How will they handle so many concurrent players with this quality of graphics?

Briq · 2012-01-30, 10:13 PM

I have faith that the PS2 team will do a good job balancing all the weapons and vehicles in the game because of all the years of experience and data they have from the original planetside. I also believe that they'll do a good job adding new features to the game to make it fresh and keep it fresh. The main thing I'm worried about is how the game will run when hundreds of players are in a small area shooting their weapons, not to mention 30+ vehicles to go with them. This was one of the main issues the original planetside faced and the graphics in ps2 aren't even comparable. Has technology advanced enough to not only handle much better graphics, but more players with a smoother playing experience? Put my mind at ease!

VioletZero · 2012-01-30, 10:15 PM

Well, the graphics are like early Xbox 360 at best.

Sure, the art design is great but when paired up to recent titles it doesn't hold up as a PC title.

The graphics are also clearly designed with scaling down a lot in mind.

Which is good. I am not some graphics fanatic who has to have good graphics.

Vancha · 2012-01-31, 08:41 AM

Originally Posted by VioletZero

Well, the graphics are like early Xbox 360 at best.

Look up CoD2, Condemned: Criminal Origins, Perfect Dark Zero or Quake 4.

PS2 looks better than all of them (for now, at least).

SKYeXile · 2012-01-31, 04:23 PM

Originally Posted by Vancha

Look up CoD2, Condemned: Criminal Origins, Perfect Dark Zero or Quake 4.

PS2 looks better than all of them (for now, at least).

lol PS2 looks as good or better than anything out there except for maybe Cryengine 3, id like to see that handle thousands of players though.

Levente · 2012-01-31, 09:14 AM

Originally Posted by VioletZero

Well, the graphics are like early Xbox 360 at best.

Sure, the art design is great but when paired up to recent titles it doesn't hold up as a PC title.

The graphics are also clearly designed with scaling down a lot in mind.

Which is good. I am not some graphics fanatic who has to have good graphics.

captainbaka · 2012-01-31, 12:26 PM

Originally Posted by VioletZero

Well, the graphics are like early Xbox 360 at best.

Sure, the art design is great but when paired up to recent titles it doesn't hold up as a PC title.

The graphics are also clearly designed with scaling down a lot in mind.

Which is good. I am not some graphics fanatic who has to have good graphics.

I agree graphics dont matter to much but im pretty sure the 360 has a 250mb
card and these days you can get 750mb/1gb for like $150.

Rbstr · 2012-01-31, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by captainbaka

I agree graphics dont matter to much but im pretty sure the 360 has a 250mb
card and these days you can get 750mb/1gb for like $150.

Ah, ranking graphics cards simply by the video memory.
What a great way to buy a shitty graphics card.

(and also, memory comes in powers of two, so you get 256 or 512 or 768mb or 1024mb=1gb)

cellinaire · 2012-02-01, 12:28 AM

Originally Posted by VioletZero

Well, the graphics are like early Xbox 360 at best.

Sure, the art design is great but when paired up to recent titles it doesn't hold up as a PC title.

The graphics are also clearly designed with scaling down a lot in mind.

Which is good. I am not some graphics fanatic who has to have good graphics.

...I'm sure you do have an idea of what you're saying, right? Right?

"The graphics are also clearly designed with scaling down a lot in mind."

Yeah, normally many games these days have scaled-down graphics for release but the difference is not that significant like you mentioned. And you sound like you are an SOE staff or someone like that.

(and "it doesn't hold up as a PC title.". Is this a joke? I mean, I say this as a person who have seen/played enough of Crysis1, 2 in extreme, BF3 ultra, and Skyrim ENB/texture pack)

VioletZero · 2012-02-01, 12:34 AM

Originally Posted by cellinaire

...I'm sure you do have an idea of what you're saying, right? Right?

"The graphics are also clearly designed with scaling down a lot in mind."

Yeah, normally many games these days have scaled-down graphics for release but the difference is not that significant like you mentioned. And you sound like you are an SOE staff or someone like that.

I'm not trying to give the impression that I work at Sony. Those are just personal observations.

cellinaire · 2012-02-01, 12:41 AM

Originally Posted by VioletZero

I'm not trying to give the impression that I work at Sony. Those are just personal observations.

Yeah, early Xbox 360 graphics. Great observation.

VioletZero · 2012-02-01, 12:43 AM

Originally Posted by cellinaire

Yeah, early Xbox 360 graphics. Great observation.

Yeah...the graphics aren't great.

What about it?

Roy Awesome · 2012-01-30, 10:30 PM

Concurrent Player Count and Graphic Rendering are fairly different from eachother. Take Eve Online for example. My computer can handle a very large battle (500+) just fine, but the servers die every time. This is because the server does all the game logic, and concurrent player count hurts them. For Graphics, you just have to deal with your polygon budget. You could theoretically have 10,000 players with 2 polygons per player and be just fine on even the worst modern graphics cards. It's all about optimizing draw distance and balancing draw calls vs polygon bandwidth, something you have to do regardless of the number of players in the environment. More players do lead to more draw calls though.

VioletZero · 2012-01-30, 10:32 PM

I'm more worried about processors to be honest.

Sifer2 · 2012-01-30, 10:42 PM

Well have you seen the quality of the models of units in RTS games now? Hundreds of little dudes running around, and each one looks really nice when you zoom in.

I'm thinking modern game engines just handle this stuff better. I'm guessing juicy details only load when your really close to the other person. But yeah I do hope they don't get too carried away. Since it did hurt the first game when people had a difficult time getting playable fps in large fights.

Death2All · 2012-01-30, 10:56 PM

What Roy said.

I'm guessing the game is going rely heavily on culling animations. I.E. highly detailed textures only load when you're at an optimal framerate or a smaller scale fight. Let's just hope they actually program the game correctly so enabling that feature actually works this time around. You actually had to go into the games files and manually change the numbers in a document to get them to work, even then it would still disable if you went into any menu with in the game.

The graphics really do look amazing (Xbox 360 graphics? C'mon, this game is gorgeous) but I still prefer performance over graphics. I really don't care about the individual stitches or hexes finely woven into your armor when I'm shooting you in the face.