Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

GTA Online Runs Into an Online Roadblock

samzenpus posted about a year ago | from the bumpy-road dept.

The Internet 102

Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "CNET reports that Grand Theft Auto Online, the biggest entertainment release of the year with more than $1 billion in annual sales, is having some trouble getting the gamers online. The title, which launched on game consoles Tuesday morning, is experiencing server issues that have locked out some gamers and made it difficult for those who have gotten in to play the game. Fifteen million people purchased the game when it was released last week — and any number of them could play online when that 'perk' becomes available on October 1. 'At a conservative estimate I would expect about two million players to log on to GTA Online within the first 24 hours,' says Keza MacDonald, UK games editor for IGN.com, the video game and entertainment site. 'Rockstar has never done an online game of this scale before, so they are totally unproven in terms of their network infrastructure.' Rockstar, the game's creator, said that it was doing all it could to buy and access servers to accommodate what was expected to be massive demand for its online title. Meanwhile Twitter is abuzz with complaints from gamers who say they can't get into the service."

cancel ×

102 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

How to create goodwill (5, Funny)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year ago | (#45021683)

All would be forgiven if the Rockstar equivalent of a 404 for multiplayer was a gang of hookers appearing suddenly and beating you down until you died.

Re:How to create goodwill (2, Funny)

LordLucless (582312) | about a year ago | (#45021715)

CAD's already been there [cad-comic.com]

Re:How to create goodwill (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45021723)

How would that be enjoyable though ?

Re:How to create goodwill (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45021777)

they do it with dildos

Re:How to create goodwill (2)

chromas (1085949) | about a year ago | (#45021909)

You're thinking of Saints Row.

Re:How to create goodwill (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year ago | (#45027305)

How is it not far more enjoyable than a dialog that says "connection failed"?

Plus you fail to think of the enjoyment of the digital hookers in getting some much desired payback.

Re:How to create goodwill (1)

Narcocide (102829) | about a year ago | (#45021827)

Yes, and then if the connection randomly resumes while you're being beaten down, cops could show up and arrest all the hookers and some EMTs could come by and revive you/apply first aid, then they all walk away like nothing ever happened. Brilliant.

gamesdriving (-1, Offtopic)

bycreation (3368885) | about a year ago | (#45022381)

this is a great game and it takes many years to make it in action so that s the only reason for the price http://gamesdriving.fr/ [gamesdriving.fr]

Re:gamesdriving (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45023201)

You would have succeeded better if you had written something like "While you are waiting for the GTA online problems to be resolved, why not check out our racing game, here's the shameless plug: http://gamesdriving.fr/ [gamesdriving.fr] " You should not have mentioned the steep price either as it will turn down customers. Make the game work perfectly under Linux and you would get more customers in Slashdot.

Re:gamesdriving (1)

somersault (912633) | about a year ago | (#45023333)

Or he should just put it in his sig. And not have 200 games that are essentially all the same game.

Re:gamesdriving (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year ago | (#45027287)

why not check out our racing game

Err, I don't have anything to do with racing games???

This is the work of the LORD (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45021695)

For JESUS said to his followers, thou shalt not kill, and said not he that thou shat not not kill whilst in a video game, for that is evil in thought.

PRAISE the LORDE!

Re:This is the work of the LORD (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45021745)

The lord also said don't be a douchebag.

And for that you're going to hell bucko. Sucks to be you.

Re:This is the work of the LORD (1)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about a year ago | (#45022073)

actually I don't think there's much tier-1 commentary about being a DB or not. As a first cut you can be good about the big stuff but be an annoying douche about it. better than playing GTA V all day in ur undies.

Re:This is the work of the LORD (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45022197)

actually I don't think there's much tier-1 commentary about being a DB or not. As a first cut you can be good about the big stuff but be an annoying douche about it. better than playing GTA V all day in ur undies.

Don't worry. I play naked! Wanna see my schlong?

Re:This is the work of the LORD (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45022727)

actually I don't think there's much tier-1 commentary about being a DB or not. As a first cut you can be good about the big stuff but be an annoying douche about it. better than playing GTA V all day in ur undies.

Don't worry. I play naked! Wanna see my schlong?

You mean your schlort?

