New info on multiplayer (lower your expectations on this thread first)

[guiltyspark]

The game is using Raknet , which means this game has a lobby system instead of matchmaking.

This is a VERY

VERY good thing for 2 reasons.

Matchmaking SUCKS and has almost completely diluted online gaming on consoles.

and

This game will have an actual COMMUNITY! :grin:
Yes !
People will be able to keep playing in a single room for hours and hours without having to get booted out of the game after its over. and when people leave a room a new player can join!
People will make freindships and clump together as squadrons!

THANK YOU ANTON

[OntheCrab]

That is phenomenal news, man.

Matchmaking is bullcrap. Consider me a lobbyist.

For xbox livers this is a bonus too as it works hand in hand with the party system.

Perfect for squads and the like. MP modes sound awesome too; Ground Strike and Airfield Capture sound crazy fun - a little adversarial squad dogfighting with some interdiction (aka blowing shit up) mixed in....

Where did you get the scoop dude, are you an intern now? How's your russian sounding?;)

[guiltyspark]

That is phenomenal news, man.

Matchmaking is bullcrap. Consider me a lobbyist.

For xbox livers this is a bonus too as it works hand in hand with the party system.

Perfect for squads and the like. MP modes sound awesome too; Ground Strike and Airfield Capture sound crazy fun - a little adversarial squad dogfighting with some interdiction (aka blowing shit up) mixed in....

Where did you get the scoop dude, are you an intern now? How's your russian sounding?;)
at the bottom of the IL2 site there is copyright info , usually any major compainies or tech involved is listed ;)

[Wehrwulf]

I am also very excited about multiplayer and I hope that the game will live up to its claims of having extreme amounts of people in their multiplayer lobbies, as this will make the feel both more exciting and realistic. As well as being massive, I am looking forward to the airfield capture mode as well, specifically because it involves a degree of strategy, unlike Ace Combat and other jet fighter series in which you spawn, shoot someone with a missile from 10 miles away, and then to find yourself blowing up in the middle of the air a few seconds later. Not that I have anything against a standard deathmatch, but it's nice to know that monotonous spawning and dying is not the only feature of multiplayer. One more thing I would like to heap on my excessively long post is that I hope that arcade as well as simulation mode is available for multiplayer. It would be good fun as well to take off, expend your ammo, and have some kind of resupply on the airstip for sim mode to make it interesting, making airfield capture quite enjoyable. I am obviously rambling ahead of myself, so let me just say this: This has some awesome potential!:grin:

[Desode]

Man this is AMAZING NEWS and it really sounds to me like this means real Servers too ! I agree 100% about the whole Matchmaking system which is really bad ! and I hate it with a passion.
Great news, I'm so happy . Thanks for the Post, DESODE

[guiltyspark]

Man this is AMAZING NEWS and it really sounds to me like this means real Servers too ! I agree 100% about the whole Matchmaking system which is really bad ! and I hate it with a passion.
Great news, I'm so happy . Thanks for the Post, DESODE

take note though

this does NOT mean we are getting dedicated servers , your gameplay quality will still depend on the guy hosting the room

[Desode]

take note though

this does NOT mean we are getting dedicated servers , your gameplay quality will still depend on the guy hosting the room

Well that depends, that one E3 review said 32 players online, Now if thats true then I would think it has to be servers. Because the 360 only supports 16 player hosting. Unless they figured out some new way to do things.

[amiral-adama]

Well that depends, that one E3 review said 32 players online, Now if thats true then I would think it has to be servers. Because the 360 only supports 16 player hosting. Unless they figured out some new way to do things.
No.Perfect dark was 32 player.And without dedicated servers.:grin:

[Desode]

No.Perfect dark was 32 player.And without dedicated servers.:grin:

Hmmm, I did not know that. How did it run ? was the lag bad ?

Well if they can get a 360 to host a game that looks this good and run 32 players online with no major problems ,,, Well , I will be even more impressed then I already am with this game.

