GET SERVERS NOW (P2P connections) | Forums

[LycO.]

i would pay extra money (btw this game isnt cheap at all, but i love it) for a working server.... cmon ubisoft dont let this game DIE!!!!

[noy88]

This thread is becoming exhausted with redundant replies, but I just found something that should really put all of this to rest (if someone linked this already...call me a hypocrite?). It's not information coming from me, this information is coming from a network engineer who works for, arguably, the most popular online multiplayer game relying on fast reaction times...

If you said to yourself League of Legends, then you get a cookie. I am linking the article where he discusses the issues faced by gaming online HERE, but will quote the important parts that summarize the point (but I do recommend reading the article, it's very informative). There is another followup article HERE for those interested in networking, or for those who want to see a company giving a **** about its players.

Here we go:

The internet is not a single unified system, but rather a conglomeration of multiple entities. When you play League, data transfers from Riot’s servers to backbone companies (like Level3, Zayo, and Cogent) to ISP companies (like Comcast, AT&T, Time Warner Cable, and Verizon) and then finally to you, and vice-versa.

Backbone providers and ISPs route traffic to the lowest cost path, not the lowest latency path. In other words, these companies care that your packets get from point A to point Z, but they prioritize a cheaper route over a faster route.

The current internet architecture is great for streaming video experiences like Netflix, where the buffering of content mitigates the pain of slower response times. If the buffer gathers five seconds of video, subsequent data can take up to five seconds to arrive. In fact, for applications like Netflix, buffering means user traffic could traverse the earth 100 times and the user experience would be just as good as if it’d taken the shortest path possible. In a game of LoL, however, where the future can’t be buffered since it hasn’t yet been played, those five seconds are utterly unacceptable.

The vast majority of internet traffic breaks down into packets of 1500 bytes in size: consider these the tractor-trailers of the internet...In stark contrast, game traffic is usually around 55 bytes in size. Games require constant updates but any individual message is quite small.

Routers aren’t counting the size of the packet, just the quantity...For League, a constant stream of 55 bytes, compared to the standard of 1500 bytes, is a 27x increase in cost.

Most games transmit traffic over UDP because of the increased efficiency and speed. However, when the actual route processors of internet routers begin to become overwhelmed by traffic, many simply start ignoring UDP packets. These packets are immediately dropped and never recovered...Note this is also an issue with reliable UDP (a construct to ensure ordered delivery of UDP packets often utilized by online games), as internet routers are incapable of differentiating normal UDP from reliable.

With all this in mind, consider how the circuitous routing resulting from BGP results in many more routers being involved in a single trip.

So overall, the point I am trying to further support, is Ubisoft network engineers knew about the ISP inefficient BGP/router packet handling and decided (or were told) it would be a good idea to place the multiplayer support solely on that infrastructure, instead of paying for dedicated servers and ISP routes to give the game success and solid foundation out of the gate. They are mostly riding on the backs of their developers on the game's seriously fun mechanics, to make them money while decreasing costs.

And the second point I am trying to make is, Riot is clearly the gold standard when it comes to making an insanely successful multiplayer game, especially after reading that developer blog. Ubisoft did not give this game a chance to be the next big e-sports success by following suit, which is a huge mistake. Good luck turning it around...

Thanks for reading gents.

[BlueBerry__x3]

For a big game like this they should have better servers

[PrimaGoosa]

So overall, the point I am trying to further support, is Ubisoft network engineers knew about the ISP inefficient BGP/router packet handling and decided (or were told) it would be a good idea to place the multiplayer support solely on that infrastructure, instead of paying for dedicated servers and ISP routes to give the game success and solid foundation out of the gate. They are mostly riding on the backs of their developers on the game's seriously fun mechanics, to make them money while decreasing costs.

And the second point I am trying to make is, Riot is clearly the gold standard when it comes to making an insanely successful multiplayer game, especially after reading that developer blog. Ubisoft did not give this game a chance to be the next big e-sports success by following suit, which is a huge mistake. Good luck turning it around...

Thanks for reading gents.

Based on everything I have heard, Riot has done almost everything in their power to try to kill their game, but they are at this point grandfathered into the market as the de facto go-to casual MOBA. DOTA2 is a faster-paced experience that doesn't lend itself quite as well to casual folks, and HoN died. Newer MOBAs are forced to compete with two absolute titans in the genre, so they make some headway (Smite, for example), but aren't in the ultra big leagues.