Re:This is the work of the LORD (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45023471)

out of all the fairy tales I prefer the Catholic one because I can be as big a douche bag as I want so long as I rember to repent with my last conscious thought

Re:This is the work of the LORD (1)

desdinova 216 (2000908) | about a year ago | (#45025069)

I thought that was Wil Wheaton?

Re:This is the work of the LORD (3, Funny)

ireallyhateslashdot (2297290) | about a year ago | (#45022093)

I'm not sure why we should praise a New Zealand pop singer [wikipedia.org] . I'm also not so sure that the "thou shalt not kill" thing applies to pixels. I'm pretty sure that God would have said something like "thou shalt not use algorithms to effect the deletion of pixels through the interaction of a user interface".

Newsworthy? (4, Funny)

TheRon6 (929989) | about a year ago | (#45021701)

Day one server issues for a AAA release??? STOP THE PRESSES!

Re:Newsworthy? (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about a year ago | (#45021957)

This is the week for major online releases having issues, I guess.

Re:Newsworthy? (5, Insightful)

mcgrew (92797) | about a year ago | (#45021991)

Sheesh, you kids...

The problem is it's too cloudy today. Half a bajillion people trying to play on one server and it won't work?

Back in the day when we were playing Quake we ran our own servers, and QuakeSpy (later GameSpy) made it easy to find and connect.

But back then we actually BOUGHT games rather than renting them. DRM killed gaming for me (and company servers are indeed DRM).

I miss it. The corporofacists ruined it for me.

Re:Newsworthy? (1)

DeVilla (4563) | about a year ago | (#45022629)

I second this. Add to it that companies do Steam only releases. I can't buy games for the kids and let them all play different games at once on less I create a separate account for each game. (Even for single player games!) I have 3 computers but the kids have to serialize game time.

This call-home DRM only makes PC gaming worse. The publishers say piracy is what is killing their market. At this point I wouldn't cry if it would finally just die. Then they might be replace by something that doesn't punish the consumer.

Re:Newsworthy? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45022663)

go into offline mode and play to your heart's content.

Re:Newsworthy? (1)

asdf7890 (1518587) | about a year ago | (#45026941)

That works for many thing, but not games with online interaction or access to other online resource. While some will ignore Steam once lanuched and implement their own communication to the outside worlds, some will expect you to reconnect your Steam account before enabling online features (or running at all).

Re:Newsworthy? (1)

PingSpike (947548) | about a year ago | (#45024293)

I thought they were working on a feature that allows you do this...again like in the good old days, kind of.

http://store.steampowered.com/sharing/ [steampowered.com]

Re:Newsworthy? (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | about a year ago | (#45025381)

I thought they were working on a feature that allows you do this...again like in the good old days, kind of.

http://store.steampowered.com/sharing/ [steampowered.com]

That only really gives access to your account to someone else without giving them your password.

While they're using it, someone else can't log into the same library. And if you log into your account, the other guy's game ends.

It's all or nothing, unlike say what was the original proposal for the Xbox One. (Funny how that was so derided...).

Re:Newsworthy? (1)

Gibgezr (2025238) | about a year ago | (#45036019)

hmm, that's not the way this family sharing feature was described in the email Valve sent me. They claimed I was only sharing that particular game, not locking out my library. Supposedly I will be able to play any of the other games in my library without interfering with the loaned-out game(s).

Re:Newsworthy? (1)

phorm (591458) | about a year ago | (#45025175)

I've noticed that GoG [gog.com] is carrying some newer (released in the last 12-18 months) games these days, including ones I had only previously seen on Steam.
Not everything of course, but there's some decent stuff on there and no DRM.

Re:Newsworthy? (2)

tlhIngan (30335) | about a year ago | (#45025421)

This call-home DRM only makes PC gaming worse. The publishers say piracy is what is killing their market. At this point I wouldn't cry if it would finally just die. Then they might be replace by something that doesn't punish the consumer.

They call 'em consoles.

And piracy does affect the market - you're looking at 90+% piracy rates in both Android and PC markets. For some, that really kills RoI - and it leads to crappy-ass PC ports of games because there's no money in it. The two biggest (or used to be) PC only publishers - Valve and Blizzard, have compensated for piracy - the first owns well the premier distribution platform (and DRM solution), while the latter has made online play a requirement (at least until the console ports came out).

