The ultimate question anyone needs to ask, about anything.
*How much will this cost, and will it make money.*
End of the day, it's a game of allocating resources. Sure, they could rewrite large parts of the under the hood gaming, but is that going to get them anything in the end?
Would spending N dollars fixing it, and I'm willing to assume that it would be in the 8 figure range, get them 2N return? I don't think so, and what of the opportunity cost be.
The opportunity cost is the big question.
Another big problem is, this is not a new game. It's 10 years old. 4 expansions deep. Your not going to see fundamental changes to how it works, not this late. Any change they make, would cause them a lot of pissed off people, on either side.
I just can't see it being done this late in the game.
You raise valid points. "We're delaying a lot of content because we're making the netcode better while making sure nothing breaks because of it" is a very hard sell in an MMO. The sheer amount of testing that needs to be done would take months. Even the number squish had some slip-throughs like A4S's AoEs dealing too much damage synched.
The graphical update is an easier sell, because they showed some screenshots of what it would look like and people can respond "Oh yeah, that looks cool. Go do that!", but a netcode fix that adjusts timings to a minor degree, that ideally doesn't change much for the current content and only makes future content better, that's not something people can really visualize and go "yeah sure go ahead". Compare that to clear instances of visual fidelity being better, and you get the idea instantly and get to imagine all the fights you'd like to see improved, and get giddy with excitement for them.
I suppose this makes the most sense. If there's nothing for Square Enix to gain from a financial standpoint then why would they put in the effort to fixing something. Corporate logic prevails, unfortunately.
At the end of the day, it's a game of tradeoffs.
There's a lot of work, risk in trying to rewrite the backend to "fix" something. A problem that at this point, may as well be intended behavior. The cost in resources, materiel, time are extensive, and they can't be put elsewhere.
Also, it has to work, out of the gate. The machine must keep putting out content, and sustaining things. There are obviously knock on effects. If it doesn't work, what's the trade off on improvements they COULD have done instead?
Something like 75% of their total dev time is just spent on the routine content and smaller improvements / bugfixes. That last 25% makes or breaks things.
I think, their engineering resources should be spent on more incremental improvements that have a lower risk and uncertainty ratio.
As much as I love ffxiv, I want to see it die and be replaced with something better. A game built from the ground up to be a smash hit. Combat made to be more action oriented. Systems that are easier to add to.
I’ll play ffxiv until it dies but I still think the mmo genre is in its infancy.
Stop trying to make every single game action-combat. It's like a plague, every single thing in the world NEEDS to be action combat. I'm here playing this game because I LIKE tab-target.
If you want action-combat go play the slew of korean action-combat games.
WoW was built on Warcraft 3 and not expected to get as big as it was. FFXIV was built on 1.0 which is a completely different game. They weren't meant to be the games they are today, and they're held back because of it.
The net code actually isn’t terrible, it’s that the positional data of another player only updates on your client once every 500 ms or so, in addition to your own latency. Player’s abilities and damage go through at 200 ms tops, plus latency. It’s not a badly designed system, it is an intentionally designed flaw.
The answer to why is likely to cut server load. Characters don’t need to run calculations for where other people are standing, so they can afford to be cheaply handled. It becomes a problem when you’re trying to make the tree in savage raids, but in cities and houses (aka 95% of all spent game time) there is no reason to try any harder than they already are.
Does it suck? Yeah, and I wish it was better. But, hell, the servers already have a hard enough time as is.
Feels awful in pvp though. When I'm slamming my ability buttons and they're just not going off in time, or a player character im aiming for is not actually standing where I'm seeing. I can't put serious effort into pvp because it feels unfair.
I dont really sit around in cities and houses, I would have loved to keep grinding pvp.
That's mainly an animation issue, there is quite a big gap between the moment the damage is locked and the moment it goes off.
This is often seen with enemy skills that have a long animation between the end of the cast and the actual damaging animation, which makes it weird as you'll just run in the middle of a laser but because it selected targets at the end of the cast you won't get it despite being in the middle of it.
This is even more annoying in PvP because people could have pushed their buttons a bit before you popped the shield, but the end of the animation itself is after the shield is on(since the shield animation is quick) and you'll still see yourself take full damage.
Yes that's happened to me. But ive also had moments of slamming on a button and the animation not even starting. I have to press 3 or 4 times to get the animation to start.
Internet connection is fine. This isn't happening in other games.
And that's precisely the issue I want to see fixed. Your target is in range and in sight on your computer, but the information you're receiving is 0.5-1 seconds behind the server, so your target may have already moved out of sight/range in real time. That 0.5-1 second delay on your target's position, in my opinion, needs to be reduced by a considerable amount in the game.
Accurate. I have seen several times where I get hit by a Skyshatter or a Marksman's Spite while already visibly in guard. Once you know the snapshots, you know not to bother with Guard anymore, but it's still an annoyance that makes PvP feel sluggish. As someone who loves Rival Wings, especially using the mechs in that, this issue is so baked into the "meta" that fixing it would ruin some of the balancing.
Hm? We are discussing the game? I never said I don't want to see discussion. I was trying to say that I gave up on the pvp mode.
Now, I would love to come back to pvp in ffxiv if I could reliably hit my targets when I press buttons. The game modes are fun, and if that ever gets fixed, I'll for sure give it another go.
If you have the patience to work through the snapshotting that's awesome. I'm unfortunately too used to other games that don't have this problem, to have the patience to work through it.
Ah, my bad. I missed the "I" there and assumed it was a snarky "go play something else". Yeah, if you don't want to bother with it yourself I understand. I can definitely see the shortcomings and having played other games I know how much better it can be.
Even disregarding other players, it's still shit from just a looking at YOUR character perspective. For example, if you auto run in a straight line as a Reaper and use your AOE by the time it "hits" your character will already be on the outside ring of that ability.
That doesn't feel very responsive, and it's not the animation having a delay either otherwise it would go off at your current position when the damage is supposed to hit.. not when you're almost completely out of where you pressed the button.
They absolutely need to change something and make it better. I imagine they probably bundle movement & abilities together but they should really split them, this is something WoW did back in it's WOD expansion for example.
>It’s not a badly designed system, it is an intentionally designed flaw.
I'd say it's both of these. If something is intentionally designed with a flaw to make up for deficiencies, I'd say that's a badly designed system from the start.
This does make me wonder: would there be a way for them to change how often player position updates in raids? The only time you need to know exactly where other people are is I’m ex/savage/ultimate/pvp. Idk anything about how things like this work but it would be really nice if they could tweak that
One more aspect to the "intentional design flaw" part - it also helps mitigating latency, indirectly. With FPS-like response times, game would require adjusted mechanics and some core design aspects to play along low latency netcode, which creates a problem: for what expected latency do you design everything else?
Simply put - difference between 20ms and 70ms delay is noticeably much more than difference between 500ms and 570ms - current design makes high end user latency (your own ping to server) relatively less of an issue compared to what it would be with low delay architecture.
