Posted By AlricJ at 06:36 AM - Fri May 12 2017

The EVE numbers are for people playing on the same server at the same time (and I think they're quite a bit higher than that.

Yeah I just checked and you are right. I think the exact number is 65,303. Still quite a ways away from 100k though.

Posted By AlricJ at 06:36 AM - Fri May 12 2017

Concurrent users is quite different from total server population.

I agree but I definitely think the # of players that can be online playing at the same time should be present in any discussion over estimates of a server's total population.

The whole premise of SpatialOS is that it can scale massively. Caspian has recently (most recent Q&A I believe) said that they hope 100k would be the minimum concurrent players supported on a single server instance. As the game and indeed SaptialOS matures we could be looking at 2, 3, 4 times that.

Just hope they have the business model down because they will be paying the Google Cloud Platform costs. Everytime a worker process is spawned in game that is generating CPU cycles which need to be paid for.

Posted By Apaukolypse at 11:53 AM - Fri May 12 2017

I agree but I definitely think the # of players that can be online playing at the same time should be present in any discussion over estimates of a server's total population.

For sure, and I share your underlying concern, both from a technical standpoint and in having a big enough player base. I find it reassuring that SS don't have to deal with all the big infrastructure challenges themselves.

A well funded project doing the backend scalability stuff hopefully means that ground can be broken there while he CoE team can focus on the game specifics.

This is so much better than the old EQNext and SOE situation.

More Ray Of Hope Shine Into My Life. LOL

One the one hand its good news! But on the other hand its still all new technology pionieering in many ways. It means much still has to be developed and fine-tuned! What does that mean for CoE? Not established and tested technology to rely on, but new and developing technology. So there could be delays in the development of CoE if unexpected problems occur or UE4-integration in SpatialOS takes longer as expected! Does anybody know what the status is of UE4 and SpatialOS? Is everything going according to plan?

Posted By Costanius at 3:06 PM - Fri May 12 2017

One the one hand its good news! But on the other hand its still all new technology pionieering in many ways. It means much still has to be developed and fine-tuned! What does that mean for CoE? Not established and tested technology to rely on, but new and developing technology. So there could be delays in the development of CoE if unexpected problems occur or UE4-integration in SpatialOS takes longer as expected! Does anybody know what the status is of UE4 and SpatialOS? Is everything going according to plan?

That's a little immaterial. It was always new technology they were building on, in conjunction with UE4.

The key impact of this news is that SBS's partner, who are supplying the engine now have significantly more funding and publicity. Those two both provide the means to bring on the best talents in the market. I'm not sure why you'd view it as a bad thing..

I don't see it as a bad thing. Its awesome and can be a game changer for MMOs! My point is: Because its new technology still in its infancy it'll make the development of CoE more unpredictable and the probability of further delays in its development will be much higher than having a proven and established engine to work with. So: An awesome new game with new options and possibilities but we just have to take into account that the development probably will take much longer as we expect now.

Posted By Flynnt at 03:15 AM - Fri May 12 2017

Posted By Apaukolypse at 05:11 AM - Fri May 12 2017

Posted By Oracle at 04:01 AM - Fri May 12 2017

As a company effectively selling a working games dev and simulation engine, a project like Elyria will push them very much to the centre of the world stage. It paves for many software houses, large and small, to follow in Soulbound's footsteps and redefine the games market.

Slow down there. Even SbS is expecting like, what, a maximum of 100,000 players (Would mean literally no NPCs iirc) on 4 different servers. That means they are planning for a maximum of like 400,000-500,000 (if another server opens) subscribers. Even if they hit their maximum projection like that, I don't think that would put them in the top 3 for MMOs. CoE is a great experiment for Improbable, but I would wait before saying it will push them to the center of the world stage.

Minor correction, but it is 100k per continent IIRC. Technically the world could be open to more people as we learn to travel the ocean.

Onto the posts main topic, this is great news, I'm not too well informed on what all this EXACTLY means for SBS, but I'm sure it can be nothing but good things :). More money is always better!