Indies do good on PCs, but that's purely because the games cost very little to make to begin with - and are fairly huge - big enough that consoles are trying to adopt indies after seeing them explode on iOS and Android.

But, the big problem is either AAA titles with online requirements (not a problem for a lot of current PC games that are basically online multiplayer, MMOs or such), or indie games (many of which deride them for "mobile" style gaming).

Re:Newsworthy? (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about a year ago | (#45026253)

The publishers say piracy is what is killing their market.

Yes, they do, but research doesn't.

Re:Newsworthy? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45022739)

"I miss it. The corporofacists ruined it for me."

You mean the morons who are tech illiterate and the traitors who are who keep buying games anyway.

Re:Newsworthy? (1)

Ash Vince (602485) | about a year ago | (#45023543)

Back in the day when we were playing Quake we ran our own servers, and QuakeSpy (later GameSpy) made it easy to find and connect.

I think back then though most online gamers were more trust worthy. I used to play Quake and then Unreal Tournament online and never remember people cheating as being much of an issue whereas now without things like punkbuster and VAC there just seem to be too many damn cheats. I think if we moved back to hosting your own server for this sort of stuff you would find too many people just moving from server to server cheating until they got kicked.

Then there is the other problem which I have run into recently where clans rent a server that is really just for them boost their fragrates so as soon as you beat them they just ban you.

I think a lot of the moves recently towards moving online gaming towards online matchmaking is actually trying to make it more fun to casual gamers as they actually start standing a chance instead of spending the whole time being owned by cheats and people who spend 80+ hours a week practicing.

Not sure what you mean about buying games as you mostly still do that now for what I play. I have never rented anything although I am one of the suckers who has bought all the add-on maps for BlackOps 2 so I guess that is what you mean. I also bought all the add-ons for Skyrim (and Oblivion before it) too though and even went back to Oblivion just before Skyrim came out to get some practice.

I can safely say though that I have never found myself unable to play anything I have bought previously apart from through things like not being compatible with newer versions of windows or running to fast to be playable on newer hardware (try playing Commander Keen or Duke Nukem 1 on a new PC for a laugh).

Re:Newsworthy? (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about a year ago | (#45026203)

I mean when you buy something it's yours -- you can resell it or give it away. Can you still do that? If not, you didn't buy anything, you paid for a service.

Re:Newsworthy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45026655)

I mean when you buy something it's yours -- you can resell it or give it away. Can you still do that? If not, you didn't buy anything, you paid for a service.

Well, technically it's both. You bought something and you paid for a service. The disc you bought can totally be resold, just that it has little value beyond a shiny coaster on its own.

Car analogy time: you can resell your car, but it won't run without gas. In the gaming world, the car maker controls all (legal) sources of gas.

Of course they could make cars not run on gas, and it's a dick move if they don't is simply because "fuck you we want more money", but I would disagree with your labeling it as "corporofacists". Fascist imply government backing is making it work, but even if the absence of government these companies could do this. It's their game and their servers after all.

Unlike government backed monopolies/oligopolies, you can just not buy their games (and you probably did, judging by your tone) and look for DRM-free games. Arguably the library of DRM-free (and indie) games is larger than ever, and growing. At the very least you can find a few gems that can last you a very long time. So don't be discouraged that you may not be playing any AAA sell a billion in a day games. Look for new horizons. The games are out there

Re:Newsworthy? (1)

Ash Vince (602485) | about a year ago | (#45027071)

I mean when you buy something it's yours -- you can resell it or give it away. Can you still do that? If not, you didn't buy anything, you paid for a service.

Ok, I understand more what you mean now. Although in this case I think I still bought something, it's just what I actually bought is a single user license for something. I would not use the word rent though since the licence never expires.

Re:Newsworthy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45027973)

I think back then though most online gamers were more trust worthy. I used to play Quake and then Unreal Tournament online and never remember people cheating as being much of an issue whereas now without things like punkbuster and VAC there just seem to be too many damn cheats. I think if we moved back to hosting your own server for this sort of stuff you would find too many people just moving from server to server cheating until they got kicked.

The primary reason for this is developers removing control of the game from players. Very few multiplayer games these days allow you to run a server and administrate it as you see fit. Your bit about being banned by clans is irrelevant as that is how it should be. If the players control who, how, and when people play on their server you will inevitably find a server that does it in a fair and responsible manner. Whatever punkbuster may have been "back in the day" when it first started (I wasn't paying attention back then) it is now simply a paycheck with no real effectiveness. All major publishers require their developers to integrate it (or any of the other paid-for services) because it boosts sales (because people think they actually do anything...).

