We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 62
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    1,010
    LAG^2
    "I never feed trolls and I don't read spam" - Weird Al Yankovic

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,071
    To summarize this entire thread:
    There is a lot of misinformation.

    :-)

    MAWorking had the highest post count on the pre-beta LOTRO forums. He was truly an icon and clearly, hasn't changed a bit. -Meghan/aka Patience

  3. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowlock View Post
    Graphics engine? It's literally in wikipedia. Turbine G3 with Havok[1]

    so here's that contradiction again. So if you wanted to try and do it without all the talking down part:



    Please reference all the requests for a silver bullet? Can't we just have an honest conversation here without all the editorializing? Every single post by every single of one of you guys that seem to know alot about this says the following thing:

    1) A 64-bit client WILL NOT improve performance.
    2) But it can improve performance.

    What does that mean, is my question? Why be negative about something and then turn around and say it can have a positive result?

    Because we don't know if it will have a positive result. A 64-bit client raises the ceiling of performance gains. The rest is on SSG, and their ability to improve a multitude of core issues. People are talking down because the question has been answered over and over again.

    1) A 64-bit client "MAY NOT" improve performance
    2) But it can improve performance "if SSG takes advantage of what's possible."

    If SSG does it right, performance should increase.
    If SSG does ok, expect no changes on how the game runs.
    If SSG does a bad job, expect the game to run a lot worse.

    My bet, SSG does a bad job at the release of the 64-bit client. It'll get better after several months sure, but given this companies track record, ya'll should fear change.

  4. #29
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    5,283
    Quote Originally Posted by Hurin View Post
    Building a 64-bit client, in and of itself, won't likely improve performance appreciably. Though it may improve stability. It does however, lay a stronger, larger foundation for other enhancements that could improve performance.
    Yeah, but I guess I'm (maybe naively) assuming the only reason to begin this undertaking is to improve performance. You're saying the 64 bit client may not fix the issue, but the 64 bit client and xyz could fix the issue. In my mind, the 64 bit client is the term for the upgrade and the work they'll do to improve perf. Otherwise, why do it

    Because to your analogy, building the same house on top of a new foundation is kinda counter intuitive.

    While I certainly agree with the rational of 64 bit and other tuning, it still doesn't explain the contradiction. If the 64 bit will handle the Ram better, and there is a memory leak, then that right there will mean gains for some people.

  5. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by TheHylianLink98 View Post
    SSG developing a 64-bit client is them just meeting the bare minimum requirement of computing.
    That is rather overstated. There are plenty of use cases where a 32-bit platform fits the bill perfectly. My NAS, for instance, or a Raspberry PI. There isn't such a thing as a minimum requirement for "computing".

    The moment Microsoft announces the end of 32-bit OS it's over. SSG better have a working 64-bit client or the game dies a very quick death. And the rumor is this could happen sooner later.
    Support for a 32-bit OS is quite something different from support for 32-bit programs. 32-bit Windows is indeed likely to go. Vendors of software running on Windows have begun to pull support for some time now, Nvidia being a recent example. When that happens, MS will have to give ample warning, and probably have some sort of extended support for years. Remember XP?

    Support for 32-bit programs is unrelated to that. 32-bit programs on 64-bit Windows runs on emulator software (google WOW64). There are no indications that this is going to be desupported anywhere soon, if at all. Also here MS will be obliged to give notice a long time in advance, and probably wind down support slowly. If this game would survive as long as 32-bit app support in Windows, I'd be (happily) surprised.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,282
    Quote Originally Posted by OghranNasty View Post
    That is rather overstated. There are plenty of use cases where a 32-bit platform fits the bill perfectly. My NAS, for instance, or a Raspberry PI. There isn't such a thing as a minimum requirement for "computing".



    Support for a 32-bit OS is quite something different from support for 32-bit programs. 32-bit Windows is indeed likely to go. Vendors of software running on Windows have begun to pull support for some time now, Nvidia being a recent example. When that happens, MS will have to give ample warning, and probably have some sort of extended support for years. Remember XP?

    Support for 32-bit programs is unrelated to that. 32-bit programs on 64-bit Windows runs on emulator software (google WOW64). There are no indications that this is going to be desupported anywhere soon, if at all. Also here MS will be obliged to give notice a long time in advance, and probably wind down support slowly. If this game would survive as long as 32-bit app support in Windows, I'd be (happily) surprised.


