Darkfall

Hopefully this thread will put this issue to rest, as I've seen it come up again and again in many threads. 

I seem to remember this discussion before and I thought we had come to the conclusion that Aventurine and Tasos had only claimed 100 vs. 100... then I found this quote:

Link to quote below: www.thedarkfall.com/blogs/14-interview-with-darkfall

"What are the estimated system requirements?
We've recently simulated large battles and it seems that a single-core processor will be sufficient. 200 vs 200 battles produce between 30 to 60 FPS. When running alone in the wilderness, FPS can shoot to as high as 170-200. This will be further improved once optimizations has been done. Our main concern is to be able to run large battles smoothly."   Quote by Tasos Sept. 2008
 

So, again... I pose the question in the Topic Title:

Is DarkFall claiming to support 100 vs. 100 OR 200 vs. 200... because that quote above from Sept. 2008 sure seems to look like Tasos is saying 30 to 60 FPS WITH 200 vs. 200. 

No, this thread will not put this issue to rest, because other than the information you quoted, we have no other confirmation that it is valid or true.

When it came out back in the fall many of us were incredulous at the claims (nothing new for DF though) and have been anxiously waiting for a reviewer to report on how well large scale battles really function.

Unfortunately, all we've seen recently are reviews by folks who are clearly in the starter areas and not involved in testing of the higher level contents like keep battles.

So the mystery will continue, and no doubt this claim will be one of the most scrutinized ones made by Tasos.

Originally posted by xzyax

Hopefully this thread will put this issue to rest, as I've seen it come up again and again in many threads. 

I seem to remember this discussion before and I thought we had come to the conclusion that Aventurine and Tasos had only claimed 100 vs. 100... then I found this quote:

 

Link to quote below: www.thedarkfall.com/blogs/14-interview-with-darkfall

"What are the estimated system requirements?
We've recently simulated large battles and it seems that a single-core processor will be sufficient. 200 vs 200 battles produce between 30 to 60 FPS. When running alone in the wilderness, FPS can shoot to as high as 170-200. This will be further improved once optimizations has been done. Our main concern is to be able to run large battles smoothly."   Quote by Tasos Sept. 2008
 

 

So, again... I pose the question in the Topic Title:

Is DarkFall claiming to support 100 vs. 100 OR 200 vs. 200... because that quote above from Sept. 2008 sure seems to look like Tasos is saying 30 to 60 FPS WITH 200 vs. 200. 

 

 There was a incorrect translation that was later corrected. I give DF the benifit of the doubt that it will have 100 vs 100 battles (at least till i can see for myself) Unfortunately some of DF's more rabid fans still shout that DF has 200 vs 200 battles, generally this is combined with how they were right all along etc etc. which makes theirs post really fairly funny. (ok granted I've only seen 1 fan do this recently but he did give me the best laugh of my day. :) )
 

Originally posted by xzyax

Hopefully this thread will put this issue to rest, as I've seen it come up again and again in many threads. 

I seem to remember this discussion before and I thought we had come to the conclusion that Aventurine and Tasos had only claimed 100 vs. 100... then I found this quote:

 

Link to quote below: www.thedarkfall.com/blogs/14-interview-with-darkfall

"What are the estimated system requirements?
We've recently simulated large battles and it seems that a single-core processor will be sufficient. 200 vs 200 battles produce between 30 to 60 FPS. When running alone in the wilderness, FPS can shoot to as high as 170-200. This will be further improved once optimizations has been done. Our main concern is to be able to run large battles smoothly."   Quote by Tasos Sept. 2008
 

 

So, again... I pose the question in the Topic Title:

Is DarkFall claiming to support 100 vs. 100 OR 200 vs. 200... because that quote above from Sept. 2008 sure seems to look like Tasos is saying 30 to 60 FPS WITH 200 vs. 200. 

 

Wont happen, WAR and AoC both made the same claims, yet neither have delivered thus far. Same will be for DF once you start to get 50+ players on-screen casting, meleeing using mounts and what not the FPS will drop way below 15.

Oh I don't doubt you are right Kyleran, but figured it was worth a shot.  I wanted to at least give a place where all of us who are wondering about this, or had spoken about it in the past would have a thread to discuss it... since it's not like we're playing OPEN Beta!

I remember quite a few posters going off on Zorvan for spreading "False information" saying that DarkFall had claimed to support 200 vs. 200.  There were quite a few supporters that said Tasos had only claimed it would support 100 vs. 100.

Well obvioulsly the quote I showed in the OP contradicts that now.  So anyway... just thought it would be a decent discussion about the viability of such a claim.

Originally posted by winter

Originally posted by xzyax

Hopefully this thread will put this issue to rest, as I've seen it come up again and again in many threads. 

I seem to remember this discussion before and I thought we had come to the conclusion that Aventurine and Tasos had only claimed 100 vs. 100... then I found this quote:

 

Link to quote below: www.thedarkfall.com/blogs/14-interview-with-darkfall

"What are the estimated system requirements?
We've recently simulated large battles and it seems that a single-core processor will be sufficient. 200 vs 200 battles produce between 30 to 60 FPS. When running alone in the wilderness, FPS can shoot to as high as 170-200. This will be further improved once optimizations has been done. Our main concern is to be able to run large battles smoothly."   Quote by Tasos Sept. 2008
 

 

So, again... I pose the question in the Topic Title:

Is DarkFall claiming to support 100 vs. 100 OR 200 vs. 200... because that quote above from Sept. 2008 sure seems to look like Tasos is saying 30 to 60 FPS WITH 200 vs. 200. 

 

 There was a incorrect translation that was later corrected. I give DF the benifit of the doubt that it will have 100 vs 100 battles (at least till i can see for myself) Unfortunately some of DF's more rabid fans still shout that DF has 200 vs 200 battles, generally this is combined with how they were right all along etc etc. which makes theirs post really fairly funny. (ok granted I've only seen 1 fan do this recently but he did give me the best laugh of my day. :) )
 

Do you happen to know where that correction was posted winter?

When we had this discussion awhile back I remember it was the concensus that it was indeed 100 vs. 100... but I can't seem to find anything that backs that up now.

So, today when I read quite a few more threads claiming the 200 vs. 200 again I did some Googling.  The only quote I could find was the one I linked in the OP... which is why I started the thread.

We don't know? 200 vs 200 seems like a stretch though. They claim to have already tested large battles, with people joining from across the globe. Uh... somehow I doubt 'large' meant 200 vs 200 though.

Graphically 200 vs 200 should be no problem. Network-wise, it really depends on how powerful their server architecture is. You may as well ask how long a piece of string is.

Originally posted by VaporOfTasos

Darkfall is cutting edge stuff and these Aventurine guys are way smarter then the people who work for SOE, EA, Mythic, Valve, Bethesda, and all other gaming companies combined.

Darkfall will use a new nuclear fusion programming technology that will make even the oldest, most obsolete computers be able to have a million lines of resolution (even on monitors that don't support it) and the online battles will run at a blazing 90 fps in 5,000 vs 5,000 battles!

There will be no lag. Tasos said. There are already no bugs. Tasos said. The game is feature complete. Tasos said so.

Tasos doesn't lie either. Tasos is god. And Darkfall is technology hundreds of years ahead of its time. Tasos implied that part.

Heh... while I too partake in the sarcasm post from time to time; my question in the OP is in all sincerity.
 

As Kyleran pointed out it most likely won't really "settle it"... but I was at least hoping to have some definitive quotes from the Devs one way or the other.  So far it seems like all I can find is the quote from the OP... which looks like Tasos is indeed saying 200 vs. 200 with 30-60 FPS.