57 replies to this topic

[Khalija]

Today, Habib Loew brings us some information about some changes that are coming to WvW, specifically culling and load changes. Here's what he has to say:

Quote

In the January update we’ll be making a couple of preliminary changes to WvW.

• The first of our engine changes will be coming on line to help improve character load times by using fallback models.
  
• We’ll be switching over to the culling methodology that we trialed in December.

The engine change we’re making uses fallback models to represent characters until their detailed models are fully loaded. The fallback models are cached so that they can display without any asset load delay and there is a distinct fallback model for each race/gender/armor-class combination. As a result of this change players will be able to see characters represented as fallback models as soon as those characters are reported to the client. Once the specific, detailed model for a given character is completely loaded from disk the fallback model will be replaced with the detailed model. This visual compromise will help to ensure that players see other characters as quickly as possible in WvW. Please note that this change does not eliminate delays due to culling, it only addresses delays due to asset load times. Players on higher spec machines would therefore expect to see fallback models less often than players on lower spec machines. This change also lays the groundwork for more extensive uses of fallback models in future updates.

In December we ran a one matchup trial of an updated culling system. Based on all the feedback we received, both during and after the trial, we will be transitioning to the updated culling system that we used in the trial. This update allows the culling system to handle allies and enemies separately so that being surrounded by a group of allies will not impact the culling of enemies (and vice-versa). The general consensus after the trial is that this system lead to a better player experience in WvW. We further saw that some of the issues people had with the new system were related to asset load times rather than culling issues so making this change in combination with our character loading improvements should lead to an improved overall experience. It is important to note, however, that while we believe this change is an improvement to the WvW experience it does not fully address the issues with culling and we are still working towards our goal of removing culling from WvW completely. This change is intended to give players an improved WvW experience while we continue work on our more comprehensive solution.

While this update only contains a couple of visible changes to WvW it lays a lot of important groundwork for future updates. We have some exciting changes coming and this update is just the beginning! [Source]

A bit later in the thread he also makes this comment:

Quote

[...] Disabling culling entirely is something that we’re working on still and this update lays some of the groundwork we need to do that.

[Lordkrall]

Good to see that they are adding a alternative solution for now, hopefully it will work out as good as they hope while they work on the real solution.

[Airwolf]

Now that is some great news. Even the results from the test were good enough for me. So stacking the "dummy" load system on top of that will give a better wvw experience.

[Lurker14ownz]

Great news! Some may flame about seeing fallback models but it is WAYYY better than having a zerg of 50+ all of a sudden appear all around you.

[Impmon]

I suggested they do this back in beta.  Good thing they listen to their testers.  Its only half a year to implement a solution I suggested back then.

[Arewn]

Nice to see their plans under way, this should help a lot already, it'll be even better when they route out culling even more in the future.
It's too bad that releasing a game often causes developers to be too busy to instantly roll out every change and fix possible immediately with the first few months of the game's existance.

[Azure Skye]

I hope this reduces the portal bombing with mesmer or not. o.O

[Global_GW2]

Good news! Anything that improves the situation is a step in the right direction.

Edited by unraveled, 23 January 2013 - 10:38 PM.
Removed image.

[Familiar]

Given my experience with PvP in another MMO not addressing similar rendering issues in here, I am quite pleased with Anet's active involvement to continue a positive experience for their players. I look forward to more updates!

[Obscure One]

It's looking sharp ANet! That's exactly the stuff I want to hear about so we can hurry up and refocus the mad scramble of WvW guilds/alliances. All this hype on PvE content has really been bumming me out knowing it would encourage less attendance in WvW, but this makes me feel better. Now, let's kick the WvW/sPvP hype train up to 11 and get this game in a position to truly compete with the next big MMO on the radar...ESO...

[dawdler]

"The general consensus after the trial is that this system lead to a better player experience in WvW."

They have a funny way of interpreting player feedback considering most people in the culling feedback thread on the official forum called for an immediate rollback due to it ruining the gameplay and being a complete disaster. Not to mention complaints over the fact that Anet sideswiped the community by introducing it for an extended period on live servers, rather than a testing enviroment.

This is [i]not [/i]good news unless their explanation of the "load changes" fixing it is 100% accurate.

