>Modern technology now allows for servers and games supporting up to 94362 concurrent players in action games, or 272108 players in higher latency titles [1]>You can display up to 373 player characters on screen before framerate starts dropping [6]>Running a game like this 24/7 wouldn't even take 1/171th of amazon or microsoft's bandwith>No MMORPG or online game taking advantage of thisWhy did we fail as a generation? MAG with 2026 technology would be the greatest game of all time
>>739002813It's wild that could pitch a game to Sony and all you had was>okay okay mediocre shooter BUT>a lot of players in the same match!
>>739002813dust 514 > MAG
>>739002976the idea of multiplayer massive game is fun for a lot of peopleunlike the retards who enjoy 1vs1 or 4vs4 boring shitor>heres 40 retards vs 1 rock and 500 lasers . if one of you miss1 laser your whole party dies and you start from 0
>>739002813Because the demand for such a game simply doesn't exist.None of the technology is new, it's simply just not wanted by the market. The market share isn't enough to justify making and balancing a game around so many players.
>>739002813there was a reason it was called LAG but I do miss it, and am sick of 4/6/32 players max
>>739002813>could make an always online real-life town simulator>animal crossing but 500x the population and always-onlineWould this make money though?
>>739002813
>>739003148what is planet side, arma, typhoon rising...
>>739002813Sounds like a clusterfuck that would stop being fun after a few hours desu.
>>73900281384% of the population are using internet speeds barely faster than dial-up, so it cant work. you could run the game on the world's fastest supercomputer, but pablo in dumbfuckistan would lag so much he'd ruin the game for everybody
>>739003148>>739003160It could easily be done. Fortnite and all the other battle royale games proves that there's a market for games with lots of players.
>>739003148>balancing a gameno such thing as balance in videogamesif you want balance go play mirror matches in rts or fighting games. otherwise it doesn't fuckng exists
What faction did you pick? I went with S.V.E.R.
>>739002976>>739002813What is Planetside 2
>>739003309i wouldn't say 100 player is a lot of players
>>739003292Just limit the game to America and Western Europe then
>>739003428based SVERbro
Why was the title screen music so allahu akbar coded?
>>739003431a shit game where at max you find 20 players in a zone
>>739003254In which case OP is wrong, retard.However outliers don't invalidate what OP is saying, the vast majority of games don't support more than 64 players and those that do are overwhelmingly battle royales.I can name examples too. Foxhole, Anvil Empires (in development by Foxhole devs with 1000 player per region on a single game world), Elder Scrolls Online Cyrodiil/PvP zone.But the gist of what OP is saying it right, it's not a popular choice.>>739003309It can but it doesn't mean it's worth it for the average developer or studio.Another component of big multiplayer games is a low player count kills the game. In Fortnites case they had to offset that by implementing bots.>>739003393This is a retard take. Balancing does exist in every game, they might be unbalanced but that unbalanced gameplay is far more balanced than it could have been.Moreover I wasn't just talking about mechanically but fun.In a game with hundreds of players, if not every role is fun you'll bleed players. You'll have players act as essentially zombies for other people to have fun killing. It's a balancing act of making being it fun to be a "zombie" and making it fun killing them.
>>739002813>>739003431imagine Planetside 2 x Chromehounds
>>739002813BF2042 did 128 players and BF6 went back to 64 because all it did was create chaotic killzones around central points and leave the rest of the massive map empty
>>739003614There's your answer then.
>>739003181No because it would somehow end up like Rust where everyone is just griefing each other the second someone goes offline or if you get to keep your own plot you would just end up living next to a house covered in dicks. It would also end up being used for nothing but ERP as the game aged.
>>739003148You pick any gacha and there's fake pretend mmo features. Could real mmo features be half as profitable as gacha and no one is trying? maybe not who knows.
>>739003742>>739003853just be better developers and create a game where every area of the map has something to doez
>>739003742>We can't let peoples have fun
>>739002813that's not very season based 6v6 esports of you anon, perish
>>739003742dice is retarded. what more is new>you can create stairs!>but not there>but not there>but not there>the enemy can attack you from outside the map but you can't attack himthe more i play the more i wonder why i play this shitoh yea its giving me jewtube views
>>739004192return to bf3/4/1
Now that its only a matter of time a community of game devs just builds open source video game systems using the ever increasingly better agentic coding are we gonna get interoperable video games? I'm not talking about ai slop art or whatever one shot prompted web games but a proper team of senior devs architecturing open source systems of what is currently closed source.
>>739004343we would already have this if the chuds didn't protest and piss themselves over NFTs and killed them
>>739002813This was literally the only reason to buy a PS3. Surprised there's not been a really big multiplayer game made like this.
Battlefield 2042 tried that with 128 players and surprise that shit sucks
300 player matches would be epic
>>739004318i already played too much of that and since no map tools. no reason to go backalso i like when the snipers bullets are snipers bullets and not a fucking paper airplane. not that i enjoy camping but variety is nice
>>739004608>i didn't like it so nobody likes itthis is why natural selection needs to come backretards like you shouldn't survive being a toddler
>>739004679taste issue
>>739004776You'd be the first to go since your retard ass failed to realize that Battlefield got naturally selected out of existence because no one liked it, you fucking moron.
>>739005748i'll give you a hint since you are so fucking retarded2028 have more in common with Siege than with battlefield
>>739005748>>739006958no one liked 2042 because its core infantry mechanics are shit and its core class balance is shit and its map design is shit and its conquest mechanics are shit, not because it was 128 players
>>739002813Please understand, server costs high