    As I said in my reply, it is most likely AMD and NV will drop dx9 support soon, they have tried once, but consumers complained, but as Win10 takes over, there will be fewer and fewer people wanting to run dx9 and they WILL cease to support it; lack of dx9 testing in recent software releases from both companies show it is not something they are bothered about working or not, with multiple releases containing bugs in their dx9 capabilities.

    Although Win7 is in much the same position as XP was, MicroGit have already dropped support for 8/8.1, as have AMD and NV, and remember, the majority of OS in use are now 64bit, and the vast majority of programs are now 64bit.

    Also remember, Win10 is already dropping support for older systems.

    As for official support, they will do as they did towards the end of XP, and during the push to Win10; issue crippleware disguised as urgent updates to slow the older OS's and make them unstable; so users who dont know any better throw away their old hardware and buy new hardware with the new OS installed.

  7. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by OghranNasty View Post
    That is rather overstated. There are plenty of use cases where a 32-bit platform fits the bill perfectly. My NAS, for instance, or a Raspberry PI. There isn't such a thing as a minimum requirement for "computing".



    Support for a 32-bit OS is quite something different from support for 32-bit programs. 32-bit Windows is indeed likely to go. Vendors of software running on Windows have begun to pull support for some time now, Nvidia being a recent example. When that happens, MS will have to give ample warning, and probably have some sort of extended support for years. Remember XP?

    Support for 32-bit programs is unrelated to that. 32-bit programs on 64-bit Windows runs on emulator software (google WOW64). There are no indications that this is going to be desupported anywhere soon, if at all. Also here MS will be obliged to give notice a long time in advance, and probably wind down support slowly. If this game would survive as long as 32-bit app support in Windows, I'd be (happily) surprised.
    There is a thing as minumum requirements for your client to run when the vast majority of your user base is in windows. I don't think anyone here are running Lotro on a raspberry Pi.

    And you're talking like SSG has the money and ability to update lotro within that warning timeframe. Sure, 32-bit capable versions of Windows 10 will be supported for a long time but that's useful to professional environments, not gaming. And if how Micorosft has been rolling out their OS is anything to show, they will be ever more aggressive in getting everyone to upgrade. You're average user on this forum and in this game are pretty dumb. They will upgrade to the newer OS then complain on the forums that their game doesnt work, then try to revert back but can't figure it out, complain some more here then maybe move on. SSG wants to avoid this scenario.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Albany New York
    Posts
    445
    You get twice the number of bits for the same low price.
    It is logical, in view of the times in which we live. But to be logical is not to be right, and nothing on God's earth could ever make it right!
    - Judge Dan Haywood

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,333
    The fact remains that SSG has commited (sorta) only to building a 64-bit client and nothing more. No further enhancements. No multi-core capability. No additional optimizations.

    A 64-bit client, alone, would be valuable in that it would shore up the game's client and allow them to do areas like Minas Tirith again without bringing the game engine to its knees and causing long-term, un-resolvable stability issues. That is its point and its value entirely separate from the issue of "lag" or framerate performance. It is the conflation of the two --stability vs performance issues-- willful or not, that is the source of confusion, real or not.

    People can assume they will do those other optimizations. But they are engaging in conjecture. Meanwhile, those pointing out that a 64-bit client, in and of itself, will not appreciably improve "lag" or "performance" are most assuredly not engaging in conjecture to any such degree.

    Debating the likelihood of SSG performing other optimizations and/or rewrites of the engine to improve performance is an entirely separate discussion. But it gets inappropriately linked and/or bundled in to the 64-bit rebuild (the only explicit thing SSG has committed to doing).

    Put in yet another way: x may be a prerequisite for y, but because x has value in and of itself, you can't assume that y will definitely come after x.

    Those pointing out the above (the nature of x and its relative value) are not engaging in conjecture. Those asserting that y will necessarily come after x are indeed engaging in conjecture.

    --H
    Last edited by Hurin; Aug 10 2018 at 02:02 PM. Reason: typos, clarity.

  10. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Gwinthilnel View Post
    So this may be a dumb question, but with all the strong desires for the 64 bit client, I am wondering what exactly that is and how it would impact the game as a whole? I'm not super technology inclined. All I know is that there are 32 bit and 64 bit Windows and that 64 bit is better lol. Just would like more details so I and perhaps others can understand it a little better. Thanks!

    Here is your answer. Anyone and everyone can understand this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hurin View Post
    The fact remains that SSG has commited (sorta) only to building a 64-bit client and nothing more. No further enhancements. No multi-core capability. No additional optimizations.

    A 64-bit client, alone, would be valuable in that it would shore up the game's client and allow them to do areas like Minas Tirith again without bringing the game engine to its knees and causing long-term, un-resolvable stability issues. That is its point and its value entirely separate from the issue of "lag" or framerate performance. It is the conflation of the two --stability vs performance issues-- willful or not, that is the source of confusion, real or not.

    People can assume they will do those other optimizations. But they are engaging in conjecture. Meanwhile, those pointing out that a 64-bit client, in and of itself, will not appreciably improve "lag" or "performance" are most assuredly not engaging in conjecture to any such degree.

    Debating the likelihood of SSG performing other optimizations and/or rewrites of the engine to improve performance is an entirely separate discussion. But it gets inappropriately linked and/or bundled in to the 64-bit rebuild (the only explicit thing SSG has committed to doing).

    Put in yet another way: x may be a prerequisite for y, but because x has value in and of itself, you can't assume that y will definitely come after x.

    Those pointing out the above (the nature of x and its relative value) are not engaging in conjecture. Those asserting that y will necessarily come after x are indeed engaging in conjecture.

    --H
    Università degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza" Sapienza University of Rome

    Graduate PhD con lode Scienze della Politica

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Alabama, USA
    Posts
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowlock View Post
    I've seen no commitment to this. Not even a sorta. Perhaps your expectations are not reflective of reality on this project.
    <sigh>

    From http://www.mmo-central.com/2018/08/0...lin-ciccolini/

    MMOC: One more question? Okay. One of the other hot topics, since we have so much engineering work going on, has there been any progress on the 64-bit client?

    Ciccolini: Yes! Finally, we’re past the back-end work that we had to do which took longer than we thought, and our main engineer, our deep-down engineer is finally back to working on 64-bit.

    MMOC: Yay!

    Ciccolini: So we’re going on that, we’re slowly working through that. Right now, I think we’re compiling the physics engine in 64-bit, it’s the big hot topic they’re all working on now.

    Snook: Yeah, I think I saw an email about that yesterday or today.

    Ciccolini: So we’re finally back on that, thank goodness, because we’re all eager to have a 64-bit client.
    In my mind, that at the very least "sorta" indicates a commitment on SSG, insomuch as they've dedicated resources to get "back to working on 64-bit."

    Granted, it may not to you, but is quite plausible to consider that to be confirmation. They are working on a 64-bit client. Period. Will it see the light of day outside a test lab? Dunno, they haven't said or haven't decided. Will it result in any noticeable difference in gameplay? Dunno, they haven't indicated any testing results or even if any tests have occurred.

    If by all this you mean "We don't know if SSG is committing to going 64-bit or if it may die on the vine," then I feel most would agree with you. They've committed resources to "working on 64-bit," but I have not seen a commitment to release a 64-bit client.

    Now can we wrap this up, or do we continue with the game?
    Firgrim of Landroval

    Formerly Rampage522...new name, same management.

  12. #37
    Maybe we could have got a few lines from Ciccolini on what he hopes the 64 bit client will do for Lotro.

    I wouldn't hold my breath though because all the so called grown ups are acting like brats and if I was him I wouldn't touch this thread with a barge pole.

    Good job folks !!

    You know who you are.... the ones who are always right.......... yea right.
    ----A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything----

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,333
    Quote Originally Posted by Yarbro View Post
    The BIGGEST single issue for new players is getting the game to work on Win10
    That could/should be relatively easily solved with a re-scripting of the installer to more reliably install the DirectX runtimes (more specifically, the three directx extensions LotRO requires).

    I must admit, it's a bit of a mystery to me why they haven't bothered to do this for so long now. Though I'm generally loathe to assert that anything in software development is "easy". . . I've actually worked with a couple of installer authoring tools before, so I feel somewhat confident in saying that fixing up the installer or even creating a new one from scratch (with the help of an off-the-shelf installer authoring tool) shouldn't take more than a week of an intern's time.

    I could be wrong though.

    However, just to be clear, once the initial install issues are overcome, the game runs just as well on Windows 10 as it runs on any other edition of Windows.

    --H

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    KY - Founder - since MEO May '03
    Posts
    2,255
    What does it mean? To me? Abosolutely nothing for I do not believe it can be done without developing a new game. A 64bit client is 'wool being pulled over your eyes.' It would be nice and I do hope I am wrong.

