| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (102)

Posted: Feb 28th 2011 11:09PM ErikC said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think it's only faeblight and sunrest that are the really big queues for the RP servers. That said, I believe the others HAVE had queues, but very tiny ones by comparison.

But yeah, likely they will at least partially be joining us in queue happytimes.

Posted: Feb 28th 2011 11:11PM semajin said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
I'm excited for the new PvRPvE server! You get a set of physical dice mailed to you, and during the course of player made storylines you can enforce personal perma-death with a natural roll of 2! The progress is slower than the normal servers, because all updates to your progress must be mailed by standard post, with no less than two photos of the roll in question, and a signed and notorized witness statement attesting to the event. We did conquer a rift in this manner, in just under 6 years.

Posted: Feb 28th 2011 11:35PM winterborn said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Huge mistake on Trions part.

They just dont have the abillity for thier servers to handle a MMO sized player base. Or they know thier engine FPS sucks so bad that they need to make the game playable by restricting the severs to a few thousand each.

You can not raid with queue's and Raid/PVP are the only real reasons to bother with Rift.

Posted: Feb 28th 2011 11:59PM ChromeBallz said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@winterborn WoW has one of the lower player limits per realm, FYI, at ~2500. RIFT i believe does about 4k per server before queues form, just to put it into perspective.

Client framerate has nothing to do with server strain - Rendering is done by the client, not the server. MMO's aren't OnLive.
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 12:41AM mmogaddict said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ChromeBallz
WoW's servers are between 5,000 ~ 7,500 per server OR if you like you can look at it as 2,500~4,000 PER FACTION. Which is where you might be getting confused.

This was back in Vanilla and TBC when we were running the Census program on an hourly basis on a mixed variety of servers including some of the largest ones.
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 1:30AM Sharuk said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@mmogaddict Pretty sure it is ~2500 on both sides combined. WoW servers work differently, each zone is on a "separate" server. Which is why when Northrend goes down sometimes you can still play in Kalimdor.

If 2500 people try to log into Northrend there would be a queue.
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 3:08AM notinterested said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ChromeBallz

Making up numbers is fun!

I guess eleventy!
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 3:11AM notinterested said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Sharuk

That would still put it significantly beyond 2500 per realm.
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 3:15AM ErikC said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@winterborn Uh, there are insane numbers of people onscreen at once, fighting the same mobs, with zero server lag and, on my machine, quite solid client performance. I see no evidence at all that the servers are holding small numbers of people, and in fact suspect they hold more than a typical MMO overall, and most definitely support more players in a single area. By, like, a lot.
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 3:41AM bobfish said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@winterborn

The Gamebyro (formerly NetImmerse) engine can handle over 5000 concurrent users per world, the highest I've seen it pushed to is 5400 by DAoC.

Whilst the engine is old and it does show visually, it's strength is in it's network code. Server side it is one of the best MMO engines available, proven over years of use to be reliable and efficient... for the server.

As for frame rate issues, that is all client side and will vary from one user to the other. Rift is actually one of the better games for handling lots of users on screen, but I think it is dependant on your system, nVidia seems to work better with it.
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 9:02AM senral said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@winterborn

obvious troll is obvious

you so mad lol.
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 9:18AM ChromeBallz said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@mmogaddict That's where i was getting my numbers from, though admittedly i haven't used wow census since WotLK. Before TBC, combining both sides, EU-Argent Dawn never had more than ~2k people online before queues started to form. After TBC that limit was raised to ~2500 before i started seeing queues.

I don't really know where you got that 7k+ number from. Every instance of wow census i ever ran horde-side never got over 990 at peak hours (Sunday 8PM). Alliance side i never got over 800, though i didn't run it at peak hours. The server ratio at the time was 1.6, which is where i get my 2500 number from after consistently measuring 850-950 people hordeside on Sundays.

I hope you're not confusing 'characters created/observed' with 'concurrent online numbers'.
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 10:42AM aurickle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ChromeBallz
I suspect the 7,000 is total population as opposed to concurrent players.

However, if that's the case then the 7,000 population is also an old figure. There are currently 494 total WoW servers across all regions. The total WoW population is over 12 million. That translates into about 25,000 per server.

The bottom line is that Blizzivision and other companies don't usually share these kinds of details so the best we can do is guess.
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 7:26PM mmogaddict said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ChromeBallz I I used to count in a single run of WoW census on average between 2000 and 2500 on the horde side alone on Bleeding Hollow US server during US peak. I also used to run it on Proudmoore and Blackrock, two of the highest population US servers (at the time also the unofficial Oceanic servers) and it used to get to 3,500 horde.

WoW Census would typically take about 30~45 mins to do a complete run.

These figures are all for concurrent.

BH and BR also had a population ratio of 1.1:1 so it is reasonible to suggest the concurrent numbers would have been similar on the Alliance side.

So doubling what I was getting for the horde side alone gives you what a WoW server is capable of holding (5,000~7,000) concurrent.

Using the industry standard of approximately 20~25% of your customers play at peak time (Outside of recent launches, patches or expansions which typically see much higher rates) this leads to up to 28,000~35,000 active subs on a high populated WoW server where it tips into Queuing etc. Of course these figures a lower for medium/low servers.

Due to the large number of available servers these days it's rare for the WoW server to require queuing except after the launch of a new expansion. As people don't like to queue.

So most WoW servers today would be rare to top 5K online concurrently due to players wanting to avoid any server that might result in a Queue..
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 7:45PM ChromeBallz said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@mmogaddict As far as i know, the 'industry standard' for how many subs are connected at peak times is around 10%. The only game which makes it to 20 (albeit rarely) is EVE. WoW's record is 13%, though admittedly from info from 2008 (deduction from press releases at the time).

I don't understand why the numbers are so different. EU-Argent Dawn is (still) one of the more populated servers in the EU, which has never seen more than ~2500 players online before WotLK (can't speak for after). I wonder what the population feels like ingame on US servers, and whether the hardware is different enough to allow for this gap?
Reply

Posted: Feb 28th 2011 11:47PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Kinda scared. Warhammer did this and they ended up with too many servers and they started to die out from the population being spread too thin. Most people interested in the game are in the head start. I can see adding a couple new servers, but 31? Dayum.

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 1:45AM Amusednow said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@(Unverified) Nice try on the fail. I'm interested in the game but had no interest in the extended beta, sorry headstart, to listen to more whiners about not being able to get in in the final beta stage, sorry headstart, Trion offered. I just chuckled at the whiners on their forums about how the game is horrible as they can't get onto a full server to create a take your pick character or guild. OR the ones who are already bored with it as they raced through for the epic you win button to pop up before the offical launch. All I can say is hey great more slots open for people who want to play the game @ launch.
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 9:27AM Laren said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

Of course it is scary. All AAA mmos have shrunk after their first months. I hope rift bucks the trend.

Fwiw. I was not in headstart, but will be buying the game soon.
Reply

Posted: Feb 28th 2011 11:51PM Sharuk said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Wow, I love Rift and I am already hooked. But I wonder if it is too much. I will leave this up to the Devs, they know what they are doing.

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 12:00AM ChromeBallz said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This is a bad move. Putting up so many servers for the launch rush will only lead to bad service and servers being taken down/merged 4-6 months down the line, just like every other MMO which did the same.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW