Ubisoft: Reviewers Won’t Have Access to For Honor Until Launch
Quote:
Ubisoft has sent out a statement to media outlets today stating that they won’t be able to access the final build of the upcoming For Honor for review until it’s publicly launched on February 14.
The reason for the delay is said to be due to the open beta (running from February 9-12) tying up the servers until launch.
Reviewers will be able to pre-load the game, but likely will not be able to begin playing until the game is available publicly or soon before then depending on when the servers go live.
Look at steam stats, mind boggling the kind of shit games that are still being actively played.
Also aren't all fighting games P2P? Like Street Fighter, Tekken (on the consoles where it exists anyway) and Mortal Kombat etc?
They survive.
Pretty sure this will survive long enough as well.
I too would prefer dedicated servers though and with all the outcry about it there is at least a chance that it will happen eventually, especially since they are going to include a ranked mode.
But at the same time everyone is still buying it anyways, even the people that threatened to not buy it, because they love it.
The subreddit for 'For Honor' speaks for itself, quite the momentum this game has.
And last but not least, no early access for reviewers isn't exactly a bad sign if there was a closed beta and there is a 3 day open beta next weekend.
Usually not a good sign, but they are showing plenty of the game and letting people play it, so there's probably other reasons for it
probably them still being hard at work balancing the classes with the beta feedback, one of the reasons we didn't get to see 3 characters that are going to be in the final release and were in the alphas, they're being tweaked
"There’s been a lot of discussion around dedicated servers vs P2P. Can you talk through the decision there?
JV: One thing that is not entirely clear to people is that we don’t actually have a traditional peer to peer architecture. We have a new type of architecture that, while it’s sort of based on a peer to peer philosophy, is actually there in order for us to do this game with eight players active simultaneously and then these two hundred AI running at the same time.
We were thinking about what to call it, but it isn’t actually traditional peer to peer.
A lot of the complaints that I’m seeing online, not all of them but a lot of them, are actually just lag issues that have to do with normal network states.
That said, the game is built on that framework because without that framework there wouldn’t be a game. We wouldn’t be running the way that we are right now. I wish I could go into more detail.
At this point, it seems to be working the way that we anticipated. I’m not terribly concerned about the problem right now, but we’re going to continue to look at the needs of the player base as we move forward.
I think there’s often a sense within the community to read something off a spec sheet and then decide based on that whether something is good or bad, but then the implementation of that spec is often the far more important aspect of it. It sounds like your implementation of P2P ultimately is one that you’re happy with, even if on the sheet it technically says P2P.
JV: Yeah, we run on a thing called ‘the simulation’. The way that our network system is built is that it’s built around everything being 100% fair. So what you’re seeing is what I’m seeing at the same time, there’s no visual advantage in the game.
There’s no host advantage?
JV: There’s no host advantage. This is the part that is not well understood because our technology has not been used in the wild before on other games. We’ve been using it all along, but it’s not something the audience is familiar with.
In our peer to peer solution it’s not really peer to peer, it’s based on that.
There was this moment that was really important. Six or eight months into development I had this moment where these engineers came to me and said, “So, you want to do eight players running over a network and you wan to do that with two hundred AI, over a normal internet connection? This is your pitch?”
I said, “Yes.”
They say, “That’s impossible. I don’t know if you understand how networks work designer boy but that can’t be done.”
Fortunately I work with these incredibly bright bulbs...and they come back a couple of months later with this thing called a simulation and they took a bunch of white papers for Siggraph which they assembled it into this new way of doing networking code, but when communicating it as a peer to peer model the problems with the other implementations kind of scare people, which is perfectly reasonable.
So we’ll just see moving forward how it goes, and if there are actual problems then we’ll reassess and see what we need to do."
JV: One thing that is not entirely clear to people is that we don’t actually have a traditional peer to peer architecture. We have a new type of architecture that, while it’s sort of based on a peer to peer philosophy, is actually there in order for us to do this game with eight players active simultaneously and then these two hundred AI running at the same time.
We were thinking about what to call it, but it isn’t actually traditional peer to peer.
I'd say that's peer-2-peer whether there's AI bots or not, co-op or just players against players.
And the thing about not possible seems a bit forced as well, 64vs64 player combat already exists since several years back as does 128vs128 and having actual players over AI "bots" would be more network intensive.
(Browsing around a bit it looks like Mount & Blade handles upwards of several hundred players though servers above 100 weren't too common.)
Its pretty clear the game is still P2P, he would have explained why it wasn't P2P if that was true.
If I can open the game, limit the upload rate to a peer to 1 KB/s and gain an advantage, its P2P. This is exactly what you can do in games like Dead by Daylight.
I think their special network architecture is just a way of handling traffic and peering in a fair way that doesn't use too much traffic, it doesn't really solve that much.
You always need a dedicated server sending all the data, there is no way around it.
Ah, only 10 more hours and it's once again time to DEUS VULT! VALHALLA! ....... kage bunshin no jutso
Oh and so far, even from the very first closed alpha, the game seemed optimized quite well for "my hardware combination". I only saw it drop on the forest map when looking at the little water ponds. Guess it's caused by the shader on them. Besides that, the game never ever drops below 60 in any situation at max settings (1080p that is).
Download stopped again for me so I thought to myself "fuck, this shit again? Alright, I'll restart the client again". Getting this now http://i.imgur.com/zcPu524.png
Are some classes OP? Also, does this shit play better on XBone? I'll download it on that shitsole tomorrow to check it out. I was just getting my ass handed to me on PC.
Just need to get used to it, you can learn it quick even on pc. Have to learn the classes too. I didnt have much problem winning with any of them after learning how the game works.
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