Once again, cloud computing killed the .

Re:Newsworthy? (1)

jd2112 (1535857) | about a year ago | (#45022011)

Day one server issues for a AAA release??? STOP THE PRESSES!

I'm sure that no matter how bad Rockstar messes this up it will be infinitely better than EA on a well-executed release.

Re:Newsworthy? (4, Interesting)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | about a year ago | (#45022179)

Day one server issues for a AAA release??? STOP THE PRESSES!

I think it is newsworthy. While it is inevitable from a technical perspective it seems strange to me that companies (whether Apple or Rockstar) aren't more creative at managing the demand side so that people don't have a bad experience.

How about:
1) Conservatively work out how many people you expect you can serve.
2) Auction off that many "Early Access" entry tokens with the proceeds going to charity.
3) Continue to sell more tokens (again with proceeds going to charity) for the rest of the week as you find you have spare capacity and work out any bottlenecks.
4) Let everyone in.
Everyone wins. Company gets good press rather than bad, people super keen to access the content get a good experience and a charity gets some resources.

Re:Newsworthy? (2)

tlhIngan (30335) | about a year ago | (#45022519)

I think it is newsworthy. While it is inevitable from a technical perspective it seems strange to me that companies (whether Apple or Rockstar) aren't more creative at managing the demand side so that people don't have a bad experience.

Except well, Rockstar KNOWS how big demand was - GTA V was released last week, in September. GTA Online opened earlier this week.

In the first three days, it made over a billion dollars.

You have SOLID numbers of how many people have your game. You also have reasonable guesses as to how many of those people will try to sign in online at the start.

For other day 2 releases, it can be hard to tell because you won't know how well it sells, so you have to guess. Apple and others have to do this (and which turned the iPhone 3G into a fiasco). But then again, Apple didn't really have a clue how well the iPhone 3G would be accepted - it was something like a million opening weekend, when the original iPhone took 70 days to reach a million.

Microsoft had the same issue on Xbox Live and Halo 2. They had presented three different datacenter loadouts - a small, a medium, and a "let's just go hog wild and assume lots of people". It was something like Xbox Live to handle 10,000, 50,000, and 125,000 subscribers simultaneously. Surprisingly, they got approval for the hog-wild limit because 15 minutes after midnight, they were recording 50,000 players and climbing.

But of course, they were also dealing with millions of dollars of equipment - which is why they didn't expect approval (it was like $200K, $500K and $2M).

Apple's learned - there weren't any activation issues on launch weekend of the iPhone.

And Rockstar knows the GTA franchise is huge - 3 days to $1B maans you sold what, 20,000,000 copies? If you know you sold that many (and climbing), your servers better be able to handle at least 10M users clamoring, if not 15M. And if they can't, delay the launch - GTA Online wasn't ready on launch day - what's a few more days so you can rig up some Amazon AWS instances to handle the peak initial load that you know is coming. Your data center may be inadequate, which is why Amazon and other cloud services exist. It would take weeks to get the racks installed, but AWS can spin up in hours. Then shut down AWS instances as load tapers off and your data center can take over permanently.

Plenty of reasons why day 1 load estimates may be inadequat - but when you know how much sales you have, there's no more excuse.

Re:Newsworthy? (1)

Joce640k (829181) | about a year ago | (#45022991)

Day one server issues for a AAA release??? STOP THE PRESSES!

We sold 10 million copies in the first 24 hours ... but a week later we were shocked that more than a few dozen of them went online! We honestly didn't think anybody had Internet connections these days!!

Re:Newsworthy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45023733)

not newsworthy, however.. the online features did not launch on 'launch day'.. the game has made a huge profit, one that could easily have been anticipated.. the publisher COULD HAVE BEEN PREPARED for the online features launch but isn't because of simple greed.. put as little into a game's features that don't result in new sales (i.e. the online features are for people that already bought the game, very few will buy it just for that and not single player campaign).

Re:Newsworthy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45025505)

Yes, you are sooo right - they should have assumed ahead of time that it would be the biggest game release in history and so had more game servers ready to go than at any time in their history.

