Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Video Game News › [Destructoid] Man vs. Machine proves 999-player multiplayer is possible
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Destructoid] Man vs. Machine proves 999-player multiplayer is possible

post #1 of 30
Thread Starter 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=k4S19CcnN_Q#

Quote:
Something spectacular happened last evening. Swedish non-profit MuchDifferent hosted an event of monumental proportion. Nearly one thousand players participated in battle as the resolve of the technological development firm's network was put to the test.

First-person shooter Man vs. Machine was built utilizing the Unity engine as an experiment for new network technology that allows for hundreds upon hundreds of users to play simultaneously in a lag-free environment. The result was absolute chaos; 999 players rushed toward another with guns blazing in what must have been one of the most prodigious multiplayer experiences ever.

While the game was a one-time only experience, MuchDifferent is looking to put this technology in the hands of developers everywhere. With any luck it won't be too long before we'll all be able to experience battles on this massive scale. Let's just hope that when it does happen developers have something a little more creative in mind than making the most colossal Normandy landing ever.

Source


That was epic ! That and the chat too ! Friendship is Magic @ 0:48 lol

(quoted the whole thing because it is not much )

Edit: errr , dont know how to embed youtube videos
Edited by Perrin - 1/30/12 at 9:37am
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 2500K 3.30GHZ GA-Z68XP-UD4 Zotac GTX 1060 Mini Vengeance 8GB DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
OCZ Vertex 3 64GB WD Black 500GB +1TB , WD Green 1.5TB CM 212+ Win 8.1 64Bit 
MonitorPowerCase
AOC e2343F - 23" 1920 x 1080 Gigabyte Superb 720W HAF X 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 2500K 3.30GHZ GA-Z68XP-UD4 Zotac GTX 1060 Mini Vengeance 8GB DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
OCZ Vertex 3 64GB WD Black 500GB +1TB , WD Green 1.5TB CM 212+ Win 8.1 64Bit 
MonitorPowerCase
AOC e2343F - 23" 1920 x 1080 Gigabyte Superb 720W HAF X 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2 of 30
I for one wouldn't mind an accurate Normandy Beach online map with the numbers to back it up. BF1942 was the one of the best maps I've ever played period.
post #3 of 30
Interesting...

I know I read reports that BF3 tested a 250 player server but it was terrible as the server could not keep up (or the programming). Interesting that they didn't actually have an interactive environment, single unit, and object type. Would the player count be less if they had a game as complex as BF3?
Rig 2.0
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k Asus P8Z77-V EVGA GTX780 SC ACX Samsung DDR 3 (2 DIMMS) MV-3V4G3D/US 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 830 SSD WD Caviar Black Asus DVD/RW Xigmatek s-1283 HDT (Air Cooling) 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Scythe Slipstream 1200RPM (x2) Antec 140mm + Antec 120mm + Xigmatek 120mm (x2) Win 7 64bit Acer S243HL bmii - 24" 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Corsair TX750 Corsair Carbide 300R MX 518 Auzentek X-Fi Forte 7.1 
  hide details  
Reply
Rig 2.0
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k Asus P8Z77-V EVGA GTX780 SC ACX Samsung DDR 3 (2 DIMMS) MV-3V4G3D/US 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 830 SSD WD Caviar Black Asus DVD/RW Xigmatek s-1283 HDT (Air Cooling) 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Scythe Slipstream 1200RPM (x2) Antec 140mm + Antec 120mm + Xigmatek 120mm (x2) Win 7 64bit Acer S243HL bmii - 24" 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Corsair TX750 Corsair Carbide 300R MX 518 Auzentek X-Fi Forte 7.1 
  hide details  
Reply
post #4 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chachi123 View Post

I for one wouldn't mind an accurate Normandy Beach online map with the numbers to back it up. BF1942 was the one of the best maps I've ever played period.

probably would be harder on rigs if you plan on adding a lot of detail such as explosions in the sky, planes fighting above (not used by players) , sand and dirt and what not, with 1000 people over the internet with varying internet connections.

Probably would be low detail to have it run smoothly.
My System
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 2700k Asus p8z68v-lx Intel HD graphics 3000 G.Skill 2x4GB DDR 3 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
320 GB WD Blue  1TB WD Black Samsung SH232 Win 7 Ultimate x64 
MonitorPowerCase
Samsung P2770 1920x1080 Thermal Take 600 Watt Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 2700k Asus p8z68v-lx Intel HD graphics 3000 G.Skill 2x4GB DDR 3 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
320 GB WD Blue  1TB WD Black Samsung SH232 Win 7 Ultimate x64 
MonitorPowerCase
Samsung P2770 1920x1080 Thermal Take 600 Watt Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
post #5 of 30
the in-game chat was very colorful! i like it. GFx looked a lot like the older Tribes series. if this goes into future games, PC gaming will be better than ever.

BTW, didn't MAG have support for 250 players? <<<< Never played MAG
Edited by rgrwng - 1/30/12 at 10:16am
post #6 of 30
I'm curious what the server<->client packets look like, normally there are three reasons why 1000 players in the same area (all visible to one another) is not possible.