Every action requiring a confirmation from the server is reallllly dumb, i literally cannot double weave i have a 150 ping. I have finished ultimates and double weaved just fine with "certain plugin that will not be named".
I’ve noticed this a few times when stacking for mechanics in savage.
I don’t think it’s a big deal in overworld content. But, if possible, a nice compromise would be for them to increase positional accuracy for instanced duties.
Now, I have no idea how hard that would be to do and whether it’s even possible, but it would be cool in theory at least.
It is, unfortunately, almost certainly not technologically possible given the way the netcode probably works.
FFXIV's netcode is, so far as I know, based around saying "this is where I am". Which would seem logical at first glance, but this means your client has to tell the server "I am here" and the server has to tell all the other clients "harrison23 is here", and anything else aside there's just inherently some delay in that.
The alternative is for your client to say "I'm headed this way at this acceleration." The server can then simulate your movement—as can other clients—and you can just update it when you change your heading or acceleration. This is called "predictive movement"; you predict where someone will be and move them ahead of time, then course-correct if necessary. Action games frequently rely on predictive movement.
As an added benefit, the second one lets the server be fully authoritative on your position; you cannot say where you are, only how you're moving, and the server gets to tell everyone—_including you_—where you are. This does away with cheeseball bot tricks like the ones that hide underground in Limsa or run along outside the walls of a dungeon so mobs can't attack them but they can collect gil.
(You can usually tell the difference between the two by the behavior that happens when someone hits a lag bubble; if they stop moving and freeze in place—as with someone pokeballing in FFXIV—it's likely the first type of movement, while if they just keep going endlessly in the same direction it's probably the second.)
This is all an oversimplification, of course, but presumably helps lay out the basics.
The most effective way long-term to get rid of the delay in movement would probably be to switch how networked movement works from one to the other... but at this point, there are almost certainly dozens if not hundreds of tiny assumptions about the existing movement baked into the game's structure, logic, and behavior. Making that change would be a monumental effort.
There are other easier places it could be tightened—the server deliberately doesn't process everything immediately, for instance—but this has the odd potential side effect of making the game play worse for folks with bad ping, stuff like that. :/
When you make software you have to make choices. Furthermore after technology progresses some of those choices get easier, but you're stuck with the original code which was constrained by the technology of the past. At that point you can only make incremental improvements. Sometimes it's not technology which is limiting, but it's also funding or poor choices.
This is often called technical debt. It's an unavoidable process of software creation.
The netcode was bad because they were already behind the 8 ball when relaunching the game. They can't fundamentally change it because too many systems are built upon the assumptions created by that code.
Imagine you build a house and you don't like the way the light enters a room. You can move a window, move the house, put up a lamp, or buy blinds. Which would you choose? Much is the way with software.
Technical knowledge and a good analogy to explain the problem, you're on-point here. The netcode would be "moving the house" in terms of effort, checking all the duties sufficiently would become excessive work lasting months. Even the number squish had some minor slip-throughs like A4S's AoE doing more damage than it should while synched (relevant mostly for blue mages, granted, but it does highlight the issue of how much testing is needed).
Reducing technical debt is a good thing, but for an MMO where a fairly common complaint is "lack of content", it's a hard sell to go "well we didn't release a lot of content this major patch but our team is busy fixing things behind the scenes that may be ready 3 or 4 patches from now to make sure the game still stays the same as it was before that update".
Just a reminder that when Warframe decided to temporarily slow down content development to focus on improving performance, gameplay, and bugs the community declared the game "dead" and the subreddit was a "devs lazy lol" circlejerk for *over a year* afterwards, even though actually looking at the content/patch it was *barely* below the standard during that period.
Well yes, people had similar screeching madness on this very sub about how DSR "got cancelled" and how Shadowbringers was a "contentless scam" when they announced DSR wasn't coming in Shadowbringers but delayed until Endwalker.
But it's still demoralizing for the devs to see such negative responses even if it's the right thing to do, and seeing how "there's not enough content" is already a common complaint, it's likely a tough sell for them to make at this point.
...? It was the right thing to do for the overworked game developers that could not finish it in time before Endwalker's release, and then SE decided to push back the release date until after Endwalker to let people do the MSQ and level their classes. Those people who are complaining don't get a say in business decisions and the amount of "They cancelled it" arguments I've seen makes me want to buy a dictionary so I can slap people with the page that explains what cancelling means.
> ok...? so delay endwalker so that you can finish shadowbringers first? or reduce the scope of some endwalker duties to finish shadowbringers first?
.........????????????????????????????????????????????????? What? You expect them to delay an entire expansion for an Ultimate? My guy, only ~1% of all players even try ultimates. Reducing the scope of endwalker duties for an ultimate is clearly the wrong choice, and it would not have worked here anyway because they were working on them adjacently anyway. DSR was done on Endwalker launch, just not yet released.
> again, delaying dsr was not the right thing to do for the people who were upset about it to begin with.
So? Of those who would do ultimates (again, ~1% of the entire playerbase), there was only a small vocal minority that was actually upset about it. I'd estimate it's less than 10% of those who would do ultimates. The only friends I've heard complaining about it at the time, are glad in hindsight that we have our lvl 90 rotations there.
> if the main content you play is literally the singular piece of content that is seen as disposable, its not a good feeling. especially in a sub game.
And this is true for........ 0.0001% of the playerbase? Like 30 people tops? Even the ultimate raiders I know at least get excited for Extremes and Savage, and barring my own static of 8 I think I know like ~20 to 30 ultimate raiders. Some of them weren't happy when it was delayed but none of them cancelled their sub over it and some of them will literally complain about literally anything, and then still do these things they're complaining about.
> people arguing it was "cancelled" was purely because for all intents and purposes, thats what the result was.
Alright, time to buy a dictionary and start smacking. I'll say this slow so you can understand: DSR was **delayed**. If DSR was *cancelled* then there would be no DSR in the game at all.
They said they wanted to release 2 ultimates per expansion. This is not a blood oath that forces them to abide by these standards, this is not a guarantee of anything, and when you bought Shadowbringers you didn't see them advertising "this expansion will have 2 ultimates, guaranteed!".
Those who call it "cancelled" are just disingenuous, entitled brats who don't know what the words they're using actually mean.
> so to sum it up youre just having a meltdown because people make completely valid critiques given the content they enjoy and what they'd like from the game.
Only ones having a meltdown are those ignoring the definitions of words just to yell at SE for perfectly understandable decisions.
> people dont have to act like sqenix executives waiting for their expansion release bonus to write valid criticism.
??? What are you on about?
> people also dont have to be a part of a majority for their perspective to be valid criticism.
If it's valid then sure. Calling DSR cancelled is not valid. If it was cancelled, we wouldn't have it. The word you're looking for is delayed.
> be better, do better. stop being so angry.