[Vihar]

I'm not thrilled.

  The December culling was the worst, in my experience. I was happy when it went away.

[Eon Lilu]

It all depends on implementation and execution, guess we'll wait and see how it works out.

Edited by Eon Lilu, 23 January 2013 - 10:01 PM.

[Lordkrall]

How surprising. People already found something to complain about.

Why can't people at least wait until the patch before complaining about how much it will suck?

[MrZero]

[quote name='Lurker14ownz' timestamp='1358974718' post='2149413']
Great news! Some may flame about seeing fallback models but it is WAYYY better than having a zerg of 50+ all of a sudden appear all around you.
[/quote]

I could care less what enemy players model looks like. It's not like I stand there and admire their gear. Kind of have better shit to do when they are in my face. Right?

[Arewn]

[quote name='dawdler' timestamp='1358977433' post='2149453']
"The general consensus after the trial is that this system lead to a better player experience in WvW."[/quote]

They have a funny way of interpreting player feedback considering most people in the culling feedback thread on the official forum called for an immediate rollback due to it ruining the gameplay and being a complete disaster. Not to mention complaints over the fact that Anet sideswiped the community by introducing it for an extended period on live servers, rather than a testing enviroment.

This is [i]not [/i]good news unless their explanation of the "load changes" fixing it is 100% accurate.

So basically:  "I believe it is this way, and will take my limited view on the matter and say that it reflects the true states of the feedback given, because my view is the true view. And the feedback Arena Net claims to have tallied up is false and they manipulated it for the sake of purposely introducing changes that will make the game worse"

[dawdler]

[quote name='Arewn' timestamp='1358979123' post='2149481']
So basically:  "I believe it is this way, and will take my limited view on the matter and say that it reflects the true states of the feedback given, because my view is the true view. And the feedback Arena Net claims to have tallied up is false and they manipulated it for the sake of purposely introducing changes that will make the game worse"
[/quote]
No, more like: "I read the new culling test thread in december and played WvW during this period".

It wasnt bad for everyone, no. Your average zerg probably didnt even notice a difference when they zerged about, ignoring allies and focusing on enemies. Maybe they have fixed the issues they had during the test, I dont know. Its still not great news, based on previous experience.

[Doctor Overlord]

Reminds me of a F2P Korean MMO where the fallback characters all wore robes.   It was creepy as heck loading into a town for the first time, it made you feel like you were surrounded by cultists lol

Good to hear ArenaNet will have different fallback models for their system.

Perhaps for April Fool's day they could load up joke fall back models - all the humans could be wearing red-shirts, the asura could be wearing those Stormtrooper outfits from Fractals etc

[Vihar]

[quote name='Lordkrall' timestamp='1358978527' post='2149469']
How surprising. People already found something to complain about.

Why can't people at least wait until the patch before complaining about how much it will suck?
[/quote]

  Because they are just re-implementing what was done in December for culling.

   The December culling was awful, IMO.

  Instead of "X Number of models nearest you will render", it now will render "X number of enemy models", and "x number of friendly models".

  In other words, it will be better if you are in a zerg and run into an enemy zerg.

  But...if you are in a 5 man group and run into a zerg, culling will be twice as bad as it is now....because it will only render half as many enemies as it does now.

[Azure Skye]

[quote name='Doctor Overlord' timestamp='1358980464' post='2149489']
Reminds me of a F2P Korean MMO where the fallback characters all wore robes.   It was creepy as heck loading into a town for the first time, it made you feel like you were surrounded by cultists lol

Good to hear ArenaNet will have different fallback models for their system.

Perhaps for April Fool's day they could load up joke fall back models - all the humans could be wearing red-shirts, the asura could be wearing those Stormtrooper outfits from Fractals etc
[/quote]Like these? I thought my gaming files were corrupted when they did this update. Lol

[img]http://wiki.guildwars.com/images/a/ac/Guild_Wars_Stickies.jpg[/img]

[img]http://wiki.guildwars.com/images/4/47/Stickyfest.jpg[/img]

Edited by Azure Skye, 23 January 2013 - 10:42 PM.

[Lordkrall]

[quote name='Vihar' timestamp='1358980852' post='2149495']
  Because they are just re-implementing what was done in December for culling.