Thanks for the info Admiral Adama, DESODE

[Roadie]

Where do you have the info, that there will be a lobby system? I will be happy too, if this is true.

[peterdegrotere]

so if i understand corecctly you can also just play with friends only if you like, or can get friends to your game

[Roadie]

Yes, I understand this, but where have you got the info, that there will be lobbies in BOP? Can somebody give me a link?

Sorry for my bad english!

[peterdegrotere]

Yes, I understand this, but where have you got the info, that there will be lobbies in BOP? Can somebody give me a link?

Sorry for my bad english!

yeah is there a lobby mode were did you get that info??hope so

[guiltyspark]

Well that depends, that one E3 review said 32 players online, Now if thats true then I would think it has to be servers. Because the 360 only supports 16 player hosting. Unless they figured out some new way to do things.

I HIGHLY doubt this game will have 32 players

For a few reasons , first reason is that 505/1c games are not going to be throwing that kind of money around for dedicated servers for thousands of people, currently the only people using dedicated servers on consoles is sony , and they are only doing it to make the PSN appear superior to XBL and they are losing ALOT of money by doing this.

The other reason is that 32 players flying around would get old fast. And historically dogfights were only around 4-6 planes encountering each other.

Dedicated servers are really a stop gap for current online gaming. At some point in the future internet speeds will reach a point where you will be able to host 32 player matches peer to peer. But as of right now cable is the current type of internet in use so its 16 players.

[guiltyspark]

yeah is there a lobby mode were did you get that info??hope so

if you look at the bottom of the new IL2 website there is a copyright for raknet

which is a network engine for games

here

http://www.jenkinssoftware.com/



Lobby system
Database powered lobby with support for friends, rooms, quick match, ranking, email, and multiple titles.

[Stanrosquain]

32 players in a dogfight is a bit too much for me. But it could be interesting in the bombing mission in line (6 fighters escorting 10 bombers in "capture the airstrip")

[xNikex]

Just imagine getting into furballs in biplanes. That would be one hell of a fight.

[guiltyspark]

Just imagine getting into furballs with biplanes. That would be one hell of a fight.

it would hardly be fair for the bi planes

[xNikex]

it would hardly be fair for the bi planes

I meant biplanes vs. biplanes like WWI.

[guiltyspark]

I meant biplanes vs. biplanes like WWI.

oh

[Desode]

I HIGHLY doubt this game will have 32 players

For a few reasons , first reason is that 505/1c games are not going to be throwing that kind of money around for dedicated servers for thousands of people, currently the only people using dedicated servers on consoles is sony , and they are only doing it to make the PSN appear superior to XBL and they are losing ALOT of money by doing this.

The other reason is that 32 players flying around would get old fast. And historically dogfights were only around 4-6 planes encountering each other.

Dedicated servers are really a stop gap for current online gaming. At some point in the future internet speeds will reach a point where you will be able to host 32 player matches peer to peer. But as of right now cable is the current type of internet in use so its 16 players.

Man I have to disagree ! I have both systems so I have no favorites but as a gamer who plays online all the time you are way off base.

The 360 has just as many games on real servers. BFBC BFMC , Chromehounds, Fronlines Fuels of Wars(50 players with jets ,tanks,heli's,Apc's,jeeps and infantry), I could go on and on. I know because most of these games are ones I in house tested. The difference is that XboxLive has more restrictions on Dedicated server use , then the PSN..

Last year I put together a petition of 80 thousand names from XboxLive Gamers that wanted real servers.

Hosting on consoles Sucks ! It limits what gamers can play with whom, and the integrity of the host's ping changes every time some one leaves and then comes in. This in turn changes who the match making system puts in the game ! So you almost never have 3 lag free games in a row EVER !!!!!

