Muscular Beaver wrote on Feb 13, 2018, 04:40:

Osc8r wrote on Feb 12, 2018, 16:57:

Muscular Beaver wrote on Feb 12, 2018, 04:31:

Talutha wrote on Feb 12, 2018, 01:00:
I'm not sure how you guys think that 20hz is a low goal. This is a game putting 100 players in a fully destructible world with building in it. Other games with 64+ tick rates are low player counts like CSGO or Overwatch. The other Battle Royale games are struggling with the same issues. CPU speeds have not increased at all in the past few years, yet we continue to try and push player counts and arena fluidity further. We're simply hitting the max we can go with what we have available.

And I know someone will bring up Battlefields 64 tick servers, some even have 128 tick and that is honestly a good point. It is incredibly impressive what DICE has managed to do with their engine. But you have to keep in mind they are the only ones that have been able to do this, and they had to work at it for years. Frostbite is the only engine that runs as well as it does, takes full advantage of multicore CPUs, can handle a multitude of genres and works well across a wide range of hardware/consoles. The only other engine that I can think of off the top of my head that can do this is Ubisoft's Snowdrop engine and that one does not have anywhere near the networking ability that Frostbite has.

I guess ultimately my point is that getting above a 20hz tickrate is not an easy task for a game of this size. Only one company has managed to do it, with only up to 64 players but I do believe DICE has some of the smartest people in the industry working on their engine. They would have to with what they can put out with it. If these other companies could, I'm sure they would put in the research and figure out how to do it. And I would bet that Ubisoft has tried and failed or else we would see them competing on the same fronts with online gameplay.

I am sorry, but King of the Kill has 50% more players than Fortnite or PUBG and achieves a much higher tickrate than even 64. Check the video I linked. It uses ForgeLight.

If true (i have my doubts, as it was an ancient MMO engine from memory), then it goes to show how meaningless tickrates are when comparing different games and without considering other factors (like desync, hz consistency, lag compensation, poor coding [read h1z1] etc).

KOTK had the the least consistent and most sluggish combat of pretty much any modern game... the dev's tried to improve things every patch but got nowhere (sometimes going backwards). There's a good reason why pretty much everyone abandoned KOTK in favor or PUBG and Fortnite.

And using your own source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjIJTantgWE , the guy compares the netcode of KOTK to PUBG beta and then makes the comment that already "hit registration definitely feels better than KOTK".

Then his next video he shows that fortnite beats PUBG. So which one is sluggish again?

Doesn't seem the lower tickrate is too impactful in fortnite even for super aggressive gameplay: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/22828526, not do i notice any sluggish behavior going on.

I've got over 1000 hours in KOTK and over 500 in fortnite, and there's simply no comparison. Fortnite is a far more responsive and consistent game - yes, even with their built in bloom mechanic. The Epic guys are currently letting players trial different shooting mechanics that remove or tone down bloom, however, they don't want to turn the game into a campfest like PUBG or where building is meaningless and you die instantly before you get a chance to re-act.

I do agree that they should be aiming higher than 20hz though, so hopefully that's just their first stepping stone.

Still, i'd love to see a BR game done in the frostbite engine.

So because something bad is better than something worse means that the less bad is super good?
You need to check your definition of logic.

And of course other problems we havent talked about here can make things worse. I am just saying that 20 Hz is ridiculous in a game like that and the video shows why, and that its possible to make it better.

Tick rates are not meaningless. They are just one part of the game. If other parts are done wrong, then the game will still feel crappy, even though the tick rates are good. And if the other things are done well (which they arent in either PUBG or Fortnite either) and the tickrates are bad, it will still feel crappy. What is so hard to understand? Your comments feel more and more like youre trying to defend bad game design.

Fortnite is super sluggish. PUBG is worse. There is no denying it. Its just that some people can deal with it, while others cant. Pretty much the same as some people can see no difference between 60 and 100 FPS. There is a huge difference, but some people arent sensitive enough to notice it.
I mean, I too think Fortnite has much bigger problems than the tickrate, but that doesnt mean the tickrate isnt a problem.