   The December culling was awful, IMO.

  Instead of "X Number of models nearest you will render", it now will render "X number of enemy models", and "x number of friendly models".

  In other words, it will be better if you are in a zerg and run into an enemy zerg.

  But...if you are in a 5 man group and run into a zerg, culling will be twice as bad as it is now....because it will only render half as many enemies as it does now.
[/quote]

Did you even read the whole first post?
Where do they state that they simply take the exact same thing that they used in December and just put it back in?

It is quite clear that they are using that trial and the results as a basic for the new system and they also stated that they are adding fallback models until the real models are loaded.

[GoGoGhosty]

I hope they make it so commanders never cull. In december when you were running with a larger group, sometimes your commander would suddenly disappear, which could get really confusing in hectic moments.

[Schwarzseher]

THE best thing they could've done...I wonder why they didn't do that in the first place..does that mean thief will have a harder time now 1vsZerg? I hope so...I had one annoying brat last time who made 5on1 look easy

[Captain Bulldozer]

Azure Skye, on 23 January 2013 - 10:41 PM, said:

Like these? I thought my gaming files were corrupted when they did this update. Lol

Ah... one of the best April Fool's days A-net ever had for us! I still fondly remember the epic stick figure pile-up dance in LA... good times.

[Sphinx2k]

When is this JAN update? Didn't we already have that one?
I thought they are usually in the middle of the month..

edit: probably Jan 28th when the guesting starts... eh

Edited by Sphinx2k, 23 January 2013 - 11:39 PM.

[kidawk]

Impmon, on 23 January 2013 - 08:59 PM, said:

I suggested they do this back in beta.  Good thing they listen to their testers.  Its only half a year to implement a solution I suggested back then.

This....

ANet, I am disappoint

[Bottoms_Up]

Schwarzseher, on 23 January 2013 - 10:49 PM, said:

..does that mean thief will have a harder time now 1vsZerg?

Not necessarily. Simply going by Anet's comments, there seems to be some confusion about what fallback models will achieve. I am assuming that until they fix the culling problem, falback models will not help you to see a zerg earlier because culling determines in the first place when the zerg is reported to your client. All fallback models will do in the short term is enable your client to render another player's model more quickly once your client has been told it is there (this might help in situations like a 1v1 with a thief where culling does not come into play). If your PC is powerful enough to render the full models quickly anyway, you may see no benefit from fallback models at the moment. Fallback models should help everyone when it comes to rendering large amounts of player models simultaneously, such as a zerg, but only once all those player models have been reported to the client.

Edited by Bottoms_Up, 24 January 2013 - 12:18 AM.

[typographie]

kidawk, on 23 January 2013 - 11:39 PM, said:

This....

ANet, I am disappoint

I'm not. I can understand that something like this that cuts to the core of their game engine requires some time to get done. I was disappoint a month or so ago when I wasn't sure they were serious about addressing it. But now I'm glad to see they're really on it.

[Lol Lol Lol Guy]

Explain to me, what is culling? I know I know I'm a noob but I googled it and couldn't find out the definition in an MMO sense of the word

[Bottoms_Up]

As far as I understand, culling as Anet uses it is a method by which they ensure that the flow of data between their servers and players' game clients is smooth. Culling in this sense does not mean that they destroy data, but rather distribute it over time so that it doesn't all flow at once and cause a bottleneck.

Consider the simplified process:

1. Player A presses the move forward button and their client sends this message to the server
2. The server receives the message, processes it and sends it to Player B
3. Player B's client receives the message and renders Player A's movement on their screen

Culling affects step 2. Imagine that there are 50 players who all move into Player B's view at once; to avoid a bottleneck, culling could mean that the messages that those players are there are sent to Player B's client in clumps rather than all at the same time. The net effect is that Player B will see only a portion of those players at first and then more later.

This is a vast simplification because other factors are involved (how many players are there, how many are already on Player B's screen, are they friendly or enemy, do any of them go invisible, etc.).

Fallback models on the other hand I think affect only step 3. Although culling and fallback models are connected in the same process and together affect the final result, they are different problems.

But I'm not an expert and am happy for corrections if I got something horribly wrong.

Edited by Bottoms_Up, 24 January 2013 - 01:05 AM.