As a long time pc gamer I have been spoiled because we pay $10 less per game and 95% of pc MP games get real dedicated servers to play on.
360/console users get Screwed on this !! They pay a yearly fee to play online and $10 more per game on top of that !!!! How can you pay that much extra money and not get real servers ! We are talking about Millions of dollars !!

Its plain Freakin GREED MAN !!! Thats what it is.

I'm here to tell you, that if you think that hosting games on a consoles will ever come close to the stability of real dedicated servers,, well then you are going to be waiting for 20yrs before you see a console that can do it and do it well.



Now I will say that 1C, maybe one of the very VERY FEW, that couldn't afford real servers but they are a small minority. Plus in my BOOK they shouldn't have to give them to us ,because the Console companies SHOULD provide the servers !!!!!!!!!!!


Please know that this anger isn't directed at you,, its aimed at the problem I encounter all the time on consoles ! HOSTING SUCKS ! *SS !!!!!!!!!!!
DESODE

[guiltyspark]

You dont seem to grasp the idea very well
Dedicated servers cost alot of money

Just because microsoft is charging us money for their service doesnt mean that they should host dedicated servers.And them charging money for the service is most definately NOT greed , its essential to the growth of the xbox as a platform and keeps the servers up that connect millions of players together.

Sure it would be nice in fantasy land where money grows on trees , but microsoft doesnt have enough money to host dedicated servers for over 20 million people to play on.

The only reason it works for the PC is that gamers themselves are hosting 90% of the servers with their own hardware and money.

to assume that the same system is possible on consoles is frankly ignorant.

no offense

PS , dont bring up the fact that sony is doing it , because they are taking a huge loss and one day you will not be able to play killzone while gamers are still playing rainbow 6 vegas.

that is the main advantage of peer to peer gaming , if you have an opponent , you have a game.

once sony starts running out of funding for things like dedicated servers (which based on recent press will be soon) They will either have to start charging for their service (which would become a complete failure based on the fact that its main perk is being free , without that the service is useless)

or they will close down servers

[Desode]

You dont seem to grasp the idea very well
Dedicated servers cost alot of money

Just because microsoft is charging us money for their service doesnt mean that they should host dedicated servers.And them charging money for the service is most definately NOT greed , its essential to the growth of the xbox as a platform and keeps the servers up that connect millions of players together.

Sure it would be nice in fantasy land where money grows on trees , but for over 20 million people to play on.

The only reason it works for the PC is that gamers themselves are hosting 90% of the servers with their own hardware and money.

to assume that the same system is possible on consoles is frankly ignorant.

no offense

PS , dont bring up the fact that sony is doing it , because they are taking a huge loss and one day you will not be able to play killzone while gamers are still playing rainbow 6 vegas.

that is the main advantage of peer to peer gaming , if you have an opponent , you have a game.

once sony starts running out of funding for things like dedicated servers (which based on recent press will be soon) They will either have to start charging for their service (which would become a complete failure based on the fact that its main perk is being free , without that the service is useless)

or they will close down servers

Lets see $60 for a one year membership, and Xboxlive said in my quarterly stock report that for 2009 they estimate that they have 32 million gold members. At $60 a piece ? How are they losing money ? They could atleast give us the option of renting our own servers then .

You said "to assume that the same system is possible on consoles is frankly ignorant."

No one said the "same system" is possible. If you really think that some of these companies can't afford servers your very Naive.


Do you know anything about networking or buisness ?

I mean really, I'm just wondering.

You said "dont bring up the fact that sony is doing it , because they are taking a huge loss and one day you will not be able to play killzone while gamers are still playing rainbow 6 vegas. "


Well, sony is losing money because, they missed the boat when it came to online gaming and now they are playing catch up !!! They were Ignorant ! Stupid, scared little Bit**S when they said in 2001 "We feel that online gaming is a fad that will not represent the future of the gaming world "

This statment was the day I sold my 20,000 shares in sony. Its the day their stock fell and it has never recovered. They have lost money in every divison they have since 2000 except their console division ! They are behind the eight ball and I don't think they will ever come back. Thats why Sony is losing money and if you think its because of using real servers your crazy ! No Offense.
You must not know anything about the buisness world and what is going on financially in these companies.

