P2p matchmaking

XBox barely has any games that utilize dedicated servers. Most games use a P2P system, where one of the players is the "host", ie the server. In the long run, P2P clients are rediculous as it creates multiple points of failure, instead of one point of failure. This is because, if one peer lags, everyone lags.

Dedicated servers are the way to go. It is the way that XBL was supposed to head, but never did. Does anyone honestly give a crap? You really won't notice any of this clientside. No you really wouldn't. I imagine microsoft is competent enough to provide speedy servers for its owners. I don't have either PS3 or so it's difficult to say, I don't usually play on anything but dedicated servers since I have a slow internet, and when I do I don't really pay attention to what kind of system it's using.

With Sony's console you would have to go to a developer's site to see your states or how many people are playing the game. Microsoft keeps advertising that they have a good match making system. Sony's site says nothing about that because they don't run the servers themselves. That's why somes times there're so much firm ware updates but if you play Warhawk for the PlayStation 3 you'll see ping numbers. When you go online with XBOX Live you don't see things like that and will only have match making systems or something else.

All PC games have decdicated servers so if one game's server shuts down you can still play Counter Strike or something. You'll also notice the ping a lot with PC games. Just because a game can create a breakdown of how many players are playing, or where they are playing does not infer that dedicated servers are being used to host the matchs.

The infrastructe for hosting the matchmaking is different, in which case it has to be dedicated. You cannot have matchmaking without a master server.

I'm not sure if I understood half of what you just said. Prolly also other GFWL games and some sport and strategy games. You're wrong about both of the consoles using P2P connections but right about servers.


Matchmaking for P2P games

With P2P they simulate servers and client servers they don't. Like for instance Halo 3 match making you'll never see Terminator TX3 starting match in match making. With the dedicated servers I mean that developers are using their own servers not Sony's so when you get a firmware update it's from the developers not Sony. With Home I'm guessing it'll be client server but who knows? The more I read things like this from you guys, the more I am convinced that none of you know what you're talking about.

It looks like you're reading nonsense on line and regurgitating it as fact, without any understanding of it at all. Ehm, some of the PS3 games has dedicated servers. In other words units that acts solely as servers for hosting games.

P2P Matchmaking? - System Wars - GameSpot

All the PS3s connected to the dedicated server are clients. The Xbox network uses player created servers. The players is the host. The s connected to the host are clients. I've read stuff that developers or famous companies put out.

Ubisoft needs to fix For Honor's terrible multiplayer problems

It wasn't about the speed of the servers it is more of how much consumers benifit. Plus games can be larger because of this. Ehm, some of the PS3 games had dedicated servers.

Yes true but in P2P servers everyone doesn't feel the pain if that game's servers shut down. With XBOX Live they're connected to Microsoft so trafic can happen due to more people signing in than they're servers. With P2P they create their own servers so this will never happen.

P2P Matchmaking?

The developers themselves must have a master server for the clients to connect to. Their servers are connected to the master server which provides the server list for the users. If the master server crashes none of the other servers can be found. Just because Microsoft controls their servers, does not infer they are restricted from multiplexing their servers per game.

Your Answer

P2P networks are very lossful, and lag prone due to multiple points of failure. Once again, this means that if one person in the network starts failing, it causes the rest of the network to start failing. Lastly, if you have 5 players who are playing a game, and one of them is "hosting" the match -- it is still technically P2P. P2P is loosely defined, and isn't as specific to how you attempted to define it in your post.

These are not dedicated servers. I wont even bother trying to correct all the mistakes and rediculous conclusions TC had made. If you really dont know what your talking about, please dont just make stuff up or babble what you want to be true, because you can confuse alot of people. P2P all depends of the programing and actually almost eliminates lagging all together because of the structure of the network. With Sony leaving it to the developers you'll see things like mods and 60 player matches that make it more like a PC. With client servers if something is wrong with one server everyone will suffer and lag can happen more often.

Since client servers don't simulate servers they remind as clients. So networking itself does make a difference because XBOX Live forces developers to use clients server only. With the PlayStation 3 developers have a choice and most times they choose P2P networking for better online matches. Dude, stop reading wikipedia or whatever and take a course on networking. You are just making up these half baked statements, with clearly no knowledge of networking theory. Software can not solve network infrastructure problems alone. If they did, then we would know how to solve against DDoS attacks - lulz.

PC games, in the majority, run on dedicated servers which ARE client-server based. Which means, you are suggesting that "Sony leaving it to developers Well duh, with client servers if something is wrong with the server everyone suffers. However, dedicated servers are statistically more reliable then an "end-user".

In P2P networks, it's a bunch of "end-users", whom when they fail, they affect all their peers. You are thinking purely theoretically, based on a world of amazing network infrastructure, not the real world. I'll have to see if I can find a link about this.

Sony pays another company to run their network services though, whereas, Microsoft runs their own network services. Also, some of the games do use P2P connections as well. Yes if one user is having problems everyone fails and with "end-uesers" they aren't real servers. They just simulate a server so in actual reality you're only talking about the battles themselves not the server.

P2P still needs servers like client servers but they don't calculate everyone as a whole but only in battles as a whole. So when I say they have dedicated servers I mean with each developer not each game. If each game is made by a different developer than yes they have their own servers yet when talking about two games made by the same developer can be different. With the PC comment you're talking about dedicated servers that are using client networking I'm talking about developers using their own server for P2P networking.

That's a big difference when comparing to client servers.