1.) Client performance, rendering 1000 animating and unique players at once.
2.) Client bandwidth, sending the information for 999 other players each doing unique things from the server to a client, normally means a huge amount of data that the client cannot handle multiple times per second.
3.) Server bandwidth, the server is sending 1000 different players a packet of data including the information for the other 999 players that are not that client. For example, in a 4 player game, the server sends each of the 4 players a packet with information for the 3 other players, if each players information is 100 bytes of data, that means it sends 4 packets, one to each player, that are 300 bytes each (100 bytes per player, for 3 other players), for a total of 1200 bytes. If there are 8 players, that is 8 separate 700-byte packets (7 other players, 100 bytes each), for a total of 5600 bytes. And finally, for 1000 players, that is 1000 separate packets that are 99.9 kilobytes in size (999 other players, 100 bytes for each player) for a total of 99.9MB per update. Generally in an FPS updates happen a few times per second, so for the server that is a few hundred MB of data per second of the game. That amount is unsustainable. And, as mentioned in the last point #2, the clients won't always have the bandwidth to receive 100KB of data, multiple times per second.
Edited by lordikon - 1/30/12 at 10:23am
Foldatron
(17 items)
 
Mat
(10 items)
 
Work iMac
(9 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 950 EVGA x58 3-way SLI EVGA GTX 660ti GTX 275 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
3x2GB Corsair Dominator DDR3-1600 80GB Intel X25-M SSD 2TB WD Black 150GB WD Raptor 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
2x 150GB WD V-raptor in RAID0 Win7 Home 64-bit OEM 55" LED 120hz 1080p Vizio MS Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000 
PowerCase
750W PC P&C Silencer CoolerMaster 690 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5 2500S AMD 6770M 8GB (2x4GB) at 1333Mhz 1TB, 7200 rpm 
Optical DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
LG 8X Dual-Layer "SuperDrive" OS X Lion 27" iMac screen Mac wireless keyboard 
Mouse
Mac wireless mouse 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7-2600K AMD 6970M 1GB 16GB PC3-10600 DDR3 1TB 7200rpm 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256GB SSD 8x DL "SuperDrive" OS X 10.7 Lion 27" 2560x1440 iMac display 
Monitor
27" Apple thunderbolt display 
  hide details  
Reply
Foldatron
(17 items)
 
Mat
(10 items)
 
Work iMac
(9 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 950 EVGA x58 3-way SLI EVGA GTX 660ti GTX 275 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
3x2GB Corsair Dominator DDR3-1600 80GB Intel X25-M SSD 2TB WD Black 150GB WD Raptor 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
2x 150GB WD V-raptor in RAID0 Win7 Home 64-bit OEM 55" LED 120hz 1080p Vizio MS Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000 
PowerCase
750W PC P&C Silencer CoolerMaster 690 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5 2500S AMD 6770M 8GB (2x4GB) at 1333Mhz 1TB, 7200 rpm 
Optical DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
LG 8X Dual-Layer "SuperDrive" OS X Lion 27" iMac screen Mac wireless keyboard 
Mouse
Mac wireless mouse 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7-2600K AMD 6970M 1GB 16GB PC3-10600 DDR3 1TB 7200rpm 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256GB SSD 8x DL "SuperDrive" OS X 10.7 Lion 27" 2560x1440 iMac display 
Monitor
27" Apple thunderbolt display 
  hide details  
Reply
post #7 of 30
looked unfair and unbalanced, Aliens had no chance.
Bender
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Core i5-2500k @ 4.6Ghz Gigabyte Z68X-UD3H-B3 Sapphire AMD R9 290X Tri-X (1050/1300mhz)  EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 (How do you OC?) 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOS
8GB 1600Mhz OCZ Vertex 3 240GB SSD OCZ Vertex 3 240GB SSD windows 10 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus MG279Q Logitech G510  Corsair TX750 CM II 690 Advanced 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
CM Sentinel Advance  some big corsair one beyerdynamic DT 770 Pro 250 Ohm SoundBlaster Z Soundcard 
  hide details  
Reply
Bender
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Core i5-2500k @ 4.6Ghz Gigabyte Z68X-UD3H-B3 Sapphire AMD R9 290X Tri-X (1050/1300mhz)  EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 (How do you OC?) 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOS
8GB 1600Mhz OCZ Vertex 3 240GB SSD OCZ Vertex 3 240GB SSD windows 10 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus MG279Q Logitech G510  Corsair TX750 CM II 690 Advanced 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
CM Sentinel Advance  some big corsair one beyerdynamic DT 770 Pro 250 Ohm SoundBlaster Z Soundcard 
  hide details  
Reply
post #8 of 30
It was incredible, indeed. It had a very epic war feeling. Sure it was basic, but I had tons of fun.

Here's hoping I make it in the books ~
New rig
(9 items)
  
Reply
New rig
(9 items)
  
Reply
post #9 of 30
That is awesome even if it is basic.
post #10 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordikon View Post

I'm curious what the server<->client packets look like, normally there are three reasons why 1000 players in the same area (all visible to one another) is not possible.
1.) Client performance, rendering 1000 animating and unique players at once.
2.) Client bandwidth, sending the information for 999 other players each doing unique things from the server to a client, normally means a huge amount of data that the client cannot handle multiple times per second.
3.) Server bandwidth, the server is sending 1000 different players a packet of data including the information for the other 999 players that are not that client. For example, in a 4 player game, the server sends each of the 4 players a packet with information for the 3 other players, if each players information is 100 bytes of data, that means it sends 4 packets, one to each player, that are 300 bytes each (100 bytes per player, for 3 other players), for a total of 1200 bytes. If there are 8 players, that is 8 separate 700-byte packets (7 other players, 100 bytes each), for a total of 5600 bytes. And finally, for 1000 players, that is 1000 separate packets that are 99.9 kilobytes in size (999 other players, 100 bytes for each player) for a total of 99.9MB per update. Generally in an FPS updates happen a few times per second, so for the server that is a few hundred MB of data per second of the game. That amount is unsustainable. And, as mentioned in the last point #2, the clients won't always have the bandwidth to receive 100KB of data, multiple times per second.

^ What is this the 90s? We've got much better ways of handling all that now days.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Video Game News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Video Game News › [Destructoid] Man vs. Machine proves 999-player multiplayer is possible