Maybe you missed the part where i said that i was hoping 20 hz was just their first step and they had bigger plans in store for us.

-edit- on second look, Epic themselves even state that their FIRST server goal is to run the game at a solid 20 hz. Keyword 'first', implying more server improvements to come....

The changes they are making to improve fortnite's performance will also go on to improve a other unreal engine based games: https://goo.gl/rvGyCy

You're the one going on about KOTK like it's some type of goal/savior with it's high tick rates... but then ignore the fact that fortnite is already superior to all other BR games, and that KOTK has the most sluggish, least reliable and most desync plagged gameplay of much any BR game in existence. Hell, your precious video's you keep spouting as proof even say as much. But guys aim high, be like KOTK!?!

So yeah, maybe you're the last person who should bring up logic.

Let's be real, it's obvious that whenever a fortnite (or pubg) story comes up logic is put aside as as you just see it as another opportunity to whine about 'netcode', 'sluggish' and/or 'hacks'.

Now feel free to watch any pro-gamer (or decent PC player for that matter) rack up 20+ kills match after match without any of the above issues and get back to me. Or you know, maybe it is actually you. Put down your controller and step away from your dialup modem.

Now for my personal take on the current state of fortnite -

No issues whatsoever with sluggishness - unlike arma 2, dayz, kotk etc.

Getting a little burnt out on it but still enjoying it in shorter sessions.

They had a few lag issues over the xmas break due to their cloud provider patching the server due to meltdown, spectre etc. They had an issue with sniper shots not registering, recently built structures not blocking shots, delay before being able to loot recently killed enemies... but these have all been fixed.

These days my only real complaint is around bloom (work in progress), and their lack of limited time modes (they should have one running at all times - not sure whose bright idea it was to have them last for like 5 days and not even run over a weekend). Footstep audio positioning needs work especially in elevated space, I also find endgame to be the worst part of this game still - it usually devolves into people just camping in massive towers with snipers /yawn. All the shitty pistols and smg's need to be taken out of the loot table, and the scoped AR needs to function like in the current LTM.

They also need to fix the quick build button not resetting traps, but apart from that i don't have any major complaints. I just hope they continue with their frequent updates, server improvements, map changes, new weapons (less stealth / passive gameplay BS though) and limited time modes (splode mode was better than the core game).

They also need to stop listening to the all the fanboys that infest reddit ("Epic is the best", "game is perfect", "plz give us more $20 skins" blah blah). Epic fell into this trap with Paragon and look how that turned out.

I'm still patiently waiting for battlefield royal though.

This comment was edited on Feb 14, 2018, 00:27.

Osc8r wrote on Feb 12, 2018, 16:57:

Muscular Beaver wrote on Feb 12, 2018, 04:31:

Talutha wrote on Feb 12, 2018, 01:00:
I'm not sure how you guys think that 20hz is a low goal. This is a game putting 100 players in a fully destructible world with building in it. Other games with 64+ tick rates are low player counts like CSGO or Overwatch. The other Battle Royale games are struggling with the same issues. CPU speeds have not increased at all in the past few years, yet we continue to try and push player counts and arena fluidity further. We're simply hitting the max we can go with what we have available.

And I know someone will bring up Battlefields 64 tick servers, some even have 128 tick and that is honestly a good point. It is incredibly impressive what DICE has managed to do with their engine. But you have to keep in mind they are the only ones that have been able to do this, and they had to work at it for years. Frostbite is the only engine that runs as well as it does, takes full advantage of multicore CPUs, can handle a multitude of genres and works well across a wide range of hardware/consoles. The only other engine that I can think of off the top of my head that can do this is Ubisoft's Snowdrop engine and that one does not have anywhere near the networking ability that Frostbite has.

I guess ultimately my point is that getting above a 20hz tickrate is not an easy task for a game of this size. Only one company has managed to do it, with only up to 64 players but I do believe DICE has some of the smartest people in the industry working on their engine. They would have to with what they can put out with it. If these other companies could, I'm sure they would put in the research and figure out how to do it. And I would bet that Ubisoft has tried and failed or else we would see them competing on the same fronts with online gameplay.