    I read the game's engine was taken from another game that never reached the dev table. That engine was visually changed and made into Middle-Earth Online to appease the the right-to-use Tolkien license save from losing it. Then it was sold to Turbine. I don't have the knowledge about Asheron's Call but I think everyone knows that DDO was made with the same engine.

    This engine was made when two core processors were out. Core2-Quads didn't even come out until '07. Can assume majority of people didn't have them at LotRO's release or even in Alpha or Beta phases. This makes me think the engine cannot utilize anyting other than 2 cores simple because it is the way it is. I feel it's why all the issues with anything other than DirectX9. New graphics, textures, particles and frills etc all have issues. A similar feeling with the 64bit client pitch. Not to mention the designers and developers of Lord of the Rings Online no longer exist. Almost to the thought of lack of knowledge 'how' it was created. /shrug

    I want to think black steel keys would me more accepted if the box they opened pop'd a list of items to choose from.
    I amar prestar aen. Han mathon ne nen. Han mathon ned cae. A han noston ned gwilith.
    Palenen - Elendilmir - The royal gem of Arnor - "May you 'Jingle Jangle' into the West."

  15. #40
    I wished SSG would just close threads that end in personal battles. Nobody wants to read this.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Middle-earth
    Posts
    1,168

    Lightbulb

    I see that this thread went down the same road as so many other threads have. *sigh*

    It started very interesting, like many threads does, even very informative...then...well just 2x *sigh*

    I'm not blaming anyone in particular, as it does take two (or more) to tango, as they say. It's why I have tried to learn never to reply when I feel the bait is set by anyone and I can see the personal attacks coming. Yes, at times I still fall for it too.

  17. #42
    @Cordovan

    Please don't lock this thread when you arrive in work this morning. Just deal with the 2 who hijacked it for petty arguments.
    It actually started off really interesting until over inflated egos got in the way.

    I for one am still interested in this subject and would like it to get back on track.

    Hopefully.....Thanks
    ----A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything----

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Middle-earth
    Posts
    1,168

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by LabadalofDorlomin View Post
    I for one am still interested in this subject and would like it to get back on track.

    Hopefully.....Thanks
    I totally agree.

    If every thread that turns into this style gest locked, then soon no thread will be open. It's better to deal with issues with a scalpel than to smash it with a blunt club.

    Sometimes I think some people even have the agenda to try and turn threads into alot of fighting and insults just to get them closed. Often when it's a topic they don't seem to agree with. That maans closing them acctually give them what they were after. I do NOT think that was the agenda in this case, in this thread. Here some just got carried away and sucked into some argument and everyone involved wanting to be the one in the rights. Then none would step down and it just carried on and on and on. It happens. It happens to me too, in real life as well. Sometimes I can get carried away like that too. Especially if it's a topic I'm passionate about.

    For example, don't get me started about the transition into a cashfree society that banks, financial institutions and certain corporations try to push onto us. I will go on a rant and even almost was thrown out of a bank when they tried to tell me that they don't give out cash over the counter anymore and wanted me to sign up for an app on my mobile to be able to use my money. How busses and trains here don't take cash anymore and forces You to use apps to pay or pre-paid cards that even those will be removed in 2 years and then it's only apps left if You want to travel by public transportations here. My old mother can't even handle a smartphone. In any case we should not be forced to sign up and sign in for anything and hand out our private information. We should just be able to pay with cash if we so chose. Now that's a topic that will set me off.
    "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say." /Edward Snowden
    Never The Spy-Tool Windows 10 Who needs DirectX 12 anyway ??? Vulkan is better. :)

  19. #44
    OK so now we're back on track...... (hopefully)

    I have a couple of questions. (remember novice here!)

    1) So, implementing a 64 bit client with all the work that involves (unspecified as by Producer) we won't get access to hht technology? Basically you are saying that the game code has to be changed to allow access to it? So the work this new engineer has been taken on to do isn't the work to get that up and running?

    2) My understanding also was that with 64 bit client running on windows platform can, even if on a single core, can utilise more than 4gb ram and from what I've read that figure is unspecified and probably has more to do with the hardware etc and so this at least will make an improvement to some of the things and allow me to maybe run the game on high graphics without any issues?
    ----A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything----

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,333
    Quote Originally Posted by LabadalofDorlomin View Post
    we won't get access to hht technology?
    Do you mean htt? Intel's "Hyper-threading technology?" Which is, through technical shenanigans/wizardy, Intel's tech for making a single CPU core essentially behave like two.