The fact that they didnt make these assumptions is obviously because of GREED!

If I can't rent it from Steam (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45021713)

I don't want it. I need me some Steam DRM before I can enjoy a game. Why would I want the ability to buy it used or sell it?

Re:If I can't rent it from Steam (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45022311)

I don't know, why would you? The tradeoffs aren't worth it.

Bunch of dopes, these gamers (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45021751)

Of COURSE there are issues. Rockstar is not retarded. They are not about to spend money unnecessarily so the first day wankers can play their fucking game. They'll scale their purchases and outlays so the game runs smoothly after the "gotta have it NOW" faggots have calmed down. They'll scale their purchases for the long-haul.

It's the same thing every time. Bunch clueless, emotionally retarded basement dwellers crying about how they can't get on in the first couple of days, having no idea how large gaming companies work. Grow the fuck up.

Re:Bunch of dopes, these gamers (5, Insightful)

Seumas (6865) | about a year ago | (#45021781)

Agreed. When you only pull in a billion dollars in the first three days after launch, you can't afford to go all-out in preparation of your online component just to make sure you maintain good-will and enthusiasm for your company's product and reputation going into the future.

Re:Bunch of dopes, these gamers (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45021835)

50$ million dollars (or whatever the figure would be) to buy hardware that is only going to be useful for a week is 50$ million dollars, no matter HOW much you start out with.

Re:Bunch of dopes, these gamers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45022095)

wat? anyone hardware devoted to online will pay for itself within the first week with these kinds of numbers. don't be that standard IT douche... plus micro transactions...

Re:Bunch of dopes, these gamers (1)

abies (607076) | about a year ago | (#45023409)

You can sell extra servers to next company preparing for big launch, few months down the road. Or rent them to Amazon/whoever to run their cloud on them, until you need them for a next event year or two later.

You won't recover all the money this way, but can probably cut the cost considerably.

Re:Bunch of dopes, these gamers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45025743)

Why would they though?
In 5 years when they release GTA 6 they will pull in 1.5 billion regardless of how they fuck up online play.
As long as the single player campaign works, no one will care.
Sure they'll bitch and moan a bit. But it won't be anything like the drama EA had with sim city.

Re:Bunch of dopes, these gamers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45023493)

1. It's all about the PROFIT... not gaming experience.

Games manufactuers let users do the final testing. I bet they save a lot of $ by getting users to beta test. This was the same with COD2... billions made and network issues meant your PS3 locked up and completely froze! I must have logged over 20 support tickets awith Activision and as yet, have no solution that works. Their shitty response eventually replied to me saying I need to delete the update patch and download again... which didn't fix anything. So I will be selling COD2 ASAP.

I understand that Rockstar have done many online games, so the report was not worth reading as it states...

"'Rockstar has never done an online game of this scale before, so they are totally unproven in terms of their network infrastructure.'"

This doesn't make any sense given we are on the 5th version of GTA and many of the previous versions had good online experiences.

BTW I completed GTA5 the other day and was VERY dissapointed with the ending (killing Trevor)... it seems gameplay suffers for good graphics and movie cut scenes (which I always skip anyway).

ROCKSTAR - remember you make cool GAMES (and minigames) with adult humour... please stop trying to make interactive movies.

Re:Bunch of dopes, these gamers (1)

P-niiice (1703362) | about a year ago | (#45023929)

Killing Trevor is the easy way out. I intend to try the deathwish and see if its better.

Re:Bunch of dopes, these gamers (1)

Demonantis (1340557) | about a year ago | (#45021941)

Didn't Guild Wars 2 limit the ability to purchase the game initially to give them time to scale the hardware? Of course that isn't as easy in this situation since the game has a single player component.

Re:Bunch of dopes, these gamers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45022143)

I think it could actually be easier to control the number of users accessing a multi-player feature in a single-player game. They could have blocked everyone from logging in until November 1st as a default. Then they could have let people earn the ability to push that date forward by accomplishing certain objectives in the single player game. For example, a user could earn a minute off for every hundredth of a second they beat certain thresholds in each of several of the many minigames. A graph of the number of users with access versus time might look like the tail of a statistical distribution, giving the company a chance to have a more manageable launch.

Re:Bunch of dopes, these gamers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45023463)

There was 3 day head start for pre-order, which had lot of overflow instance and crashed often. After the release they did stop selling the game online. You could still go to a dirt store and buy a boxed copy. BTW, there is no single player component. Some content can be played solo, but everything is networked.

Until the first few week there was a lot of connectivity issue. After a year it is still far from bug free, but this software is so complex and always changing I doubt it will ever be considerate stable. Overall experience is pleasant.

This unsolicited opining was brought to you by the Anonymous Coward and the Interwebs foundation for well connected tubes.

Re:Bunch of dopes, these gamers (1)

cheater512 (783349) | about a year ago | (#45022067)

Whats wrong with spinning up a few hundred EC2 instances? Cheap, easy and no initial outlay.

Re:Bunch of NIH (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45022223)

Whats wrong with spinning up a few hundred EC2 instances? Cheap, easy and no initial outlay.

Not Invented Here.

Or corporations don't trust a cloud service run by other corporations when it really really matters.

Re:Bunch of dopes, these gamers (1)

mythix (2589549) | about a year ago | (#45022953)

This is exactly why I just tried to connect once, and then went back to offline... I knew it wouldn't work the first week.

But I don't understand why they don't rent scalable cloud services, from amazon or whatever? Are they actually buying all the servers themselves?
Or would even amazon or MS azure datacenters not be sufficient?

More than two weeks ago. (2)

Seumas (6865) | about a year ago | (#45021767)

GTA V wasn't released this Tuesday *or* last week. It was released more than two weeks ago. The online component went live (well, theoretically) Tuesday (yesterday).

Clearly nobody wants GTA V Online (2)

adamanthaea (723150) | about a year ago | (#45021865)

After all, if nobody wants it, the servers wouldn't be slammed and hard to get to.

Re:Clearly nobody wants GTA V Online (1)

Amy Kent (2864677) | about a year ago | (#45022261)

Yep. Still haven't started that god damn race.

Re:Clearly nobody wants GTA V Online (1)

P-niiice (1703362) | about a year ago | (#45023951)

Me neither. Tried twice, sat like an idiot waiting, and went back to single-player.

Re:Clearly nobody wants GTA V Online (1)

CaseCrash (1120869) | about a year ago | (#45027455)

Why is this not +5 Funny?

(It's an obamacare/heath exchanges reference for those that don't get it)

You get what you pay for (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45021905)

How much are those servers costing the consumer? That's what I thought.

Re:You get what you pay for (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#45021971)

some arbitrary percentage of a billion dollars..

though, the online play for max payne 3 was really fucked up most of the time.

Re:You get what you pay for (1)

dadelbunts (1727498) | about a year ago | (#45022101)

Im sure they will also use the money from microtransactions to support the servers. I was just playing with 3 other people. Not a touch of lag anywhere. Once you get in its good. Been playing since yesterday.

Re:You get what you pay for (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#45023063)

that's how it was mostly with max payne 3 too.

with that title, the games were hosted on player computers. stats weren't though so some things ingame were laggy as hell sometimes and getting the game to start was hell.

CNET and Slashdot Editing (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45021947)

From Wikipedia article on Grand Theft Auto 5:
"The game includes a multiplayer mode, Grand Theft Auto Online, which allows up to 16 players to freely roam a recreation of the single-player setting. Players can cooperatively engage in various activities, such as races and bank heists. "

From Rockstar Games (http://www.rockstargames.com/V/GTAOnline):
"Access to Grand Theft Auto Online is free with every retail copy of Grand Theft Auto V and launches on October 1st"

The CNET article is horrible by trying to slant an angle that Grand Theft Auto Online is a separate game from GTA5. Its not. Its a multiplayer aspect to GTA5 which is running into issues. Not a separate game, a feature of an existing game not working as expected. End of story. On the Slashdot editing front, Grand Theft Auto online did not make $1 billion in annual sales, GTA5 did. FTFA: "GTA Online's launch comes a couple of weeks after Rockstar started selling Grand Theft Auto V. That title has become the biggest entertainment release of the year, generating more than $1 billion in annual sales".

On the plus side, thanks for the heads up GTA Online is now available.

Re:CNET and Slashdot Editing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45022087)

The CNET article is horrible

CNET does not publish articles, they publish advetorials and copypasta news from other sources. But yes, what they do publish is horrible.