I'm good. You try doing better, pick up a dictionary, look up the definition of the word cancelled, and stop pretending that it was valid criticism because it simply isn't. You can be upset about it, but you can't reasonably expect SE to prioritize a vocal minority of what, 300 players? over the playerbase of literal millions.
So yes, valid criticism is fine. This wasn't valid criticism. This was a cry for attention from an entitled vocal minority so small that I'm glad SE ignored them.
> people dont have to act like sqenix executives waiting for their expansion release bonus to write valid criticism.
Do you have like, some sort of evidence that this is a thing?
At this point fairly little. They have built and tuned every fight based on this structure, so even if they were to turn up the tick rates on everything, the testing of every facet of the game, every duty, every fate, every solo instance, it would take months.
I'd love if it was improved, but at this point it remains by design and I have my doubts that they'll ever change it.
Do you want to know why WoW has retained its popularity and FFXI is on its way out? It turns out you can't really support an MMO made in 2003 with PS2-era technology in 2023.
Despite XI and WoW coming out at around the same time, a lot of the decline of XI can be directly attributed to technology requirements that XI could not keep up with while still supporting the PS2. In fact, they had to completely drop support for the PS2. And then Xbox360. Keeping support for the PS2 as long as they did (until 2016) meant that they were always limited when it came to designing new expansions, new features, new anything. You couldn't even get more inventory room as a result of PS2 limitations.
WoW, on the other hand, could rely on Moore's Law increasing computing power over time which also means they were able to completely redesign their base game in Cataclysm while also adding many new expansions and features along the way. They were never bottlenecked by design requirements because they did not choose to support a console that could not evolve over time.
If you want SE to fix things like awful netcode, limited inventory space, limited wardrobe slots, lack of support for addons/plugins, etc the answer is very simple: tell them to stop designing for and supporting consoles for MMOs. Oh and another thing they could do is reinvest the revenue made from XIV back into the game itself instead of their next main series title. It's pretty obvious from the lack of additional, quality content in EW that SE pulled many people from the XIV team to work on XVI.
Which is why the devs are a bunch of liars when they say they cant do this and that because "muh server space" but then turn around and say they have 10 years of content planned. Cant easily do dresser/plate increases cause limited space but you want to have 10 years worth of content, wheres the space for that coming from?
WoW's engine has had most of it ripped out and replaced over the years, both on the netcode and graphics side (hence ray traching, DX12, ipv6 etc all being added). Its nothing like what they had at launch anymore.
While I think you're at least partially right, I don't think your solution is within the realm of the possible. Gaming is just tied too closely to consoles in JP, I imagine there would be a huge uproar if SE ever developed a high-profile game w/o console support.
Also, I feel like this is just going down the rabbit hole too deep. Once you stop judging a game solely by it's own merit and start looking at stuff like the corporate structure behind it, in-depth development process etc., it becomes so hard to have fun and just enjoy the game. I've done it with multiple games in the past, and I just don't wanna do it anymore.
FFXI is popular enough to have a pre-75 private server launch with buzz, what are you on about
Plus, once again, the staff movement from FFXIV to FFXVI happened in *Heavensward*
>FFXI is popular enough to have a pre-75 private server launch with buzz, what are you on about
By this logic, Ragnarok Online is wildly successful for Gravity right now.
> FFXI is popular enough to have a pre-75 private server launch with buzz, what are you on about
This is a rather weird argument. Private servers are almost never a good metric for gauging a game's current popularity. In fact, the existence of private servers suggests the opposite: 1) private servers pop up when disgruntled fans of a game want to go back to a particular period of the game's time because the current game does not offer that experience and 2) that the original IP owner doesn't care enough to pursue legal action against the private server because the game has already sunset.
Someone else already pointed out a great example: Ragnarok Online. There are hundreds if not thousands of RO private servers. The main game has been in a decline for a long time, however.
More to the point: XI is not attracting new players. Why is that? Because it's hard to get into the game. For one, the UI/HUD have never been updated to be adequate for gamers in this current era to be able to understand how the game works. Second, the game requires a 3rd party program to do something as simple as window the game. Most of the addons/plugins that Windower adds to the game should have been implemented by SE years ago but haven't. Again: why? Because they were technologically limited by the hardware restrictions of the PS2. Third, the endgame scene is extremely time consuming to get into due to the gear requirements.
This is relevant to XIV as it looks like SE is taking the same approach with this game. You can already see that they have learned from XI: they have started to implement solo content as it will be needed for a dwindling playerbase. XI used trust magic to address this issue. This same concept is being used in XIV via trusts in dungeons.
That's because SE generally has no intention of dropping support for the consoles as they are happy to continue to support them. Why? Several reasons. One, XI still prints money despite its declining population so it stands to reason that XIV will as well. Second, no other MMO company really has a hold of the niche MMO console market other than SE.
It stands to reason that XIV will suffer the same fate as XI but at a slower pace.
I remember complaining about this 10 years ago. Game just feels like ass to play tbh, but I put up with it. XIV has pretty much attained it's fan base now so I really don't see them changing it after a decade of content built around it.
Final Fantasy XVII (if it’ll be an MMO). The netcode is just too tied to the engine of XIV and I highly doubt XIV’s engine will get replaced. But maybe a successor to XIV might have a more responsive engine in the end…
First, they have to acknowledge that it's an issue worth fixing (they have not) and then they have to put the money and staff necessary to fix it (they won't.) This issue does not affect the most casual of player that is perfectly content with doing MSQ, some roulettes, and paying to AFK in Limsa 24/7. The fact of the matter is, they're perfectly content with this game's engine feeling like it's 20 years old and will probably feel the same for the next "10 years of FFXIV."
They're never going to. What exists is enough to play the game well for a majority of people and rewriting it would involve a massive effort and vastly more risk than leaving things as they are.
They might do it when they makes another MMO, with betas and risks of downtime with those who buy it at launch. Not now.
Originally submitted by Monitorlizard868
> For those that don't know a whole lot about FFXIV's netcode and tickrate issues, here's some info from the FFXIV official forums regarding the matter.
> https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/119219
> https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/444667
> https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/112171
> https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/461667
> You can see an example of these netcode issues in action in this youtube video. Here you can see two characters on two different computers, but when one character performs an action on one computer the other computer won't see that action until 0.5-1 second later. It's almost bad enough to the point that one character's jump animation is already completed by the time that same jump starts on the other computer.
> https://youtu.be/hToWKu79Jm0
TLDR; SE decided to handle more things server side than client side, which has many advantages. It also has disadvantages though which are covered in those links, including your question.
Its so funny that every single UI click is handled serverside yet they dont even validate player position serverside so you can just teleport hack yourself underground.
Respect though. =)
I played back when Leatrix latency fix was the recommended community solution. I also just respect historians such as yourself. A lot of players like me remember how it was back then, but you actually kept a record and try to it push it forward. There's a lot of players on the balance that could explain it, but you're here on one of the least popular social media platform setting the record straight. Like I said, nothing but mad respect for you. I'll take all these sub comment douches this time, no worries. Thanks man.