    That's not really true multi-threading, or multi-core capability.

    Maybe you're referring to something else. But, just wanted to point out that Intel's HTT is not what we're looking for here.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Netherworld
    Posts
    79
    All-righty then. I have a bit of time today.

    Warning: Technical Explanation follows. I do skip over some deep tech issues for time and simplicity.

    In computer science, and in this context, 32-bit and 64-bit refer to Random Access Memory (RAM) storage sizes. 2^32 = 4,294,967,296 = 4GB. So 32-bits could give us access to 4 GigaBytes (GB) of RAM.

    RAM allows a program like Lotro to be loaded into memory (RAM) so it runs faster… essentially. The more one can load at once, the better.

    Even with 4 GB of RAM installed, MS-Windows has a default limit of 2GB in their 32-bit version operating system (OS). The OS needs memory for itself, drivers, et cetera and this reserved space ‘above’ 2GB is for that. Note there are arcane tweaks to get 3GB of RAM, but most people do not employ those.

    The memory limitation of 32-bit was recognized and 64-bit systems were developed. Modern programs needed more than 2 / 3 GBs of memory to run correctly. The main advantage of 64-bit systems is they can use larger amounts of RAM. They can store more ‘stuff’ in available memory. 2^64 = 18,446,744,073,709,551,616. That’s big. So big, no computer on earth could contain that. Last time I checked, MS-Windows has a hard-coded (on a chip) limit of 48-bit memory access. 2^48 = 281,474,976,710,656. So theoretically, Windows 64-bit could have 281 TeraBytes (TB) of RAM.

    Lastly, it seems some are unclear about what the client does and what the server does. The client is the Lotro software that runs on your computer at home. Given it is a 32-bit client it has the memory limitations described above. One could have 16GB in their computer running 64-bit Windows, but the client will never use more than 2 / 3 GB of available memory. As Lotro seems to prove in some cases, one needs more than that in Lotro. Thus the outcry for a 64-bit client.

    Now, refactoring the server to 64-bit could have other benefits. Possibly like reducing ‘server lag’ (not internet lag), because the server could hold more in memory as well. 64-bit will not be a panacea, but it could help.

    I’ll stop now as posts have a readable limit. I’ve left some things out as an exercise for the reader. ;D Enjoy.

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,333
    Quote Originally Posted by JustBoo View Post
    Now, refactoring the server to 64-bit could have other benefits.
    I saw a passing reference to the server end already being 64-bit and thought: "Oh, did they do that?" But can't recall if that's in fact the case. Anyways, it's possible the server end is already 64-bit.

    The game servers, of course, are very different than the local game client (as you of course know). Game servers like LotRO (to be very simplistic) are essentially just big databases. They don't do any graphical rendering, etc.

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Alabama, USA
    Posts
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by Hurin View Post
    I saw a passing reference to the server end already being 64-bit and thought: "Oh, did they do that?" But can't recall if that's in fact the case. Anyways, it's possible the server end is already 64-bit.

    The game servers, of course, are very different than the local game client (as you of course know). Game servers like LotRO (to be very simplistic) are essentially just big databases. They don't do any graphical rendering, etc.
    My recollection is that the server migration in 2015 (?) included a conversion to 64-bit on the server side. This led to some interesting issues for a few days. They had to re-do some things for a more current version of Windows server (as the server OS for which LOTRO was originally designed was well past End Of Life), in any event.

    My recollection is not infallible, though...so maybe I misunderstood something.
    Firgrim of Landroval

    Formerly Rampage522...new name, same management.

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    368
    Quote Originally Posted by Gwinthilnel View Post
    So this may be a dumb question, but with all the strong desires for the 64 bit client, I am wondering what exactly that is and how it would impact the game as a whole? I'm not super technology inclined. All I know is that there are 32 bit and 64 bit Windows and that 64 bit is better lol. Just would like more details so I and perhaps others can understand it a little better. Thanks!
    Don't worry about it, it's never happening. It's another carrot to keep some players hanging on, that's all.

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by Korandon View Post
    Don't worry about it, it's never happening. It's another carrot to keep some players hanging on, that's all.
    Nah , it's coming.
    Like the EU data center.

 

 
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload