:12 GMT by Z : Marked the pdf as such.
Nothing to say but damn you large unoptimized pdf!
Now, to find my quake 2 install directory.. hrm.. (You need Quake 2 to play this, obviously) (And yes, same GoNINzo from GameSpy. heh)
Gonzo Granzeau
"Nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you into heaven for.." -Roy Batty
An action-packed MMO that actually requires honed reflexes to replace MMO's major weakness (the boring click-n-level) along with possible story/quest potential to replace FPS's major weakness (obituary editors writing storylines.)
;)
MMO's and FPS are the two most popular game genres.
With their powers combined IT IS CAPTAIN FPMMOS, the first-person massively-multiplayer online shooter. (or FPSMMO/MMOFPS, but i like mine betta
Seriously, when we get a good combination of the two I will SO buy it. And I'm sure everyone else will too. Can you say MMOGTA? or MMONFS with licensed vehicles?
Hey /crew - how about having Slash automatically put a [PDF] after a PDF link - so we know we are about to download a huge PDF rather than going to a link?
www.eFax.com are spammers
70ms of added lag between servers, I wonder how much that effects twitch reaction and firing accuracy.
So, an ISP could take a popular multiplayer game, setup some grid servers, and a couple proxy servers, and then get 100 people to join the game. This is not exactly the same as making it massively multiplayer because the world is still the same size, and I'm unsure if the client could handle all the actors being on the screen at the same time. This is more just showing off the load sharing capabilities rather than a true gaming invention.
Ideally, we want something similar to the Unreal 2 idea, where you have people getting passed from server to server to server, and the place is massive. That way, people go to the interesting places and gather. And it would have to run across the internet. This thing only runs on an intranet (see bottom question). A little disappointing.
Anyway, giving links to some of these applications just further confuses people. I have a ton of friends asking me how to do this, and without a central set of servers already setup, no one can really try it out. Which would have been ideal for IBM to show it off.
Gonzo Granzeau
"Nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you into heaven for.." -Roy Batty
Really? I thought sports and casual games were. Or did you mean they were your two most favorite genres?
Also, no apostrophe in "MMO's" - apostrophes are used for possession and contraction, never plurality.
I don't see how this is anything unique and different from how other mmo's are currently deployed, and there are still the same problems that plague mmos. For example, one of the things they mentioned was the partitioning of the world map into discrete pieces. To help reduce load, sure. But what happens when everbody tries to 'storm the base' all at once?
When the pvp patch came out for World of Warcraft, serveral of the largest guilds of my server (Mannoroth) for opposing factions got together to siege/defend a capital city. (I'm trying to be as vague as possible to please bear with me) The problem isn't when you have a full raid party of 40 vs another party of 40, but rather when you have multiple raid parties vs multiple raid parties. We were in Orgrimmar, and we were being stormed by almost 300+ alliance, with almost just as many Horde waiting to defend. The load got so heavy the server crashed several times (nevermind the fact that the sheer number of ppl on the screen caused video cards to choke). The lag got so bad, ppl have given up on massive sieges altogether.
Massive sieges are still the holy grail of online gaming. I don't think it'll happen anytime soon.
I think he meant most popular PC genres, which appears to be true. Other more popular genres tend to be consoles
Why not just code up your own custom browser from scratch?
Oh wait, but then there would be 4 proxies with a limit of 1 player each...
PlanetSide anyone?
With this data, any FPS can be made MMO. This is important, because S.O.E. (Sony Online Entertainment) would have you believe that it takes years of development and hundreds of thousands of dollars to accomplish -- and to not even be that good at it, IIRC. Planetside flat out sucked, and it failed to be what they wanted it to be -- but if you take something like Battlefield 2, and extend it across 4 or 5 servers, you then have the propensity for actual battles between hordes of people, something that Planetside only claimed to have, but was never popular enough to actually do.
War isn't about who's right. It's about who's left.
I used to play PlanetSide (for nearly two years) there were regularly huge zergs, with 300-500 people on a single map (often with almost all of them zerging a single area). I say 300-500 as they ended up putting a cap to level on to split up the zergs and by capping the percentage of slots a single faction could use on one 'continent' to limit the ability of a team to simply 'zerg' a continent filling up the first few hundred slots up thereby dominating it unopposed it by sheer force of numbers. In the process the overall number of slots was reduced, which also helped better distribute players across the world (and was widely welcomed at the time).
something that Planetside only claimed to have
PlanetSide battles had battles with more than than the '4 or 5' times a large BF2 game offically supports virtually every night for about 2 years, which is not bad going. For the first year, there were typically two large zergs on the go for each faction at peak time (and, for those not familer with it there are three factions in PlanetSide).
The game has definately had it's ups and downs - a very buggy release period for the first 6 months, a very underwhelming and pointless expantion, followed by a good stable period, then it jumped the shark with the arrival of BFR's, and now in game adverts. It was also consistantly poorly manged with high turn over of production and development staff and very poor quality support staff who regularly abused their positions (and still do).
However, IMO, the biggest reason for the struggle for larger success of the game was that the target audience seemed to consist of 13 year old who endlessly bitched about having to pay a monthly fee, when they could play BattleField 1942 or UT2004 on a server someone else was paying for, for free (of course they never really twigged that it still cost money for people to provide hosting for the servers they used). When the free 30 day trials were launched the game saw a big boost in population from people who would just go and generate new 30 day trial keys over and over rather than pay 7 UKP a month. People played for months like that, IRC PS-related channels had lots of users like that (many of whom had been lurking their for ages, unable to play the game due to not having any means to pay for it, and presumably not being able to convince their parents to fork out).
This is perhaps the most likely reason there have been no other MMO pure FPS titles to date (FWIW I don't count World War II Online as it only supports 64 players per map, as such it didn't really break any new ground technically for MMO's), it's apparently not all that financially viable given users can enjoy a very similar experience without a monthly on going fee, and they apparently prefer that model.
Your doing a great disservice to an outstanding technical achivement which (dispite what the abusive, yobbish and amazingly poorly informed forum kids would say about it) dealt very well with some very difficult issues, dispite some dodgy project management (and apparent lack of any form of version control system during development *cough*).
This concept already exists and is wildly popular - it's called Battlegrounds in World of Warcraft.
I've been a fan of the Grand Theft Auto series since the beginning, loved the style and gameplay of every single game. Watching my mate play World of Warcraft the other day, and I realised how many game mechanics are the same.
I initially noticed it when he entered a new area and it popped up with the "suburb name" and I thought, "Heh, just like in GTA" then I noticed the map, the style, the way people give you quests, and (in San Andreas, anyway) the skill development.
I've played Multi Theft Auto and it's damn cool, but I never thought it would be commercially viable because it seems to be lacking something... somthing to make people come back and play it continuously. But what if they added experience points? Levelling? Character classes? Different people play for different gangs? Gangwars? They'd have to cut out cinematics, obviously, but they could still have quests, and jobs. Goddamned, that would be my favourite game ever. And now it looks like it's possible to get a game like that with a usable ping. Hot stuff!
Call Forum Joe, That's my name, That name again is Forum Joe.