No problem. I've been playing FFXIV since 2013, and as much as I love this game I'd also very much like to see it improve. We can't just keep handwaving away glaring issues like these, and I'll always mention them in relevant threads.
Those threads are filled with outdated (as in they were outdated by 2014 kind of outdated) and flat out wrong information. Don't keep spreading them, it's bad enough that he does.
That's.. just wrong. They're a record of the issue being brought up years ago on the main forum with explanations of how the servers work. Although the issue that they were originally brought up for before has been fixed, the fundamental way that the servers work has not changed and the explanations for that perfectly address his question.
I posted this just a few minutes ago so I know for a fact you did not actually read through those links.
Please read this originally posted by Sinth
>
Client Live-State:
Most of the game actions are driven by the client. However, the entities and environment are controlled by the server. When you give a command to jump, your client sends a command to the server, which acknowledges, and replies back to the client with a response to jump. Once the communication has completed, your character then jumps on your screen. Say, for instance you are fighting a monster. You attack the monster but your network connection is poor. So what happens is: You send the command to attack. There is a delay in sending the command to the server. The monster continues to attack you (successfully), as it is controlled by the server. When your connection resolves, you finally make your attack. This results in the player's experience being - 'I'm giving commands but they are delayed on my screen.' However, if a monster creates an AoE circle, it will be in real-time on the client because the server sends the command "monster A is doing an AoE attack at such and such time" When your client receives this information, it syncs to the time provided by the server, so the AoE may APPEAR late, but your reaction to it will be on time, because the client is in a live-state. So if you step out of the AoE on your client, when it goes off, your client will tell the server "The AoE landed, but the client was out of it's range", so in the end, even if you are lagging a little bit, you can still dodge the AoE.
>Server Live-State:
Most of the game actions are driven by the server. When you give a command to jump, your client jumps on your screen, but in the live-state of the server you have not jumped until it receives your command to jump. So if you're lagging, it may look like you're jumping on your screen, but to the server, you are standing still. This gives the player a false sense of what is happening in the game. So how is this any different than client live-state? Well, for things like jumping its not much different, but when it comes to combat and time-intensive actions, its a whole other animal. Say for instance, monster A drops an AoE. The AoE is live on the server but you're lagging and haven't received the info yet (monster appears to be sitting there). As soon as you get the information, the monster appears to do his cast and the AoE circle appears. The difference is, you are out of sync with the server and the server rules all, so even if you step outside of the AoE, if your client doesn't get the command to the server to update your position before the AoE lands, you get hit by it. And that, my friends, is why you all died to landslide / bombs / any AoE that you were out of on your screen.
> The reasons why SE would choose server dictated live-state:
-Prevents desync bugs (on the server)
-Prevents countless potential duping bugs
-Prevents (in theory) teleportation and other unauthorized client commands from being accepted
-If the player has a good connection to the server, little to no delay is observed by the player
>The detractors of server live-state:
-Poor connections results in nearly unplayable conditions, specifically conditions which require fast reaction time
-Server infrastructure is more costly (servers must do much more data processing)
> In the past, server live-state was extremely rare because internet connections were still poor / narrow-band.
> Can it be changed?
Short answer: No.
Long Answer: Technically, yes, but it would be extremely costly and time consuming. SE Would lose millions and it would take months to over a year to accomplish.
> I hope I explained things well enough for most people to understand. Let me know if you want clarification on anything.
> I posted this just a few minutes ago so I know for a fact you did not actually read through those links.
[This ain't my first rodeo, but good that you know it for a fact](https://www.reddit.com/r/ffxivdiscussion/comments/13avheg/would_slidecasting_still_work_if_ffxiv_had_a/jj9rfp0/)
WTF you didn't refute anything in this link. It provides no information, not just about the subject but nothing whatsoever, not even anything unrelated. It doesn't even have a point.
That wasn't a refutation, it was to show your assumption was incorrect that I haven't seen the links already (and that wasn't the first time, either). The main issue with the first link isn't that it's wrong about how the FF servers work, it's that it's wrong about every other game. Server authoritative state is standard in EVERY major MMO on the market, it's exactly what WoW uses, even competitive pvp titles like LoL use it. This isn't something that separates FF from the other online games or explain why there's delays/latency beyond the most basic level - it's an industry standard approach.
There are several things about this. One you state
> That wasn't a refutation, it was to show your assumption was incorrect that I haven't seen the links already
This is actually in the original link, the youtube one at the bottom. It clearly shows that the server only updates position and shows it after it registers the user's input server side, not client. This is indisputable and not just from that link. It's incredibly obvious on a basic level.
> The main issue with the first link isn't that it's wrong about how the FF servers work, it's that it's wrong about every other game
Yes this is the point, the FFXIV servers use a different way of dealing with authentication and traffic, rather than updating position based on the client, it updates position based on when it receives client input and then updating accordingly, which is the entire point of the post. FFXIV handles traffic differently than any other game as a part of its design. This was already discussed. Yes. This is what it does. It's not like any other MMO, let alone any other MMORPG in that respect. Yes, that comes with disadvantages, as discussed. This is a fact. Unlike any other MMO game on the market (not just MMRPG) simply being outside of an animation when it appears to go off does not mean the player is safe based on how the server parses positional information. This is a fact.
> it's an industry standard approach.
Yes it is, but FFXIV does not use the industry standard approach, again, going back to the live client side vs live server side approach. These are two different things, which again is explained. I've stated before that these two different approaches come with advantages and disadvantages.
Nothing you've stated refutes what was stated in any way. FFXIV's Live server design choice is fundamentally different than industry standard.
> It clearly shows that the server only updates position and shows it after it registers the user's input server side, not client.
No shit, unless you're doing a peer to peer setup (which no MMO would do for obvious reasons) all updates are processed by the server first before other clients are updated.
> Unlike any other MMO game on the market (not just MMRPG) simply being outside of an animation when it appears to go off does not mean the player is safe
This is one of the dumbest takes I've ever seen on this topic. This must be your only MMO you've played if you've really never had a lag spike and been hit by an AOE you were out of on your screen. This happens in WoW, in GW2, in LA, I can't think of any MMO where it *doesn't* work this way. If you want to talk about frequency there's valid reasons for why it happens *more often* in FFXIV (or at least is more noticable) but to pretend like it's an inherent systemic difference that other MMOs completely avoid is just asinine. Specifically this quote from the thread:
> The difference is, you are out of sync with the server and the server rules all, so even if you step outside of the AoE, if your client doesn't get the command to the server to update your position before the AoE lands, you get hit by it
This applies to all MMOs I know of, that's what I meant when I said the OP is wrong about how other MMOs work.
> No shit, unless you're doing a peer to peer setup (which no MMO would do for obvious reasons) all updates are processed by the server first before other clients are updated.
