I get the frustration here, but it’s also kind of… idk? A “No, you just don’t understand!” response. Everyone who works in a white-collar job knows what it’s like. Everyone has different theories about why that project failed, but nobody knows the objective truth. Nobody can present a “documented and verified” list of reasons for why the project failed, not even the lead designer here. They can guess, but never reach the truth. He could repeat what he always did without changing anything in the next project, and succeed due to different circumstances, plain good luck.

I didn’t describe what could happen, but what did happen in real life. Multiple times.

MCBans is open-source btw, yet nobody checked and changed the source code, as should be expected really. Operators whitelisted alts and friends. Blacklisted server owners who didn’t appreciate that the operators of their global ban list griefed their servers with backdoors.

Another typical example is 3rd-party Discord ban lists. They whitelist their own staff. They backdoor their bots to fuck around with servers. It’s just the reality of global ban lists.

If Erlite doesn’t abuse that trust, then someone with admin access will, or Erlite’s successor. That’s a fact, not an opinion. Email spam filters prevent single trust lists with scores, multiple lists, etc.

There is no anti-cheat, instead a global ban tracking system was put in place and server admins are now able to share the identities of players who have been caught cheating, banning them on every server, regardless of who is running them, by the hosts simply opting into the global ban system.

A global ban system without a more nuanced approach is a terrible idea. Operators of that global ban system will whitelist themselves, blacklist people they hate, and maybe even backdoor the mod that enables them to ban people in the first place. Server admins have no choice but to either opt into the entire system or have none at all, and both of these options suck. We’ve seen how this plays out already.

Score players by your own criteria, weight everything with different blacklists, greylists and whitelists, etc. and ban players if they exceed a threshold automatically. It won’t be perfect, but email catches most spam emails that way just fine.

I can already hear my business administration professor scream that everyone in the free market tries to screw each other from that statement lol. Why yes of course, money. Planned obsolescence is the only logical choice, people! I bet nobody will source old, but durable products and repair them instead, no no. That’ll never happen!

Yep, that is true. Sorry about that.

I’m impressed that most people here chose to fight about the definition of the word plagiarism instead of discussing how Star Citizen’s server meshing technology differs from what WorldQL and GrieferGames do. Have fun, but that wasn’t the point of my post.

Thank you for your insightful comment!

What I’ve got full respect for is the multi region problem. I didn’t know that Star Citizen aims to have one global world instead of American, European, Asian, etc. worlds with the ability to travel between them with a latency penalty. I’m curious how they plan to solve that without god-tier peering and an artificial minimum latency to balance combat between distant players.

But I’m struggling to understand static and dynamic zones, maybe you can shed a light on where my understanding went downhill. Static and dynamic zones feel like an implementation detail to me. Do I care whether the replication layer(?) changes the boundaries of a zone, or discards the zone and creates a new zone with the appropriate state? No, only the process is different.

Since static and dynamic zones feel identical to me, I don’t get why a static zone can’t be an authoritative way of transferring object containers. What prevents servers assigned to a static zone from exchanging object information with the replication layer? Nothing, I assume WorldQL also does that.

Okay, so why use dynamic zones? Perhaps the implementation is easier than static zones? Everything else is identical to me, so nothing but the implementation difficulty feels important to me. Or is there a difference between static and dynamic zones about server assignment/scheduling? I don’t know.

What I do know is that my understanding is flawed.

Fair point. Minecraft itself doesn’t simulate anything in unloaded chunks afaik, so I think the WorldQL PoC can’t change that as a server plugin. They probably could if they develop a Minecraft server from scratch tho.

I’m complaining that Star Citizen sells this technology as new and innovative even though it has been around for quite a while. Minecraft is just how I came into contact with this technology. I edited my post to reflect this.

But isn’t that exactly what the people at WorldQL accomplished already?

To actually solve the problem, something more robust was needed. I set the following goals:

• Players must be able to see each other, even if on different server processes.
• Players must be able to engage in combat across servers.
• When a player places a block or updates a sign, it should be immediately visible to all other players.
• If one server is down, the entire world should still be accessible.
• If needed, servers can be added or removed at-will to adapt to the amount of players.

I think the last point specifically addresses your concern about dynamic server meshing. They can scale up or down depending on how many players are in an area.

Right? I felt the same thing when I saw the tech demo.

For some disabled people. Microsoft can’t create a universally accessible controller that works for every disability.

Nice Doctor Who reference

Apple just shoots itself in the foot with proprietary APIs that nobody else supports. Why should Valve write an additional translation layer for an OS that’s less used than Linux? macOS was always bad for gaming, it merely got worse.

Breaking news: Company wants more money.

When was the last time wages kept up with inflation? Games are entertainment. Money won’t be spent on entertainment when push comes to shove.

They can always charge 999999999999999999999999,- € for games. Keep the following rules in mind:

• Demand always exceeds supply to an absurd degree.
• Price elasticity doesn’t exist.
• The average willingness to pay for games is way above the 8,40 €, approaching infinity, contrary to the European displacement study on page 170 paragraph 4.
• 100 % of game pirates will buy games if they can’t pirate games, therefore DRM good.

Fuck around find out basic economic rules.

They should learn to link to unclassified but not free to distribute manuals instead of posting them directly on the forum.

No, it’s the former EA CEO doing EA things in Unity. The one that called developers stupid for not using microtransactions.

Godot also has first-class Linux support, and built a solid foundation that allows for Wayland support in the future. Developing Unity games on Linux has been broken for a while now.