EQ is unique

[DrLinux]

When I first started using SEQ I finally realized just why zoning takes so bleeding long. It doesn't bother me anymore though since I know that that load time is letting SEQ do what it does best =) Since I've learned to make SEQ map transparent over a xine window, I've had a blast! Camping mobs, expert pulling (no unexpected adds) all while watching an epside of TNG or movie....well, god damn I love SEQ! =) And I have some additions to the maps (mostly kunark) that I'll add after I clean them up a bit.

The one thing I can't get out of my head, however, is that there will probably never be an SEQ2 for EQ2, or really for any other MMORPG. Why? Because of how EQ does zones. I mean, EQ proudly sends all the information about the zone to all the clients -- what mobs there are, what lvl they are, their velocity, etc. Which is absolutely sweet -- I love being able to hear a necro complaining "where's my pet???", zoom out, and see the lvl 36 pet ripping a new one against a ton of 27ish mobs on the other side of the zone. But remember that this only works because EQ sends all this data to the client -- the client just doesn't display it.

And I guess I can understand to some extent why this happens. Makes it easier for track to work, I s'pose (is track completely client-side then? Seems like it wouldn't be too difficult to give druids ranger-like track abilities).

But is there a technical reason for sending all this data? Maybe it reduces the ammount of data which needs to be sent since the server only needs to send minimal updates concerning velocity etc? Or was it just bad design on the part of EQ, done purely for convenience?

When EQ2 comes out I've heard that it will use an enhanced version of zones vs. the seemingly more modern and standard (and frickin annoying IMHO) "bubble system" where things coming in range of this "bubble" get loaded and then unloaded when they leave (and, I might add, leave computers thrashing with swap if you don't have a mass ammount of memory). So I'm sure EQ2 will use a zone method (based on what they said) that bare minimum loads all the models into memory it will need for that zone.

Question is, will it include the ubiquitous zone data we've all grown to love? =)

[high_jeeves]

Well, there is a SEQ (OdinsEye) for DAOC, which doesnt use zones... The bottom line is simple, the data has to be sent to the client.. if the data is sent to the client, then it can be captured and decoded...

Also, the time it takes to zone has very little to do with the data sent across the pipe.. it is actually very little data. Mostly is has to with loading geometry, textures, etc.. and placing those things into video/AGP memory.. all of that per-zone setup takes all the time, not the network transaction..

--Jeeves

[DrLinux]

It's funny, tho. I increased what I can only guess is a packet size field in my eq ini files from the default 5ish to 10 and now I load 3x as fast. I always assumed it was network traffic because tcpdump goes wild during that time. But I suppose it could be doing all the zone geometry -- I always assumed the zones were precompiled and nothing was done on the fly.

As for what you said, you're right -- any data that is sent to the client can be decoded. But EQ seems overly generous as to how much data it sends to the client.

I simply fear EQ2 won't be so generous =)

[high_jeeves]

The geometry isnt generated on the fly or anything, but go look at the zone files.. many zones are over 30 megs in size (when you include geometry, textures, etc)... that data needs to be loaded, D3D objects need to be created, large textures need to be pushed into their appropriate memory locations... this can be a relatively slow process.. The data that gets sent to the client during a zone is about the size of your average web page...

Like I said in my first post, generosity doesnt have anything to do with it... if its gonna show on your screen.. it can be captured, and utilized in a tool such as SEQ...

--Jeeves

[SlowNLazy]

Hmmm .. seems to me that we are dancing around a point....

"If it's going to show on the screen, then it can be decoded....."
- One would think this answer covers it all (in fact it does) but it seems some people dont understand.. BTW Repeating an unclear message.. no matter how many time, won't help the audience understand the point..

Going back to the original post....
(summarized)"Though it's a rumor at this time, EQ2 will employ a bubble system......"

Then the question that begs to be asked(and seemingly self-answered) is :

Will Seq2(is it even a twinkle in someone's eye?) be able to provide "zone" data in EQ2 like we see in EQ1?

Answer is ... we dont know at this time... for the true answer lies in what VI decides to define as a zone... Hopefully it will not be relative plus distance to the client last known position(ie "bubble")... but IMO I think VI will employ a "bubble" system given their past history with luclin(forced upgrade) and the steady increase in the number of high-bandwidth users. They might just get away with it.

Just for giggles, we could launch a thread on zone design(data not graphics) but its all a moot point unless we have someone here on the inside...

[high_jeeves]

Actually, we really dont even need to know their data design... we can assume the following things:

1) they have to send minimal spawn info to the client (location, name, visual attributes)
2) they have to send enough information around the player, that the screen can update correctly (bubble, zone, i dont care which)
3) they have to send more data than is absolutely necessary (lets say 10-15% more, although probably on the order of 100% more) to deal with player movement and potental lag (if they only sent in the view radius, movement would case large amounts of traffic.. so they send extra)

By these basic assumptions above, we can assume that some form of SEQ tool can exist for EQ2. Will it have the entire zone at one time? Possibly not.. Will it have enough information to make it a useful "radar" tool? Yes.. Will is have color coded spawns? Probably not... I cant see a good reason why they send the level across the line now.. I'm sure they wont do it next time..