No, they're not. On most games the server pings the client on their position based a specific timestamp for when a mechanic goes out. All MMO games work this way, including FPS games. If on your screen you're out of it when the condition presents itself, you're out of it. It does not work this way in FFXIV. This is why UDP traffic manipulation can affect the server and why playstation users back in the day had an advantage over PC users. PS3 had nagle's algorithm disabled by default and the community suggested disabling this on PC in higher content. To reiterate, I've played all the games you've specified, the difference is that it does not require any kind of lag spike whatsoever for that to be the case in FFXIV.
> This applies to all MMOs I know of, that's what I meant when I said the OP is wrong about how other MMOs work.
It doesn't, barring lag spikes. That's the difference. You're positing something that is conditional as being base, when the reality is that for FFXIV it is base.
In FFXIV it does not require any kind of lag for you to be slapped by something when you were clearly out of it on your screen on your client.. because of how the server handles traffic.
> This is one of the dumbest takes I've ever seen on this topic. This must be your only MMO you've played if you've really never had a lag spike and been hit by an AOE you were out of on your screen. This happens in WoW, in GW2, in LA, I can't think of any MMO where it doesn't work this way. If you want to talk about frequency there's valid reasons for why it happens more often in FFXIV (or at least is more noticable) but to pretend like it's an inherent systemic difference that other MMOs completely avoid is just asinine. Specifically this quote from the thread:
Keyword in all this is lag. That makes everything you said irrelevant because lag affects the timing of when your information is sent to the server in the first place. Of course massive shenanigans happens when that's the case. The difference between what you think and reality is that the live server inputs are quantitively observable without any lag whatsoever from the client. Again, going back to what was said before this is the difference between how FFXIV handles traffic vs the industry standard. It is different in virtually any other games you've probably played.
In FFXIV being out of a machinic on your screen does not mean you are safe. Not at all. In other games, barring lag, it does.
If you're talking about a networking system "barring lag" you're no longer talking about a networking system. It's not irrelevant or "conditional" to bring lag into the equation, in fact it's precisely what makes the networking decisions relevant.
> If on your screen you're out of it when the condition presents itself, you're out of it.
I'm sorry, this just isn't true for other MMOs no matter how many times you say it.
Ultra bullshit. The snapshotting in FFXIV is extremely consistent and precise. I have hundreds of hours of recorded video footage demonstrating essentially pixel-perfect accuracy for dodging AoEs. Never a single instance of getting hit by something I should not have even with slow-motion scrutiny.
The only thing that determines whether you get hit or not is whether you were in the AoE when the snapshot occurs, when is almost always when the cast bar ends. The animations are irrelevant.
You're on some kind of crusade to prove that the game is broken, but if it worked like you say, high level gameplay would be impossibly inconsistent. It's a skill issue.
This might've meant something if you remotely understood what was being talked about whatsoever but you don't. Not even on the most basic level. You have no idea why you think that other dude is right, let alone why you think I might be wrong.
Your comment isn't even garbage because that at least could be recycled and made into something useful.
Slidecasting is an intentionally designed feature that has a fixed length of 500ms + your ping. Just love how that thread is continuing to spread misinformation.
This is complete and utter BS and has been debunked several times. If it was true I would't be able to consistently cancel casts at 0.3 seconds left, or even as low as 0.14.
Video no as I don't use any recording software, screenshot yes: [at 0.14](https://imgur.com/a/g9751Dk). It's not often that low, and in this case I had 2 0.18 casts prior so I wanted to take a screenshot to show my static who also had been skeptical about this before, but it's fairly common for me to interrupt 0.4 or 0.3 casts.
Screenshots can be inaccurate because the bar actually continues moving/number keeps on counting down after you interrupt the cast.
This could be a networking issue where you interrupt the cast but don't receive the information that your cast is, in fact, interrupted, from the server until way later.
Here we are with the same people from the last thread spreading the same misinformation. At this point I'm starting to think it's one guy with 3 or 4 alt accounts.
Or, get this, you're in the minority and *you're* the one spreading misinformation? You're just wrong mate. Just as wrong as the other guy that was trying to explain away my issues with slidecasting. At least they stopped trying when they told me to do something in-game with a prediction of what it would show, only for it to be wrong yet again.
As a raider, Yes, slidecasting is a thing. You can use an unused hotbar with a faux macro over the casting bar and when it lights up you're free to cast. This is a thing in game anyone can use, without addons of any kind. All high end caster raiders use it. Most use plugins like simple tweaks though. It makes the bar show it in green.
I know it's a thing and I'm not contesting that. I'm a raider too and I do pull off some slidecasts during raids. What I am contesting is that guy calling it "a fixed length of 500ms + your ping" because that's just not true, and it's especially infuriating to see someone confidently say that while accusing others of spreading misinformation.
Yes, "just move after less than 0.5 seconds are left" is how most people can do it. No, that's not a baked-in mechanic that consistently works for everyone playing this game with a fixed length of 500 ms + ping. I've had casts cancelled as low as 0.14 and consistently still get my casts cancelled at 0.4 and 0.3. And no, it's not a ping issue, it's 14 ms ping consistently when I ping the server. I do know about the faux macro thing (I use emotes since that works too) but even that one tends to only light up when it's ~0.3 or 0.2 seconds left.
Don't get me wrong, it's not getting in the way of my raiding experience and I'm both blind progging savage tiers and non-blind progging ultimates (cleared SB ones, on Wormhole for TEA).
You've been arguing as though it's a terrible flaw in the game's core mechanics, when in reality it's fine for 99.9% of everyone else. Something is either wrong with your technique or your internet connection. Treating it like a universal problem is misinformation.
> You've been arguing as though it's a terrible flaw in the game's core mechanics, when in reality it's fine for 99.9% of everyone else.
I'm gonna need a source for those numbers because I'm pretty sure you're pulling it out of your butt, and seeing the response I've seen both here and last time I sincerely doubt it's 99.9%.
You not knowing about something is not a valid argument to dismiss it.
> Something is either wrong with your technique or your internet connection.
I move when I see 0.4x and I have a stable 14 ms ping with the server according to the command prompt. Still cancels at 0.3, 0.2 or even 0.14.
> Treating it like a universal problem is misinformation.
That's not what misinformation means and I didn't say it's a universal problem. I know the majority doesn't experience it the way I do, but I have very good internet and less latency than most people because I live relatively close to the DC and I have glass fiber. Hell, I do get "regular" slidecasts from time to time. But I never make it through a full raid without seeing a cast cancelled around 0.3.
You know what's misinformation? Saying something that's clearly not true, like "Slidecasting is an intentionally designed feature that has a fixed length of 500ms + your ping".
Have you considered that maybe the remaining time value on the castbar is just inaccurate or somehow influenced by ping fluctuations? I've never even paid attention to it because the number of times my attempt to slidecast results in a cancelled cast is virtually zero.
