PlayerOne

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    29

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by PlayerOne

  2. Posted · Edited by PlayerOne

    13 hours ago, Krebork said:

    The way it works is that you can own houses, fix them up yourself, and then rent them out. As for apartments, no, you will most likely not being able to rent them out. While there is a limited number of houses, apartments are unlimited, meaning that everyone can technically own an apartment if they have the money for it. Since there will be an unlimited number of apartments, a set price will most likely be set, rather than having people be able to buy apartments and then rent them out.

    are apartments in seperate instances? so the same door could be a "portal" to the apartments of many players?

    why would i want to rent a house if there are unlimited cheaper apartments?

  5. Posted · Edited by PlayerOne

    sometimes a child dies no matter how much you love it. 

    i really dont get why some people here think that the first module can prove anything. what do you think the first module will bring to the table? if you expect too much from the first module you could get disappointed

    • Like 1

  6. Posted

    you just need to call it early access :) i agree to a certain degree though. the initial hype is a great opportunity. 

    for games that dont rely on the narrative - sandbox games - it should be more important to test the game early in development. at least thats what garry newman wrote.

    the quote is from the mid 90s though. 

  9. Posted

    9 minutes ago, Arky said:

    The 4 devblog updates, 20+ pictures and a video showcasing apartment customization. Not to mention the fact that there's a supposed release for late March for the first moduale.

    a static world with a chat. thats it. thats not a game. 

  11. Posted

    11 hours ago, Arky said:

    It's all about stress testing man. If you stress test servers you're able to see how many people can fit. I'm sure they've already done that so that's why they say 300 maximum just to be safe.

    already done that? how can they do that without a game?

  12. Posted

    45 minutes ago, JamesLuck01 said:

    I can say @Joshua_Else you can always aim for one of the highest ended PC's and set a goal, if you fall short of the goal ask your parents if they can chip in and also maybe if that is still a bit short, you can always downgrade some stuff/ goal.

    For instance I am going to be buying a brand new pc even though I could probably run the game on this one, but I am going for a much better computer. Some things I will be getting; GPU: GTX 1080 (a bit over the top but oh well), Hard Drive 3TB (again over the top), 32 GB RAM, and CPU: i7 (not sure which one yet. My budget limit is £2000. 

    im sure your bragging is very helpful here. but you should get an ssd.

  16. Posted · Edited by PlayerOne

    there is no difference if you have the data on servers of a typical game server provider or on the servers of amazon, microsoft or google.

    you can make exclusive deals with amazon, microsoft, google too. 

    "just fine". yes, just fine. except that you can see the technical limitations when you look at survival games. funcom thought it will work "just fine" and then had to fire their prefered server provider 4 days after release. and funcom has a little bit more experience than asylum afaik. i mean, what has the ceo worked on so far? a mod and mortal online? 

    these discussions come up every time a new service goes public and makes things so much easier for devs. steam as a publishing platform. social media as an advertising platform. unity/unreal as development tool. and now with cloud services. 

  19. Posted

    3 hours ago, JamesLuck01 said:

    Yes, I get the point but the physical servers are not handled by the devs meaning that they cannot physically upload updates to the servers but instead will do it via internet which means it is a slower process. Also uploading via the internet could have loss of data when complete, well more data loss than the physical updating using direct contact with the servers.

    do you think they build their own server farm in their living room? seems to be unlikely given the size of the company with.. how many? maybe 3-4 people and a couple of freelance artists? 

    and the community servers around the world?

    i guess if file verification methods would be too unrealiable, cloud platforms wouldnt be a multi-billion dollar business.

  20. Posted

    im not an expert. so i dont know how exactly all of this works.

    but let me add one more thing. what typically happens in games is that many players want to be an admin and they rent their own servers. but on 90% of these servers only a hand full of people play. if devs can get players to pay them instead of server providers then they can use it to pay for the cloud costs. but because the cloud costs are usage based the devs could make a profit from servers only a few players play on and use the money to pay for the usage costs of their own official servers with many players. 

    and they could do what many community servers do and charge for premium slots because nobody wants to wait in a queue when the server is empty.

    so there could be additional revenue opportunities. 

  21. Posted

    4 minutes ago, JamesLuck01 said:

    I meant on maintenance with the servers!

    that's google's job. as a dev you dont have to worry about that. the data wont be limited to a single server. that's the thing with spatialOS: it distributes the data and work loads between servers.

  22. Posted

    24 minutes ago, JamesLuck01 said:

    Here is the problem then.

    Also do they have control over their physical servers?

    what do you mean by control? 

     

    Therefore, over the coming year Unreal Engine 4 will become a first-class integration for SpatialOS, for use both as a client and as a server-side worker. This process will start with an experimental SDK that we plan to make available by the end of March 2017.

  23. Posted · Edited by PlayerOne

    16 minutes ago, JamesLuck01 said:

    Fair enough, but I think having it on servers are better because they can do maintenance on the servers themselves. The server providers obviously will have a certain payment likely to them as well but i am unsure of that and how they work that but having servers via the cloud means internet, if you for some reason lose access to that then you will lose access to the cloud. Also data can get lost within the cloud, not all but some bits of data.

    Having the servers on physical hardware is easier to maintain and keep an eye on data, you can also give updates directly to it.

     

    "the cloud" are physical servers too but connected in a huge data center. i think right now you dont even have to pay for it during development if you use spatialOS on google cloud. unreal engine isnt fully supported yet but its coming along. https://improbable.io

     

    "Find out more, on our GDC page.

    We’ll also be updating developers on our SpatialOS Games Innovation Program with Google. The credit system from this program will enable games studios to build, deploy and test games on SpatialOS up to the point of commercial release with significantly reduced, and in many cases completely eliminated, SpatialOS usage costs, including cloud computing fees. We hope this promotes experimentation, much earlier user testing, iteration of games, and an explosion of new ideas – these credits are intended for indie teams, new studios and small, innovative core teams in established larger studios."

  24. Posted

    4 hours ago, JamesLuck01 said:

    If they do that they will probably payout more money in the long term. So I have to disagree, I like them hosting their own servers so that they have full control and it won't be based round some other company to fix certain issues.

    Also if you mean you want them to do it so that you have better performance streaming too then really you need to get better internet to do that. Also I am sure they will be fine as it is as they will have certain places instanced.

    they will have to pay for official servers and players for community servers anyway. the difference would be that community admins send the money to them instead of server companies. you cant know if it costs more to use cloud infrastructure. and its scalable. if they decide the build a map with all 3 cities and 900 players, they can just do it. 

  25. Posted

    1 hour ago, Hatoful said:

    If you mean cloud solutions, as in you're able to change if you can see clouds or not, I'm sure you'll be able to control that type of graphics. I'm not 100% sure, so don't quote me on this! Also, they said if they can handle more than 300 players on their servers, then they'll raise the limit, but right now it's at 300! ^_^ 

    hehe. no, what i meant is they should talk to google or microsoft and use their cloud platforms instead of building their own server backend.