One company I hope Ubisoft specifically doesn't emulate is Riot, regardless of LoL's success. Especially for a game as different from LoL as For Honor. You want a gold standard for insanely successful multiplayer games? How about Blizzard, or Valve? Blizzard looked at the MOBA market as LoL and DOTA2 were flourishing and said "Yeah, let's enter that scene, why not?" They released HotS, and it's infinitely more successful than I ever thought it'd be. Then they create a TF2-style arena shooter with Overwatch based on brand new IP, and boom: huge hit.

What has Riot done since LoL? http://www.riotgames.com/our-games

Nothing, actually, and they capitalized on the DOTA-style (or AoS style, if you're going to be picky about the progenitor) idea as a new game with a standalone engine when the genre really started to take off. Great timing on their part, wonderful execution of a casual game when HoN tried to be even more fast-paced and DOTA2 was years away, leaving DOTA still as a custom map in WC3.

But you argue Riot gives a **** about their players? Is that solely because they chose a no-brainer dedicated server architecture for their simple game?

Do you think the interactions between players in LoL is as complex as it is in For Honor? Does it require as much precision to communicate that you used X ability on player Y, or that you used X attack while locked onto Y player in direction Z.

Despite the more circuitous route, allowing individuals to run simulations of a game locally and report their results to the other players in the game makes sense if you want results that feel as responsive as they need to be in a twitch reflex fighting game like For Honor.

Does that mean dedicated servers would be a bad idea? No. They'd help keep games live in the event of disconnections, reduce complexity in client-side logic with respect to resyncing, etc. Life would be more expensive, but also easier. Instead of trying to give everyone a living room experience, they could say screw it and let your ping weigh in heavily on your success. The only time lag really helps someone in this game is if they lag switch it up, or have a bad enough connection that it isn't worth playing them anyway. Otherwise, I've felt basically 0 lag against 99% of the people I've fought.

Disconnects are an issue. Errors are an issue. But cherry-picking quotes about dedicated servers from a completely different game, praising the developer for loving their customers, and then assuming money was the only reason Ubisoft went for a modified P2P architecture is just disingenuous at best.

[Sgt Goob]

#Getservers!

This game is badass, ... but i literally get to the point of nearly throwing my controller across the room, so i just turn the xbox off.... I have had some days where i just cant even get into a game.... Last saturday evening, i was matchmaking and it would say, Game found - Joining - Then Disconnect error, it did it about 8 times and i just turned the console off and went back to my laptop. later on that evening i managed to get a few games in with my mate.

Duel and Brawl seems to be ok most of the time but anytime i try to roll 4v4 ... its a nightmare, even to the point where connection can be fine and then suddenly when the match is like 80% of the way done, boom - booted!

I have more than enough internet speed to play a game, Certain places in the country can only get so much speed, if the connection issues dont get resolved then i can see a lot of people losing interest in the game really fast, i havent touched it in a few days mainly because i have been put off by not getting anywhere.

[Mia.Nora]

Do you think the interactions between players in LoL is as complex as it is in For Honor? Does it require as much precision to communicate that you used X ability on player Y, or that you used X attack while locked onto Y player in direction Z.

I believe you never played LoL, maybe at low bronze ranks with some very low skill ceiling champions; but LoL DOES require splitsecond connection.

Simple example is Fiora W, a skill that blocks incoming damage and if any CC is landed on Fiora during its duration, any enemy in the area of W is stunned instead of Fiora. This skill has a very small area size and it stays up for 0.75 seconds. Meaning you see a stun/cc skill being casted and while it travels towards your champion and you cast your W. We are talking about a skillshot travelling towards your character for a duration of maybe 0.2 second, you see it and you cast your W.

Another example is someone casts a skillshot towards your character and you flash sideways out of its way. Skillshot takes 0.2-0.5 second to reach your character from the moment it is cast. You cast flash and step out of its area effect. Pretty much a must have skill at diamond and above ranks and happens very often.

LoL network infrastructure allows that kind of complex split second interactions betweem TEN PLAYERS AT THE SAME TIME. I can tell by experience 4v4 lag when all players are close to each other is really high with our P2P netcode in For Honor by contrast.

For Honor has some serious connectivity issues, which are not present in games with dedicated servers. I do not care what model they use, P2P, syncronized P2P, dedicated servers, Magic Dust connection that runs on unicorn farts; as long as IT WORKS. What we have does not work, what other companies like Riot does DO work. So yes ubisoft should just look at how those guys make it work and do the same, if they are not capable of making something that does work on their own.