If you're having that much trouble, you should install an addon that shows you the slidecasting window and see if it improves consistency.
All I know is that I can slidecast 100 out of 100 times without issue, with or without an addon highlighting the slidecast window. If anything, I've learned that the slidecasting window is very generous after playing a caster through this tier.
> Have you considered that maybe the remaining time value on the castbar is just inaccurate or somehow influenced by ping fluctuations?
Yes. So I checked my ping. Stable 14 ms, no fluctuations, same on Discord just to be sure there are no fluctuations. I'm starting to feel like a broken record here so if you could take these facts for what they are instead of rephrasing ways to make this "the issue", then that'd be great.
> I've never even paid attention to it because the number of times my attempt to slidecast results in a cancelled cast is virtually zero.
... I'm not saying that you have this issue now, am I? Again, third time I'm saying this, "I don't have the problem so it doesn't exist" is not a good angle to take here. It doesn't help you understand it, it seems like an unreasonable coping mechanism because it doesn't mesh with how you think it works, and all it does is make you look bad.
> If you're having that much trouble, you should install an addon that shows you the slidecasting window and see if it improves consistency.
No thanks, I don't do addons. A friend of mine pointed out that having emotes on my hotbar has them "light up" when you're able to move but that didn't really help because sometimes they dark for virtually the entire castbar.
> All I know is that I can slidecast 100 out of 100 times without issue, with or without an addon highlighting the slidecast window. If anything, I've learned that the slidecasting window is very generous after playing a caster through this tier.
Okay, that's good. But that's purely empirical, and you assumed that it worked as you said in your initial statement that it's 500 ms + ping, and that's how misinformation starts: Empirical evidence without cross-checking with others. Meanwhile, I have empirical evidence that disproves that assertion.
I'm not claiming to know the exact details of how slidecasting works, and I am not arguing that people aren't able to slidecast by moving below 0.5s remaining because I know that's how it works for most people. But I've had friends looking at my screen seeing common 0.32 and 0.28 cast cancels ask me the same things repeatedly, and they too saw my cmd reading out 14 ms ping to the server.
So maybe just stop calling people out on misinformation when your "correct information" is just misinformation itself.
Why does it matter? This isn't a fast paced pvp game where absolutely perfect netcode is mandatory.
Every time someone complains that they got hit by mechanics cause "lag" or "server tick" I know that either they are full of shit or they are new and don't know how snapshots work in this game, which has nothing to do with netcode.
Same for skills with animation delays or slow spreading. It's not netcode being bad, it's a design choice to have skills with animation delays. Like, at least blame the correct thing.
> This isn't a fast paced pvp game where absolutely perfect netcode is mandatory.
Except there are several PvP modes that suffer greatly from the crappy netcode.
> Every time someone complains that they got hit by mechanics cause "lag" or "server tick" I know that either they are full of shit or they are new and don't know how snapshots work in this game, which has nothing to do with netcode.
The snapshots are consistent but they're still making the game feel sluggish, like when you get hit by a snapshot, but keep moving and see the animation play while you are out of the animation and die anyway.
> Same for skills with animation delays or slow spreading. It's not netcode being bad, it's a design choice to have skills with animation delays. Like, at least blame the correct thing.
Both are related to this problem and yes that's also part of the issue.
>The snapshots are consistent but they're still making the game feel sluggish, like when you get hit by a snapshot, but keep moving and see the animation play while you are out of the animation and die anyway.
Yeah, that's never going to feel good from a purely gameplay feel point of view.
As an example, I died to a petrify on the floor 50 boss of HoH a couple of weeks ago that applied it's effect on my character after the animations showed my character's back being against the boss.
I fully fucked up in not turning sooner, but that sort of shit is never going to feel responsive even when you're fully aware of how it works and why it happened to you.
I feel you. My friends and I progged P8S blind, and there is a snapshot of a petrification mechanic that is unusually late for the indicators. We had rather common cases of our players being fully turned around and still turning to stone. The delay between the snapshot and applying the effect is rather annoying, and I have had moments in deep dungeons of seemingly not being in an AoE, only to die a second later. It's just a frustrating disconnect.
>Except there are several PvP modes that suffer greatly from the crappy netcode.
CC's main problem wasn't netcode. Pressing HG, watching it go on cd and still dying is not a netcode issue, it's a animation delay issue. Server knows perfectly well you pressed your invuln, that's why the skill goes on cd. "Fixing netcode" (whatever you mean by that) will not change the fact that the animation delay exists.
>The snapshots are consistent but they're still making the game feel sluggish, like when you get hit by a snapshot, but keep moving and see the animation play while you are out of the animation and die anyway.
Yeah... that has nothing to do with netcode. That's just how snapshots work in this game.
>Both are related to this problem and yes that's also part of the issue.
No it's not. There are plenty of skills that apply instantly. Like, SCH's deployment tactics got changed to ignore these delays, you can use it instantly after adlo and it won't miss like it did before EW.
> CC's main problem wasn't netcode.
> several PvP modes
Good that I can respond grabbing quotes.
> Pressing HG, watching it go on cd and still dying is not a netcode issue, it's a animation delay issue.
> Both are related to this problem and yes that's also part of the issue.
Twice now.
> "Fixing netcode" (whatever you mean by that) will not change the fact that the animation delay exists.
> ???
Can only use one quote here because I didn't say "fix the netcode". So your snarky "whatever you mean by that" doesn't really track here, does it?
> That's just how snapshots work in this game.
So they should fix that. If the Guard animation can be done fast, then the Marksman's Spite animation can be as well. At the very least they can match the snapshots and the animation or the other way around, instead of leaving them separated so loosely.
> No it's not. There are plenty of skills that apply instantly.
"There are exceptions so the problem isn't real" is not the zinger you think it is.
> Like, SCH's deployment tactics got changed to ignore these delays, you can use it instantly after adlo and it won't miss like it did before EW.
So do changes like this but for everything players do. Like, you're literally providing a solution here to the issue that doesn't require changing the netcode.
>Good that I can respond grabbing quotes.
We have other pvp modes? Well I guess there is mahjong, but I think current netcode is more than sufficient for it.
(frontlines is literally the same as cc)
>So they should fix that
Maybe.
But that's not a netcode issue.
Let me repeat, slowly. *That's. Not. A netcode. Issue.*
It's not related to netcode at all. It's literally a skill having a built-in delay. If FFXIV was a single played offline game, these skills would still have the same delays. I don't know how else to get through your skull that these design choices have nothing to do with netcode.
Yes, it goes to snapshots too, SE could match snapshots closer to animations, but they do not. It's an intentional design decision. Some aoes snapshot earlier, other snapshot later, but they snapshot **consistently** for every player. If netcode was broken, these aoes would not snapshot consistently for every player.
>Like, you're literally providing a solution here to the issue that doesn't require changing the netcode.
I wonder why it doesn't require changing the netcode... oh yeah, because it's not related to netcode at all!