Re:CNET and Slashdot Editing (1)

Espectr0 (577637) | about a year ago | (#45026667)

The CNET article is just fine, read properly: "ACCESS to Grand Theft Auto Online..." doesn't suggest that it's a different game, rather it means access to the multiplayer component (which is called GTA Online"

Re:CNET and Slashdot Editing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45027135)

On the plus side, thanks for the heads up GTA Online is now available.

...if you're lucky.

Re:CNET and Slashdot Editing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45027269)

From Wikipedia article on Grand Theft Auto 5:
"The game includes a multiplayer mode, Grand Theft Auto Online, which allows up to 16 players to freely roam a recreation of the single-player setting. Players can cooperatively engage in various activities, such as races and bank heists. "

They should of just used the Multi Theft Auto [multitheftauto.com] source code. Playing against or with 16 people is nothing compared to playing with/against 500+.

They're not the only ones (0)

goodmanj (234846) | about a year ago | (#45022019)

In hindsight, Rockstar probably shouldn't have decided to split the costs of a datacenter with healthcare.gov.

I hear they're having some weird server issues, too. GTA players are signing up for the bronze healthcare plan, hoping that if they do well enough on it the game will bump them up to silver or gold. And uninsured people are signing up for catastrophic care plans that teleport them to the nearest hospital and take away their guns when they get hurt.

Re:They're not the only ones (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45022053)

I think I missed the funny part of the joke...

Re:They're not the only ones (0)

Concerned Onlooker (473481) | about a year ago | (#45022255)

That's ok, I missed the interesting part of GTA.

Not so bad (4, Interesting)

dadelbunts (1727498) | about a year ago | (#45022113)

Its not THAT bad. I have been playing since yesterday. Was just playing with 3 friends of mine. Have been in huge 8vs8 battles. Never a spot of lag while playing. Got disconnected a couple of times AFTER my missions or deathmatches were done yesterday. I think the problem most people are having is actually getting past tutorial mission. Two million people, all trying to do the exact same mission. Once you get past that its basically smooth sailing tho.

Re:Not so bad (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45022463)

Why should it matter what mission you're on. Does only one server handle one type of mission? Would that be to reduce asset costs in terms of memory usage?

Re:Not so bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45022641)

I am guessing the multiplayer component runs on an other server than the database handling the mission completion.

Maybe EA could help them out... (1)

JoeCommodore (567479) | about a year ago | (#45022221)

.. then again, maybe not.

Then again, how about merging the two - one player builds and manages the city, the other takes advantage of the populace...

Bad time for rollouts (1)

guanxi (216397) | about a year ago | (#45022465)

If Rockstar can't do it smoothly, what did you expect from the other major rollout [nytimes.com] ?

Mororns can't figure out how to Internet. (2)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about a year ago | (#45022561)

Protip: The Internet is a Decentralized Network, built to withstand thermonuclear war, with packets routed around cities mere moments after disappearing from the grid... And you fucking morons built a centralized service atop it? Even though specific end user machines could have downloaded world state and served the bandwi-- Wait, you built the whole gods damned web as centralized?

Just--gahhh. What Lamers. I'm out.

Re:Mororns can't figure out how to Internet. (3, Funny)

rebelwarlock (1319465) | about a year ago | (#45022585)

Calm down. Have a cookie.

Re:Mororns can't figure out how to Internet. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45023015)

Psst, it's a tracking cookie

Re:Mororns can't figure out how to Internet. (1)

Sockatume (732728) | about a year ago | (#45023069)

That's what we need, another big console release where online performance is dependent on the average home console owner's broadband connection.

(I say this as a home console owner. Microsoft's decision to push dedicated servers for multiplayer gaming is one of the few things they got right in the Xbox One from the start.)

Re:Mororns can't figure out how to Internet. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45025971)

When playing Diablo III, the game will sometimes migrate to whoever has the fastest connection.

That explains it (3, Funny)

cphilo (768807) | about a year ago | (#45022753)

No wonder I am having a hard time logging into healthcare.gov to look at my (probably) new insurance. All the bandwidth is being sucked up by GTA5, because they both launched the same day.

Re:That explains it (1)

DarthVain (724186) | about a year ago | (#45025411)

Also the REAL reason government shut down.