I mean thats fine I don't really expect you to know.

I'm just telling you that servers are not the reason they are losing money.
KZ2 is one of the few games that Sony may be paying for servers for. Most of the real servers are provided by publishers, and maintained by the publishers.

Whats really funny is that you think that KZ2 has all these servers ! Haha
Man !! for real ,, the max one game has is 32 people. Well,one server can run 256 people. That means that 8 filled up (32player)game rooms are only using 1 server. At the most they have 50 servers to support the whole world gaming on them. This is pocket change ! Were talking like $10 grand for all their servers and thats if they bought them Brand spankin new !


"How much money do these publishers make ? "

Lets take COD 4 for a example ok, Now I'm also a activision stock holder and their report in may told me that they have 13 million online players currently on xboxlive(alone). Now at $60 a game thats $780,000,000. Now keep in mind that when the game was released they had $29 million in the total production and marketing of the game on release date. The thing is, that this is just how many current online gamers they have playing on xboxlive. They have sold way more copies of Cod4 then 13 million. I'm not exact on the figure,but last I heard it was around 35 million copies sold. Do the math !

Now,are you starting to get the idea of how much money they are making ?
This is just one game ! and it hasn't even reached its sales cycle end !!!
Have you ever thought about how many servers you can by with say 50 grand or even 200 thousand dollars?



The money that some of these publishers make is unreal ! And I repeat its GREED that they don't provide servers for some games. At the very least they could let us rent servers.

Desode

[guiltyspark]

Its simply not financially feasable for a company to do , period

even with the amount of money MS makes with the live fees you assume that it should only be allocated to the xbox division , but the money goes to spread out throughout the company where funding is needed.

MS is not making immense enough profit to even consider making XBL dedicated servers for tens of millions of people

[Raw Kryptonite]

Personally, I don't care for huge MP games. As good as MAG looks, I suspect you'd just end up with a room full of individuals doing their own thing rather than using the options the game presents. And it does sound incredible. Just doesn't work.
I prefer to have player hosted games, but that's because I pretty much game with the same people all the time and we know who can and can't host. Not crazy about gaming with the public, since they usually don't play in the spirit of the game. Also, games hosted on a dedicated server are doomed to have the plug pulled on them. I believe that's a regular practice of EA's with sports games. Chromehounds is an incredible game, but one day the plug will be pulled and it'll be pretty much bricked as a result.

[Desode]

Its simply not financially feasable for a company to do , period

even with the amount of money MS makes with the live fees you assume that it should only be allocated to the xbox division , but the money goes to spread out throughout the company where funding is needed.

MS is not making immense enough profit to even consider making XBL dedicated servers for tens of millions of people

We will just have to agree to disagree on some of this. I don't think that MS's live fees should all go to dedicated servers, by any means. XBL does a lot with what you get for the money you pay in fees.
Like I said most of the time the publisher uses their servers.

I do think that microsoft should not charge a game publisher a fee to run their own dedicated servers.
That is how it works right now. There are lots of publishers that want to use dedicated servers for their games,but MS makes them pay extra to use dedicated servers and they make it a huge hassle. Thats my main gripe with MS.

I appreciate your debate Guiltyspark, and I appreciate your ability to debate with out getting nasty. Since I have been here on these forums , you have always made posts that I have enjoyed and dispite our disagreement on this topic you have my respect. Thanks for taking the time to voice you opinion with me.
DESODE

[Desode]

Personally, I don't care for huge MP games. As good as MAG looks, I suspect you'd just end up with a room full of individuals doing their own thing rather than using the options the game presents. And it does sound incredible. Just doesn't work.
I prefer to have player hosted games, but that's because I pretty much game with the same people all the time and we know who can and can't host. Not crazy about gaming with the public, since they usually don't play in the spirit of the game. Also, games hosted on a dedicated server are doomed to have the plug pulled on them. I believe that's a regular practice of EA's with sports games. Chromehounds is an incredible game, but one day the plug will be pulled and it'll be pretty much bricked as a result.

Thats a good point RAW, and I feel the same way at times about not playing with a huge group. I will be sad to see Chromehounds go when it does. I must say though on the flip side it wouldn't have been the ongoing war we all love if it hadn't been on dedicated servers. It would have been nice if they had some options in there to keep it alive when the plug is pulled.

Thats one of things I love about Frontlines Fuels of war on XBL. You get huge 50 player dedicated servers, with lots of options and you can also host your own private or public 16 player match, via hosting with your xbox 360 also. Plus when you make hosted matches, it appears on the server list with all the Huge dedicated servers. That game with have a huge life span even after the dedicated servers go down some day. THQ did a great job with the XBL version of that game.

DESODE

[Raw Kryptonite]

FOW really is a good game. Some balancing issues with it, but it was a very nice first attempt at their own game. Had more going for it than BFBC in fact.

CH is nice since you can play the massive map battles (almost MMO) in the persistent war...but you also have the option for privately hosted rooms and a small selection of maps to play the reg game time or others. In the persistent war, play vs bots OR humans to kick it up a notch. Brilliant game, only lacking in a forced cockpit view and some build restrictions. Wish we had another on the way. All games can learn from Chromehounds.

[Desode]

FOW really is a good game. Some balancing issues with it, but it was a very nice first attempt at their own game. Had more going for it than BFBC in fact.[/I]
Yeah and THQ stuck with it too. They had a little bit of a rocky start, but they fixed alot of things. They fixed most of the balancing issues. The auto turrets were a real pain at the begining. They added Squad leader to squadleader chat, and proximity chat. vehicle chat. Since the atuo turrents where so bad at the start , they ended up making it so the turrets couldn't see the EMP class. that was a brilliant fix. They released a ton of new maps with new weapons, vehicles and aircraft. I really don't think I have ever seen a dev team work so hard at fixing a lot of complaints, and they got it right ! . Do you still have FFOW RAW Kryptonite? If not and you haven't experienced all the balencing fixes, you might want to pick it up again for cheap on the used bin.
DESODE

[guiltyspark]

massive shooter games are very much possible

When i was playing planetside i had some pretty memorable gaming moments that i still rememember

I was in a tank with some random stranger and we were rolling through the forest towards a base when we were ambushed by an enemy patrol and had to bail out of the tank , we were on a elevated peice of road and there were ditches/trenches to each side of the road , while my tank driver bolted for it and got shot , i hid next to a tree by the trench while the enemy patrol walked by looking for me ( think that one scene is lord of the rings where they are hiding from the ring wraiths )


it was simply awesome

[Desode]

massive shooter games are very much possible

When i was playing planetside i had some pretty memorable gaming moments that i still rememember

I was in a tank with some random stranger and we were rolling through the forest towards a base when we were ambushed by an enemy patrol and had to bail out of the tank , we were on a elevated peice of road and there were ditches/trenches to each side of the road , while my tank driver bolted for it and got shot , i hid next to a tree by the trench while the enemy patrol walked by looking for me ( think that one scene is lord of the rings where they are hiding from the ring wraiths )


it was simply awesome

Yeah I have had some amazing moments on them also. Like holding down a bunker in the middle of the map when the other 7 bases are over run by the enemy. There where 6 people in my squad and we made it our duty to not give up that bunker no matter what !!!! They were hitting us from all sides with jets, tanks infantry and every thing they could throw at us ! But thanks to great teamwork they never took it ! We held it for 25 minutes !
It was one of the greatest MP experiences I have ever had.

DESODE

[trk29]

Anton can you release information on how many players will be online?

Update, Anton said there will be up to 16 players for multiplayer.