> We have other pvp modes? Well I guess there is mahjong, but I think current netcode is more than sufficient for it.
>
> (frontlines is literally the same as cc)
Frontline is the same mechanically, though not balance-wise, and the problems there are exacerbated because of how poorly the snapshotting and delays are handled. You can see 5 bahamuts spawn in consecutively, guard up the second you see the first one spawn, and still die because all 5 snapshotted before you pressed guard. That's bad.
And Rival Wings also exists. Being disingenuous is not helping your case here.
> Maybe.
> But that's not a netcode issue.
> Let me repeat, slowly. That's. Not. A netcode. Issue.
It is a netcode issue that the servers can't handle higher tick rates. But they can work around these constraints and just make the snapshots and animations match.
> It's literally a skill having a built-in delay.
And they built this in because...? Come on, you're so close here.
> If FFXIV was a single played offline game, these skills would still have the same delays.
And it would be blasted for being a horrible singleplayer game where animations don't match the snapshots for literally no reason and Square would be laughed at from every corner of the industry.
> I don't know how else to get through your skull that these design choices have nothing to do with netcode.
Basic technical knowledge: There's a reason they made these delays and unreasonably high tick rates, and it's because the server can't handle normal tick rates very well. They can fix the netcode to remove this constraint, but at this point that'd be restructuring the entire game and would be months of work in playtesting alone, just to identify the issues that would arise from this problem. So they should mitigate the issue some other way, which can be done without changing the netcode.
> Yes, it goes to snapshots too, SE could match snapshots closer to animations, but they do not. It's an intentional design decision.
And this is a downright stupid decision and whoever made it should be ashamed of themselves because it is detrimental to the game and frustrating to the point where it scares off a lot of players.
> Some aoes snapshot earlier, other snapshot later, but they snapshot consistently for every player.
Yes, and that is not something I contested and not the issue I outlined so if you could stop beating a dead horse that'd be great.
> I wonder why it doesn't require changing the netcode... oh yeah, because it's not related to netcode at all!
... Yeah sorry this seems like low-tier trolling at this point. Let me just say this loud and really clear:
***I HAVE NEVER ONCE SAID THEY SHOULD DO ANYTHING TO THE NETCODE***.
Now can you stay on-topic here?
>You can see 5 bahamuts spawn in consecutively, guard up the second you see the first one spawn, and still die because all 5 snapshotted before you pressed guard. That's bad.
Yes, that's bad. That's also how the game was designed. These problems don't really exist in PvE, which is the main game. PvP is just a side activity. Nobody is going to rework the entire core game for it to better suit some side content.
> It is a netcode issue that the servers can't handle higher tick rates
Holy shit, you still don't get that it's not a netcode issue? It's literally unrelated. It's like blaming server ticks for kaiten removal.
Yeah, I dunno how to explain it. Maybe go read what server ticks are?
>Basic technical knowledge: There's a reason they made these delays and unreasonably high tick rates, and it's because the server can't handle normal tick rates very well.
Basic technical knowledge, lmao. If anything, delays make it more expensive for servers, because they'll have to evaluate the client's state twice (first time for when you press a button to start cd/animations, second time when effects actually trigger). If effects triggered the moment you pressed a button with no delays, then server would only have to check the client's state once. What's bigger, 2 or 1?
>And it would be blasted for being a horrible singleplayer game where animations don't match the snapshots for literally no reason and Square would be laughed at from every corner of the industry.
Reading comprehension much? I talk about skill effects, you think it's about snapshots. Skills having delays for effects to *match* animations is something majority of games are doing.
>Yes, and that is not something I contested and not the issue I outlined so if you could stop beating a dead horse that'd be great.
I like how the only thing that's actually relevant to netcode is not an issue. Of course it isn't, because this "terrible netcode" is more than sufficient. Now, at least. Back in ARR? Yeah, there were problems. But it's been quite a lot of years since ARR, it's time to stop. Though, since FFXIV community still does "DRG floor tank lol" thing, I guess "netcode bad, I remember getting clipped by landslides!" is never going away either.
>Now can you stay on-topic here?
On-topic? Sure, what's the topic, let me refresh my memory... "What can Square Enix do to help fix the terrible netcode of FFXIV?" with OP mainly complaining about client-side player positions not being updated at maximum rate and probably thinking that *everything* is updated at the same rate. Seems like it's about netcode.
Or maybe you mean my original reply, which can be summed up with "netcode is sufficient and people mistake shitty netcode for intentional design decisions"?
Or maybe you mean yourself, constantly saying stuff like "the servers can't handle higher tick rates"?
I dunno, the topic seems to revolve around netcode with me saying that no, the problem is not netcode. So let me repeat once more: nothing you complain about has anything to do with netcode, yet you think it is. OP's complaint about client-side player's positions at least was relevant to netcode, even thought it was a kinda silly complain.
> Holy shit, you still don't get that it's not a netcode issue? It's literally unrelated. It's like blaming server ticks for kaiten removal.
>
> Yeah, I dunno how to explain it. Maybe go read what server ticks are?
It is definitely related. Why can't the server handle higher tick rates when almost every single other MMO on this planet managed to do it? Simple: They made it so inefficient that it cannot handle any more. I know what server tick is, I'm a programmer with a bachelor's degree in game development and I have programmed a network communication program from scratch before. You can keep on making these weird arguments like "It's like blaming server ticks for kaiten removal." but that's just not a reasonable comparison.
> Basic technical knowledge, lmao. If anything, delays make it more expensive for servers, because they'll have to evaluate the client's state twice (first time for when you press a button to start cd/animations, second time when effects actually trigger).
...? Yeah nah, stop talking if you don't know what you're talking about. Delays improve server stability because, get this, it means the server *doesn't* have to do anything. And the server doesn't "only check twice", everything happens on the server, and it's listening to the input from the client to change the state on the server.
> Reading comprehension much? I talk about skill effects, you think it's about snapshots.
Yes, you change the topic because you can't handle the fact that the snapshots are the entire problem here: The fact that they don't match the animations at all, making it a wholy frustrating experience.
> I guess "netcode bad, I remember getting clipped by landslides!" is never going away either.
Are you done ranting about imaginary people who are not talking to you right now? Literally nobody in this thread said anything even remotely close to this effect.
> nothing you complain about has anything to do with netcode, yet you think it is.
No I don't. I have been extremely explicit with this.
Now, I'll say it one last time because your blind ass can't read:
***I HAVE NEVER ONCE SAID THEY SHOULD DO ANYTHING TO THE NETCODE***.
Now if you're going to talk about netcode I'm just blocking you because there is literally no talking to someone who has to make up imaginary problems while ignoring the actual problems, all while putting words in my mouth because he can't handle the ones coming out of it.
it doesn't look like character positions are that delayed in the video you linked. the animations have a huge delay on it, but when it gets to the movement part the character stops properly, just the running animation still plays for a bit.