I think they will fix alot of the things they have now that allow SEQ to be so effective.. in a worst case scenario tho, there can be a relativly effective radar system that covers atleast 10-20% more area than is visually available on the client screen... it will also provide XP info, item info, combat info, etc...

--Jeeves

[UnGod]

Well assuming track is done client side, that would be reason eneough to send level info across. (as track has wonderful colors!)
Agreed thats not a good eneough reason though but hey ;)

[high_jeeves]

They could just send color tho... that would somewhat complicate the high-end game with SEQ... at 60 there is a big difference between a lvl 46 blue and a lvl 59 blue :)

--Jeeves

[RSB]

Biggest reason they send everything. CPU power.
They don't need to figure out on the server what the client should and should not be able to see. They just send everything and let the clients decide. Putting in code to do that server side would bog things down.
Each server runs multiple zones. Each zone has 200 - 500 NPC (or more) in it.
that means for every update packet for every player the server would have to interate through those 200+ mobs to see which ones where in range and build up a structure to be sent.
That computing power builds up. The network traffic for EQ is minimal and is a fair tradeoff.

With tracking they could do it, just if the character is a tracker send them everything. But agian extra processing would be needed there.

[raalee]

When will the rectards at soe crypt the data stream to the application??? I mean Im glad they dont but its got to be coming eventually.

[pinzmon]

Lol, Raalee, that's the funniest thing I've seen posted in a long time. Thanks for the laugh.

[Pyzjn]

They have already stated the EQ2 will be using the same engine as Star Wars Galaxies, albeit modifed a bit. The beta for galaxies starts next month so I am sure it wont be long before ShowSWG or whatever it will be called comes along. Then when EQ2 arrives it wont be a huge port from ShowSWG I am sure.

I wouldnt be suprised is at least one person on this board or the hackersquest ones doesnt get into the SWG Beta.

Pyzjn

[high_jeeves]

Actually, Its the same graphics engine... they have said that the teams split into two completely seperate development groups because they have such different requirements... I'll bet the networking engines become quite a bit different by the time EQ2 comes out..

RSB:

I agree that CPU power was the original reason that they send the absolute level. But what about faction? When you con'd something, they used to send absolute faction level, now they send a relative number. The CPU power required to do the same for level would be a minimal addition... I think in a new game architecture, they could change it pretty easily...

--Jeeves

[RSB]

high_jeeves - I agree they have a bit of a mixture with their code.
Some of the things they've done as of late are for network badwidth conservation. (Pets not paceing is one)

But if they don't send level information for every mob then they would have to code it so that trackers where sent that info. Then you have a tracker recieving different packets than a non tracker. Faction has always been on a per request basis. The resent changes just reduced that information by 1 byte.....which I don't think has to do with network saving but stopping ShowEQers from figuring out the best ways to manipulate the faction system.

Sure they could do it but its all trade offs. EQ was designed to run on computers available 7 years ago. They probably could change it but is it worth it for EQ. No. For EQ2 where they are working from the ground up? Yea. They'll tailor it to the more powerful hardware available.

On a side not there has been a update to the statement that they are using the SWG engine. They said that they where using it a while back but have since changed. Now what this means who knows. The Engine is actually a bunch of pieces. SWG is sharing (or was) network code with Planet Side. Might just be PR with them making people think that the graphics engine is even better blah blah blah.

[high_jeeves]

I agree with ya RSB.. but what they could do is send a "color" for each spawn, similar to what they do with faction.. that would enable trackers, but disable the detail we get in SEQ (We would still see the color, but would lose the difference between a 3 level up red, and a 40 level up red :).

--Jeeves

[RSB]

Ah I get you. I'm just thinking how effective that would be for the effort. Map would still be ok as you know what to navigate around. You could still pull blues, white, yellows.

The biggest benifit would be obscuring new zones mobs. As many of us know the level ranges or goto illia's for that info if we didn't Then that site would get updated slower with mobs actual level info.

It would hamper people like me that look for the lowest full blue that I can find when soloing with a melee or the highest level of a given mob when soloing with a casters.

5 levels means alot to a melee and I can often kill 2 low blues in the same time as 1 high blue of the same type of mob while my caster tends to have just slightly harder time with a level 49 mob over a level 44 mob of the same type thus the xp from the higher level mob is worth it for my caster but not for my melee.

the real problem I don't see with the level info but the actual name. We very may well see in EQ2 a stream line packet stream. But thinking about it another reason they probably send the whole zone is so that they don't have to constantly create and destroy mobs on the fly.

IE even though you don't see some mobs they are probably fully created and just made visible. If you put a bubble around the player then your constantly creating and destroying objects which may be slower more costly than just keeping them alive and making them invisible. You also have to cater for different levels of bubbles. It is easy to see a HG half way across the zone but not a tree snake. This decision making is agian done client side. Move it to server side and and and I've talked about that before. But then servers have got A LOT cheaper and faster. Its just what do they want to do with that? How good can AI get for 500 + mobs in a zone etc etc.

I for one am really interested about EQ2 and SWG. Both graphics and gameplay wise. Still would like to see a SEQ for both even if it is just mapping (though SWG comes with mapping unit etc.

I'm babbling, I'll shut up now