I wasn't wrong about my point, everything you've said in previous posts was negativity about the new game. We all know it's current flaws, but most of us know it will improve.
Btw I've played all the games in the series as well.
lmfao...
I wasn't wrong about my point, everything you've said in previous posts was negativity about the new game. We all know it's current flaws, but most of us know it will improve.
Btw I've played all the games in the series as well.
I'm far from an infrastructure expert, but surely EA has all of their various game environment servers distributed and virtualised, for performance and reliability reasons? In which case, given the likely enormous size of the physical VM server grid, why can't they spin up additional nodes during launch to ensure a smooth service, and then close them off when necessary?I think publishers really need to start doing soft launches of these online based games. The question comes up every single time, how can they mess up the launch so bad? Was on a podcast I was listening too (think it was the Bombcast) where one of the guys said that the understanding he had from speaking to devs was that it's actually much cheaper to launch and crash than it is to launch with an abundance of servers and have to close some down.
I'm far from an infrastructure expert, but surely EA has all of their various game environment servers distributed and virtualised, for performance and reliability reasons? In which case, given the likely enormous size of the physical VM server grid, why can't they spin up additional nodes during launch to ensure a smooth service, and then close them off when necessary?

I'm far from an infrastructure expert, but surely EA has all of their various game environment servers distributed and virtualised, for performance and reliability reasons? In which case, given the likely enormous size of the physical VM server grid, why can't they spin up additional nodes during launch to ensure a smooth service, and then close them off when necessary?
Again though, it's such a simple question, why can't they just get it right? The simple fact is, from Blizzard to EA, they so rarey do that you have to wonder why? And why can launch day disasters be predicted a mile off?I'm far from an infrastructure expert, but surely EA has all of their various game environment servers distributed and virtualised, for performance and reliability reasons? In which case, given the likely enormous size of the physical VM server grid, why can't they spin up additional nodes during launch to ensure a smooth service, and then close them off when necessary?
lmfao...
![]()
I'm thinking this. I can't imagine the game is anything particularly extraordinary from a calculation complexity point of view, so it 'just' needs to handle a lot of calculation streams simultaneously. It's like the software just can't scale it.Indeed so it could well be an issue with the software
Incompetence? Big companies can fail. The sad part is they probably have the knowledge, experience and understanding to have a good launch, but the formalities of the corporate world just create roadblocks.Again though, it's such a simple question, why can't they just get it right? The simple fact is, from Blizzard to EA, they so rarey do that you have to wonder why? And why can launch day disasters be predicted a mile off?
So you're telling me it won't improve from its current state?

Pretty much, as I said above I think it's in all likelyhood a calculated business decision, which just sucks for us lot that have payed and can't play. But on the flipside, these things are sooooooo predictable, that you could quite easily say we were well aware of the risk being taken to adopt early.Incompetence? Big companies can fail. The sad part is they probably have the knowledge, experience and understanding to have a good launch, but the formalities of the corporate world just create roadblocks.
I think it’s for stating the obvious that we all know while recognising it does help the people right now.