[noy88]

Based on everything I have heard, Riot has done almost everything in their power to try to kill their game, but they are at this point grandfathered into the market as the de facto go-to casual MOBA. DOTA2 is a faster-paced experience that doesn't lend itself quite as well to casual folks, and HoN died. Newer MOBAs are forced to compete with two absolute titans in the genre, so they make some headway (Smite, for example), but aren't in the ultra big leagues.

One company I hope Ubisoft specifically doesn't emulate is Riot, regardless of LoL's success. Especially for a game as different from LoL as For Honor. You want a gold standard for insanely successful multiplayer games? How about Blizzard, or Valve? Blizzard looked at the MOBA market as LoL and DOTA2 were flourishing and said "Yeah, let's enter that scene, why not?" They released HotS, and it's infinitely more successful than I ever thought it'd be. Then they create a TF2-style arena shooter with Overwatch based on brand new IP, and boom: huge hit.

What has Riot done since LoL? http://www.riotgames.com/our-games

Nothing, actually, and they capitalized on the DOTA-style (or AoS style, if you're going to be picky about the progenitor) idea as a new game with a standalone engine when the genre really started to take off. Great timing on their part, wonderful execution of a casual game when HoN tried to be even more fast-paced and DOTA2 was years away, leaving DOTA still as a custom map in WC3.

But you argue Riot gives a **** about their players? Is that solely because they chose a no-brainer dedicated server architecture for their simple game?

Do you think the interactions between players in LoL is as complex as it is in For Honor? Does it require as much precision to communicate that you used X ability on player Y, or that you used X attack while locked onto Y player in direction Z.

Despite the more circuitous route, allowing individuals to run simulations of a game locally and report their results to the other players in the game makes sense if you want results that feel as responsive as they need to be in a twitch reflex fighting game like For Honor.

Does that mean dedicated servers would be a bad idea? No. They'd help keep games live in the event of disconnections, reduce complexity in client-side logic with respect to resyncing, etc. Life would be more expensive, but also easier. Instead of trying to give everyone a living room experience, they could say screw it and let your ping weigh in heavily on your success. The only time lag really helps someone in this game is if they lag switch it up, or have a bad enough connection that it isn't worth playing them anyway. Otherwise, I've felt basically 0 lag against 99% of the people I've fought.

Disconnects are an issue. Errors are an issue. But cherry-picking quotes about dedicated servers from a completely different game, praising the developer for loving their customers, and then assuming money was the only reason Ubisoft went for a modified P2P architecture is just disingenuous at best.

Do you have any experience with any enterprise IT assets? At all? Genuine question. Because you can't just say "despite the circuitous routes" and expect the second part of that sentence to make sense. I'm sorry, but perhaps you should read the article either again, or for the first time.

Much of your argument is based around your experience, as I see "from what I've heard...", "I ever thought..." and "I felt basically...". I supplied the analysis of packet transmission from a network engineer, a professional who knows far more than you, and you start grinding your teeth using the company's history as some sort of way to do...what exactly? I said they are the gold standard simply because I was impressed with the dedicated blog spot for their engineering ideas, the popularity and quality of their game, and for actions taken to increase the responsiveness of that game. So yes, my opinion is Riot seem to understand how to have a game thrive whilst doing all they can to support user experiences; a gold standard for me. Game development history and industry impact have absolutely nothing to do with this argument. Talking about Blizzard and Valve, both utilizing dedicated servers (whether privately owned or not), is just hurting your argument, so..thank you? I guess it really is a no brainer...

LoL is a different game, but, as what said in the blog and is fact, routers don't discriminate based on that (unless configured to). They don't even do so based on the packet size. ..Besides, the first link I provided spoke of a very neutral issue, more than likely being experienced by any developer providing multiplayer with their product. He uses his game as an example of how ineffective the current WAN infrastructure is at handling these packets.

But you are right about one thing. It isn't greed that is fueling these decisions for cost cutting, it's fear. I suggest you do a little researching into Vivendi and Ubisoft.

[Raxyk]

Bump

[tcSandman]

Yea I want a refund this is so bad, it lags out so much and people can lag switch. In this day and age good multiplayer serves should be standard Im so disappointed that this is peer to peer. I really feel let down.

This really sums up how I feel about the game too I will be calling today and every subsequent day if I must until I get a refund or the server issue is fixed please sticky this post to keep it at the top so the developers know the only real issue to work on right now is not balancing heros it's making for the servers work!!

[tcSandman]

For honor is Dead on Arrival. It's just ridiculous we're even talking about the server issue Ubisoft has more than enough money to make this happen and should have long before the game was ever released I will be demanding a refund today and every subsequent day until the servers are fixed. And if they don't fix this problem I will never buy another Ubisoft game.