Everyone wanted to play GTA5 rather than go to work.

cheap jordan shoes handbag store (-1, Troll)

stusrudi (3370825) | about a year ago | (#45022791)

Hello, everybody, the good shoping place, the new season approaching, click in. ( http://www.sheptrade.com/ [sheptrade.com] ) (Discount Air jordan shoes) $36, (Air Max shoes) $35, (Nike shox shoes) $36, (Handbags) $39, (Sunglasses) $16, (wallet) $18, (Belt) $17, (T-shirts) $20, (Jeans) $37, (NFL/MLB/NBA)Jerseys $25, ( http://www.sheptrade.com/ [sheptrade.com] ) ( http://www.sheptrade.com/ [sheptrade.com] )

Re:cheap jordan shoes handbag store (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45023453)

You have a typo there: should be "shopping" not "shoping". Also "Air jordan" should be written as "Air Jordan".

Wost case scenario analysis (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45022921)

15 milion bought the game... so the worst case scenario....2 million will be online..
Thats a nice one... they dont know World of Warcraft study case?

Re:Wost case scenario analysis (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45023465)

Apples and pears. WOW was an online-only game. GTA has a substantial stand-alone game.

All 15 million players don't live in the same timezone either.

finally got in last night (2)

codepigeon (1202896) | about a year ago | (#45024029)

The bottleneck is at the point of where you make your first connection to the online service. Everyone is required to do a set of tutorial missions before joining the real servers.

They have it setup like an mmo where the missions are instances. Once you FINALLY get past the tutorial there are almost no problems. In fact, the lobbies I played in where not even full.

That first tutorial instance is the problem.

Re:finally got in last night (1)

WGFCrafty (1062506) | about a year ago | (#45038533)

I kept deleting the title thing from the HD, and it still wouldn't work. Didn't realize they install game updates and not just saves there as well.

GTA vs Healthcare.gov (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45024175)

I'm willing to bet GTA is seeing twice as much traffic as healthcare.gov.

Re:GTA vs Healthcare.gov (1)

tompaulco (629533) | about a year ago | (#45024305)

And they will probably get servers to cover the shortfall faster than the government as well.

Sigh (1)

ledow (319597) | about a year ago | (#45024189)

Honestly, how hard can it be?

We can farm out a thousand servers to run a website. Don't. Have them be connection brokers.

Design an image for a server that boots, automatically announces itself to the connection brokers, and gets a unique name back.

Now every time you go over the capacity of your own datacentre, spin up that image on a few hundred Amazon/Azure/Whatever servers. In fact, for every two instances outside that you spin up, take off one of the internal ones so you have spares, have enough bandwidth for the connection brokers, etc.

People have been doing this en-masse for decades now in the larger datacentres / websites / infrastructure. Honestly how hard can it be? The only problem is exhausting your upstream bandwidth to TALK to all the servers that you're spinning up elsewhere. That's not something you can get quickly or cheaply if you've underestimated. But you can always just move the connection brokers to the cloud too, and solve that problem.

Sure it'll cost, but then it'll die down and you go back to internal servers if that's what you want. Meanwhile, you can say you had 10m people playing online at once rather than "we crapped out around one million because we designed it badly".

And what the hell is wrong with proper testing, including letting pre-orders go online early, so you can predict demand and fix problems before the proper launch? Oh, no, apparently we just let stuff break nowadays, because people have already paid for it so stuff them.

GTA has an online? (0)

tompaulco (629533) | about a year ago | (#45024337)

GTA has an online mode? I guess that is why there was an update the other day. Ho hum. Well, you guys have fun on your online racing. I've no interest whatsoever in GTA online.

Affects single player too (0)

yankeessuck (644423) | about a year ago | (#45027279)

The game has a stock exchange whose price movements are affected not only by your actions locally but by other players' actions globally. Needless to say, trading and obtaining price quotes requires a connection to the GTA servers. Interesting idea but you that money is locked up if you can't connect to the servers. I stupidly had invested everything in this market and couldn't pull out the money I needed to complete a mission. It did come back online after an hour but it'll be a while before I do that again.

This Wouldn't Have Happened... (2)

denmarkw00t (892627) | about a year ago | (#45029781)

If the government had stayed open. Nearly a million federal workers suddenly found themselves on furlough, so what better to do than hop on GTA Online?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>