I am sorry, but King of the Kill has 50% more players than Fortnite or PUBG and achieves a much higher tickrate than even 64. Check the video I linked. It uses ForgeLight.

If true (i have my doubts, as it was an ancient MMO engine from memory), then it goes to show how meaningless tickrates are when comparing different games and without considering other factors (like desync, hz consistency, lag compensation, poor coding [read h1z1] etc).

KOTK had the the least consistent and most sluggish combat of pretty much any modern game... the dev's tried to improve things every patch but got nowhere (sometimes going backwards). There's a good reason why pretty much everyone abandoned KOTK in favor or PUBG and Fortnite.

And using your own source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjIJTantgWE , the guy compares the netcode of KOTK to PUBG beta and then makes the comment that already "hit registration definitely feels better than KOTK".

Then his next video he shows that fortnite beats PUBG. So which one is sluggish again?

Doesn't seem the lower tickrate is too impactful in fortnite even for super aggressive gameplay: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/22828526, not do i notice any sluggish behavior going on.

I've got over 1000 hours in KOTK and over 500 in fortnite, and there's simply no comparison. Fortnite is a far more responsive and consistent game - yes, even with their built in bloom mechanic. The Epic guys are currently letting players trial different shooting mechanics that remove or tone down bloom, however, they don't want to turn the game into a campfest like PUBG or where building is meaningless and you die instantly before you get a chance to re-act.

I do agree that they should be aiming higher than 20hz though, so hopefully that's just their first stepping stone.

Still, i'd love to see a BR game done in the frostbite engine.

So because something bad is better than something worse means that the less bad is super good?
You need to check your definition of logic.

And of course other problems we havent talked about here can make things worse. I am just saying that 20 Hz is ridiculous in a game like that and the video shows why, and that its possible to make it better.

Tick rates are not meaningless. They are just one part of the game. If other parts are done wrong, then the game will still feel crappy, even though the tick rates are good. And if the other things are done well (which they arent in either PUBG or Fortnite either) and the tickrates are bad, it will still feel crappy. What is so hard to understand? Your comments feel more and more like youre trying to defend bad game design.

Fortnite is super sluggish. PUBG is worse. There is no denying it. Its just that some people can deal with it, while others cant. Pretty much the same as some people can see no difference between 60 and 100 FPS. There is a huge difference, but some people arent sensitive enough to notice it.
I mean, I too think Fortnite has much bigger problems than the tickrate, but that doesnt mean the tickrate isnt a problem.

Kxmode wrote on Feb 12, 2018, 13:52:
Meanwhile Paragon is in the corner weeping because nobody loves it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwm2SxoYfJM

Muscular Beaver wrote on Feb 12, 2018, 04:31:

Talutha wrote on Feb 12, 2018, 01:00:
I'm not sure how you guys think that 20hz is a low goal. This is a game putting 100 players in a fully destructible world with building in it. Other games with 64+ tick rates are low player counts like CSGO or Overwatch. The other Battle Royale games are struggling with the same issues. CPU speeds have not increased at all in the past few years, yet we continue to try and push player counts and arena fluidity further. We're simply hitting the max we can go with what we have available.

And I know someone will bring up Battlefields 64 tick servers, some even have 128 tick and that is honestly a good point. It is incredibly impressive what DICE has managed to do with their engine. But you have to keep in mind they are the only ones that have been able to do this, and they had to work at it for years. Frostbite is the only engine that runs as well as it does, takes full advantage of multicore CPUs, can handle a multitude of genres and works well across a wide range of hardware/consoles. The only other engine that I can think of off the top of my head that can do this is Ubisoft's Snowdrop engine and that one does not have anywhere near the networking ability that Frostbite has.

I guess ultimately my point is that getting above a 20hz tickrate is not an easy task for a game of this size. Only one company has managed to do it, with only up to 64 players but I do believe DICE has some of the smartest people in the industry working on their engine. They would have to with what they can put out with it. If these other companies could, I'm sure they would put in the research and figure out how to do it. And I would bet that Ubisoft has tried and failed or else we would see them competing on the same fronts with online gameplay.

