? about Blizzards network code.

[Ughmahedhurtz]

Sometimes if you don't know the answer to something, you should keep your mouth shut.

Hey.

Hey.

Hey.

how about a bit of googling?

http://us.battle.net/support/en/arti...t-optimization

So you're saying that reducing the size of the files on drive give better latency?

I said nothing of the sort.

So what exactly ARE you saying? Just so we're clear who you're calling out here and why, and what exactly you're contributing other than snarky, open-ended snipes that really don't back up your point (assuming you had one) and, in fact, make you sort of a hypocrite. Just sayin...

[Sajuuk]

So what exactly ARE you saying? Just so we're clear who you're calling out here and why, and what exactly you're contributing other than snarky, open-ended snipes that really don't back up your point (assuming you had one) and, in fact, make you sort of a hypocrite. Just sayin...

What am I say? Nothing. I don't know anything regarding "network code" changes, but somewhere I heard about the optimization being run, so, rather than making some reference to a blogging site(and not linking to it, or saying the name of it) that said Blizzard was losing 300k subscribers a month and that alluding to the possibility that that [Losing subscribers] was why his game was running better, I linked directly to a page hosted by Blizzard that addresses the issue.

Had a link to the blog been provided, more details could have been ascertained and numbers could have been conceivably crunched (being fair, running an average of 300k users over however many servers blizzard has now, depending on continent/region. 300k is a large number, and blizzard has been around the block with wow for...THREE expansions. I certainly hope they've solved latency issues on their end, sudden hardware failures notwithstanding.


ASSUMING US realms only, and assuming 236 realms (Source: chacha, terrible source in my opinion but better than nothing, lets rough numbers be crunched).
300k Subscribers/236 realms = 1271.19 subscribers(accounts)/month per server, but this number doesn't apply, since we don't have access to how much and when each subscriber/account was playing, taking into account peak time loads. People let their accounts expire, try a new game, come back. I'm sitting on 5...no 6 accounts. I think. I don't really care to be honest. If all of those accounts were connected to the servers all the time, you might be able to perceive a difference in speed and or latency. Maybe. I highly doubt it.


Consolidation of resources can certainly improve performance, and all the sub-facets (FPS, etc) that make up the term.

i only read the Blizz message sideways but it seems to say that it's cleaning disk files (basically just reorganizing the various patch files into a cleaner one or something), but F9thret's (non-)issue is about latency and ping.. Hence my question.

so yeah, as Ugh said.

no lag, everything was running better, frame rates, ping times where around 1200

The only thing latency/network related mentioned here is ping time, and only one number is given. 1200. While certainly terrible compared to our standards, F9thret didn't provide a "standard" reference number, so I don't know how it compares to past performance.

He mentions "No lag, frame rates, running better," there are more facets to performance than simply network speed. Hard drive seek times, RAM speed, video card specs and settings. Since he changed nothing deliberately, then something else changed on his system. It's plausible to think it was the optimization, if it happened to have ran during that time, or shortly before. I'm unsure.

But it's a more plausible explanation than "A blogging site said wow was losing 300k subscribers a month, maybe that's why."

[Zub]

The only thing latency/network related mentioned here is ping time, and only one number is given. 1200. While certainly terrible compared to our standards, F9thret didn't provide a "standard" reference number, so I don't know how it compares to past performance.

He mentions "No lag, frame rates, running better," there are more facets to performance than simply network speed. Hard drive seek times, RAM speed, video card specs and settings. Since he changed nothing deliberately, then something else changed on his system. It's plausible to think it was the optimization, if it happened to have ran during that time, or shortly before. I'm unsure.

But it's a more plausible explanation than "A blogging site said wow was losing 300k subscribers a month, maybe that's why."

Fair enough.