They already informed us it wasn't due to their server limits--they could easily support greater numbers. But there wouldn't be enough room for everyone if they surpassed it

Posted By Apaukolypse at 06:11 AM - Fri May 12 2017

Posted By Oracle at 04:01 AM - Fri May 12 2017

As a company effectively selling a working games dev and simulation engine, a project like Elyria will push them very much to the centre of the world stage. It paves for many software houses, large and small, to follow in Soulbound's footsteps and redefine the games market.

Slow down there. Even SbS is expecting like, what, a maximum of 100,000 players (Would mean literally no NPCs iirc) on a server. That means they are planning for a maximum of like 400,000-500,000 (if another server opens) subscribers. Even if they hit their maximum projection like that, I don't think that would put them in the top 3 for MMOs. CoE is a great experiment for Improbable, but I would wait before saying it will push them to the center of the world stage.

I mostly agree with you that CoE is nowhere near the kind of thing that has the breadth of scope of taking the center-stage in strategic planning for a corporation with a valuation of $1b.

However. The exposure that they will get both on the market and with the very devs working on the server tech, the feedback loop they'll be a part of as early adopters... SBS, they will be forging part of what SpatialOS will be evolving into, as amongst the early adopter, being part of their alpha phases.

The actual number of people playing CoE or the amount of revenue generated by either product is effectively immaterial in that expertise and what that collaboration will develop for both SBS and Improbable, too.

Right this moment, Impropable is very open to new developers on their platform and their outreach team is deploying efforts to reach out and talk to potential customers. You get free trials, free support, get involved quickly in the feedback loop.

So that's also gonna have a value that, if well played by SBS, could very well be profitable on the 5-year horizon.

Posted By ZeroCool at 01:33 AM - Fri May 12 2017

Corrected link above;

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevenbertoni/2017/05/11/uk-start-up-improbable-raises-massive-500-million-series-b-from-softbank/#3fe19608db99

Although having now read both, I prefer the BBC article, but then I am British.

I would not have found CoE if it wasn't based on SpatialOS (The Improbable Engine sounds better imho) and I can't wait to see what SBS make of it. Today Elyria tomorrow Oasis!

Everyone has read Ready Player One right? Any self respecting gamer must.

Ah! That could've played, probably, although I am part of a country that's very close to GB in all of what it is ;)

That being said, what I liked about the Forbes article is the additional depth of insight that is offered from a corporate / capital investment front. They just sold a minority share for $502m USD to an extremely lucrative corporation ($80b in revenue yearly in 2015). It does mean they've evaluated very very carefully the potential and details behind the tech and behind Improbable. I felt that the BBC was more of a generic news entry, very good as is often the case there, but lacking the extra financials depth Forbes brought.

Posted By Apaukolypse at 06:53 AM - Fri May 12 2017

Posted By AlricJ at 06:36 AM - Fri May 12 2017

The EVE numbers are for people playing on the same server at the same time (and I think they're quite a bit higher than that.

Yeah I just checked and you are right. I think the exact number is 65,303. Still quite a ways away from 100k though.

Posted By AlricJ at 06:36 AM - Fri May 12 2017

Concurrent users is quite different from total server population.

I agree but I definitely think the # of players that can be online playing at the same time should be present in any discussion over estimates of a server's total population.

What's beautiful with the way that SpatialOS scales is that you set your workers and your clients, and you can basically scale up and down, on the fly, automatically, the server resources, dynamically. Server boundaries (i.e. workers accomplishing different pieces of the work) shift in their sptial location system, and server resource gets allocated completely automatically using the Google Cloud Engine.

So the only things SBS really need to care about is : a) the cost per concurrent user overall; b) the capacity of the client to cope a certain amount of players in the same location; c) quality of the worker code.

What's huge about those news is that a company already providing excellent customer service and support to prospective developers, as well as an agressive and ambitious tech schedule, well if they play correctly their hands, $500m is going to mean faster improvements, more quality and even better support for the devs.

Everybody wins.

SpatialOS articles are always nice to come by.

Can't wait to see more on its development with CoE.

Posted By ZeroCool at 06:03 AM - Fri May 12 2017

The whole premise of SpatialOS is that it can scale massively. Caspian has recently (most recent Q&A I believe) said that they hope 100k would be the minimum concurrent players..

This is correct. In April's Q&A (link added below), Caspian stated the 100k was NOT the cap, rather he wanted 100k to be the MINIMUM.

Population Cap - start at 9:40

Great news, thanks!