I am sorry, but King of the Kill has 50% more players than Fortnite or PUBG and achieves a much higher tickrate than even 64. Check the video I linked. It uses ForgeLight.

If true (i have my doubts, as it was an ancient MMO engine from memory), then it goes to show how meaningless tickrates are when comparing different games and without considering other factors (like desync, hz consistency, lag compensation, poor coding [read h1z1] etc).

KOTK had the the least consistent and most sluggish combat of pretty much any modern game... the dev's tried to improve things every patch but got nowhere (sometimes going backwards). There's a good reason why pretty much everyone abandoned KOTK in favor or PUBG and Fortnite.

And using your own source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjIJTantgWE , the guy compares the netcode of KOTK to PUBG beta and then makes the comment that already "hit registration definitely feels better than KOTK".

Then his next video he shows that fortnite beats PUBG. So which one is sluggish again?

Doesn't seem the lower tickrate is too impactful in fortnite even for super aggressive gameplay: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/22828526, not do i notice any sluggish behavior going on.

I've got over 1000 hours in KOTK and over 500 in fortnite, and there's simply no comparison. Fortnite is a far more responsive and consistent game - yes, even with their built in bloom mechanic. The Epic guys are currently letting players trial different shooting mechanics that remove or tone down bloom, however, they don't want to turn the game into a campfest like PUBG or where building is meaningless and you die instantly before you get a chance to re-act.

I do agree that they should be aiming higher than 20hz though, so hopefully that's just their first stepping stone.

Still, i'd love to see a BR game done in the frostbite engine.

This comment was edited on Feb 12, 2018, 21:19.

Meanwhile Paragon is in the corner weeping because nobody loves it.

Crazy people are so shocked by 20hz, not even realizing that when they play PUBG its even worse than this. That's like 25% better than PUBG's current netcode

Talutha wrote on Feb 12, 2018, 01:00:
I'm not sure how you guys think that 20hz is a low goal. This is a game putting 100 players in a fully destructible world with building in it. Other games with 64+ tick rates are low player counts like CSGO or Overwatch. The other Battle Royale games are struggling with the same issues. CPU speeds have not increased at all in the past few years, yet we continue to try and push player counts and arena fluidity further. We're simply hitting the max we can go with what we have available.

And I know someone will bring up Battlefields 64 tick servers, some even have 128 tick and that is honestly a good point. It is incredibly impressive what DICE has managed to do with their engine. But you have to keep in mind they are the only ones that have been able to do this, and they had to work at it for years. Frostbite is the only engine that runs as well as it does, takes full advantage of multicore CPUs, can handle a multitude of genres and works well across a wide range of hardware/consoles. The only other engine that I can think of off the top of my head that can do this is Ubisoft's Snowdrop engine and that one does not have anywhere near the networking ability that Frostbite has.

I guess ultimately my point is that getting above a 20hz tickrate is not an easy task for a game of this size. Only one company has managed to do it, with only up to 64 players but I do believe DICE has some of the smartest people in the industry working on their engine. They would have to with what they can put out with it. If these other companies could, I'm sure they would put in the research and figure out how to do it. And I would bet that Ubisoft has tried and failed or else we would see them competing on the same fronts with online gameplay.

I am sorry, but King of the Kill has 50% more players than Fortnite or PUBG and achieves a much higher tickrate than even 64. Check the video I linked. It uses ForgeLight.

If you set such low standards, of course you wont go much beyond them. Fortnite is a horribly sluggish game, and PUBG is even worse. Again, check the video, it is very thorough.

And yes, CPUs have become much faster. Its called multi-core/-thread (but even IPC has increased quite a bit). They have been standard in servers for over 10 years now.

You could kinda forgive it on Fortnite, because it was originally developed as a coop game only, so high tick rates arent that important. But it is not anymore. And seeing them set such low goals, proved they have no intention of improving it much.

As another example, ArmA 2 achieved 50+ Hz in 2009 already with 64 players (sometimes more). Yet ArmA 2 was known for having a very bad multi-thread optimization and in the duration of a game you could see how the server struggled to keep the tick-rate up and it didnt have the luxury of resetting after each game (often games took more than 6 hours (in Warfare for example), and even after that the server wasnt reset.

This comment was edited on Feb 12, 2018, 04:43.

* REMOVED *
This comment was deleted on Feb 12, 2018, 04:04.

Well said mate, lots of good points all round.

I'm not sure how you guys think that 20hz is a low goal. This is a game putting 100 players in a fully destructible world with building in it. Other games with 64+ tick rates are low player counts like CSGO or Overwatch. The other Battle Royale games are struggling with the same issues. CPU speeds have not increased at all in the past few years, yet we continue to try and push player counts and arena fluidity further. We're simply hitting the max we can go with what we have available.

And I know someone will bring up Battlefields 64 tick servers, some even have 128 tick and that is honestly a good point. It is incredibly impressive what DICE has managed to do with their engine. But you have to keep in mind they are the only ones that have been able to do this, and they had to work at it for years. Frostbite is the only engine that runs as well as it does, takes full advantage of multicore CPUs, can handle a multitude of genres and works well across a wide range of hardware/consoles. The only other engine that I can think of off the top of my head that can do this is Ubisoft's Snowdrop engine and that one does not have anywhere near the networking ability that Frostbite has.

I guess ultimately my point is that getting above a 20hz tickrate is not an easy task for a game of this size. Only one company has managed to do it, with only up to 64 players but I do believe DICE has some of the smartest people in the industry working on their engine. They would have to with what they can put out with it. If these other companies could, I'm sure they would put in the research and figure out how to do it. And I would bet that Ubisoft has tried and failed or else we would see them competing on the same fronts with online gameplay.

Ranger55 wrote on Feb 11, 2018, 21:07:
While this can account for many cases of getting shot just after entering cover, it doesn't explain headshots through mountains with shotguns.

That was a hack... they fixed it like 6 months ago.

Could also be dem aliens though .

Ranger55 wrote on Feb 11, 2018, 21:07:
While this can account for many cases of getting shot just after entering cover, it doesn't explain headshots through mountains with shotguns.

I'm not saying it was aliens but... aliens man.

While this can account for many cases of getting shot just after entering cover, it doesn't explain headshots through mountains with shotguns.

necrosis wrote on Feb 11, 2018, 19:02:

Muscular Beaver wrote on Feb 11, 2018, 14:27:
Ugh... 20 Hz...
It needs 64 minimum, better yet 128.
Wow... if a game has that low standards you know its never going to fix its real issues.

Yeah really. What is this Overwatch?

I thought they increased that to 63 Hz in 2016.

Muscular Beaver wrote on Feb 11, 2018, 14:27:
Ugh... 20 Hz...
It needs 64 minimum, better yet 128.
Wow... if a game has that low standards you know its never going to fix its real issues.

Yeah really. What is this Overwatch?

MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Feb 11, 2018, 15:42:

Muscular Beaver wrote on Feb 11, 2018, 14:27:
Ugh... 20 Hz...
It needs 64 minimum, better yet 128.
Wow... if a game has that low standards you know its never going to fix its real issues.

ROFL! Seriously, how the hell is a 20hz server their goal? Am I misunderstanding something completely about their networking code? That seems unplayable.

Its true:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0dWDFDUF8s
The end of that video also shows what a low rate like that does to gameplay.
Funny, as I reported several players for cheating when that happened to me several times, and I wasnt aware of the game having such a ridiculously low tickrate.

Muscular Beaver wrote on Feb 11, 2018, 14:27:
Ugh... 20 Hz...
It needs 64 minimum, better yet 128.
Wow... if a game has that low standards you know its never going to fix its real issues.

ROFL! Seriously, how the hell is a 20hz server their goal? Am I misunderstanding something completely about their networking code? That seems unplayable.

Ugh... 20 Hz...
It needs 64 minimum, better yet 128.
Wow... if a game has that low standards you know its never going to fix its real issues.