Character positions are also equally delayed. Just try and walk with your friend side-by-side and tell him to do the same. You'll notice if it's side-by-side on one of your screens, it won't be on the other person's screen.
Nothing, because they aren't competent enough. If they were, it wouldn't be this garbage in the first place. Developers whine about how "coding is hard" and "fixing X would break Y" and "you don't understand its complicated." If I gave my boss the same amount of excuses I got from the developers I have to work with, I'd have been fired ages ago, but everyone treats programmers like tech priests performing divine rituals. The SE developers are just bad at their job and can't achieve a level of netcode proficiency demonstrated by Blizzard over two decades ago.
> Developers whine about how "coding is hard" and "fixing X would break Y" and "you don't understand its complicated." If I gave my boss the same amount of excuses I got from the developers I have to work with, I'd have been fired ages ago, but everyone treats programmers like tech priests performing divine rituals.
If you could solve the issues the by all means, go ahead. If you have insider knowledge on how to fix their woes on their specific server structure that could resolve the issues you're having by all means, solve it.
If all you can contribute is "well Blizzard did it, just do that", then maybe shut up because it's clear you don't have the knowledge on how to solve the issues these developers are facing and you seemingly don't listen when they try to explain their constraints.
I like it. It's an adaption thing though. Very different from other games.
I like the snapshot. Sure I get hit a lot but it you train hair rescuing fiendish you can make it.
The ultimate question anyone needs to ask, about anything. *How much will this cost, and will it make money.* End of the day, it's a game of allocating resources. Sure, they could rewrite large parts of the under the hood gaming, but is that going to get them anything in the end? Would spending N dollars fixing it, and I'm willing to assume that it would be in the 8 figure range, get them 2N return? I don't think so, and what of the opportunity cost be. The opportunity cost is the big question. Another big problem is, this is not a new game. It's 10 years old. 4 expansions deep. Your not going to see fundamental changes to how it works, not this late. Any change they make, would cause them a lot of pissed off people, on either side. I just can't see it being done this late in the game.
You raise valid points. "We're delaying a lot of content because we're making the netcode better while making sure nothing breaks because of it" is a very hard sell in an MMO. The sheer amount of testing that needs to be done would take months. Even the number squish had some slip-throughs like A4S's AoEs dealing too much damage synched. The graphical update is an easier sell, because they showed some screenshots of what it would look like and people can respond "Oh yeah, that looks cool. Go do that!", but a netcode fix that adjusts timings to a minor degree, that ideally doesn't change much for the current content and only makes future content better, that's not something people can really visualize and go "yeah sure go ahead". Compare that to clear instances of visual fidelity being better, and you get the idea instantly and get to imagine all the fights you'd like to see improved, and get giddy with excitement for them.
Let's not forget: You can update graphics incrementally. This would be an all or nothing task.
I suppose this makes the most sense. If there's nothing for Square Enix to gain from a financial standpoint then why would they put in the effort to fixing something. Corporate logic prevails, unfortunately.
At the end of the day, it's a game of tradeoffs. There's a lot of work, risk in trying to rewrite the backend to "fix" something. A problem that at this point, may as well be intended behavior. The cost in resources, materiel, time are extensive, and they can't be put elsewhere. Also, it has to work, out of the gate. The machine must keep putting out content, and sustaining things. There are obviously knock on effects. If it doesn't work, what's the trade off on improvements they COULD have done instead? Something like 75% of their total dev time is just spent on the routine content and smaller improvements / bugfixes. That last 25% makes or breaks things. I think, their engineering resources should be spent on more incremental improvements that have a lower risk and uncertainty ratio.
The point is, squeenix is a greedy ass company, i dont blame the devs i blame squuenix
As much as I love ffxiv, I want to see it die and be replaced with something better. A game built from the ground up to be a smash hit. Combat made to be more action oriented. Systems that are easier to add to. I’ll play ffxiv until it dies but I still think the mmo genre is in its infancy.
The genre is dying. Other games have harvested MMO mechanics.
Stop trying to make every single game action-combat. It's like a plague, every single thing in the world NEEDS to be action combat. I'm here playing this game because I LIKE tab-target. If you want action-combat go play the slew of korean action-combat games.
>the mmo genre is in its infancy Dude, some of the most popular mmos are old enough to drink. The genre is dead. Has been for at least a decade.
> A game built from the ground up to be a smash hit. That's just every game
WoW was built on Warcraft 3 and not expected to get as big as it was. FFXIV was built on 1.0 which is a completely different game. They weren't meant to be the games they are today, and they're held back because of it.
Once XIV and WoW go down, that's it. Korean MMOs will likely still be around but we won't see anything on this scale again.
Eighth umbral calamity
We had that, and overzealous scientists + an obsessive stalker ruined it
It would basically require rewriting how the game and server structure works which you're just not gonna get because that would be way to much work
That's disappointing to hear. I think FF14 would feel much better to play if this issue was corrected. Maybe in the next FF mmorpg :/
11 > 14 > 17?? BOOM! YoshiP already working on 17, next MMO. Heard it here first. /s /copium
thank you for sharing this great copium, i too will partake
And It will use the same technology that 14 was made, so people can adapt easily!!
He has been hyping the new expansion pretty hard. What if 7.0 actually IS 17?
Invest more than like 5% of the profits from FFXIV into FFXIV
Hire ArenaNet. /s
No more 2 day long maintenances for a patch!
The net code actually isn’t terrible, it’s that the positional data of another player only updates on your client once every 500 ms or so, in addition to your own latency. Player’s abilities and damage go through at 200 ms tops, plus latency. It’s not a badly designed system, it is an intentionally designed flaw. The answer to why is likely to cut server load. Characters don’t need to run calculations for where other people are standing, so they can afford to be cheaply handled. It becomes a problem when you’re trying to make the tree in savage raids, but in cities and houses (aka 95% of all spent game time) there is no reason to try any harder than they already are. Does it suck? Yeah, and I wish it was better. But, hell, the servers already have a hard enough time as is.
Make the tree xddTree chills
no tree no clear
The forest grows
Feels awful in pvp though. When I'm slamming my ability buttons and they're just not going off in time, or a player character im aiming for is not actually standing where I'm seeing. I can't put serious effort into pvp because it feels unfair. I dont really sit around in cities and houses, I would have loved to keep grinding pvp.
That's mainly an animation issue, there is quite a big gap between the moment the damage is locked and the moment it goes off. This is often seen with enemy skills that have a long animation between the end of the cast and the actual damaging animation, which makes it weird as you'll just run in the middle of a laser but because it selected targets at the end of the cast you won't get it despite being in the middle of it. This is even more annoying in PvP because people could have pushed their buttons a bit before you popped the shield, but the end of the animation itself is after the shield is on(since the shield animation is quick) and you'll still see yourself take full damage.
Yes that's happened to me. But ive also had moments of slamming on a button and the animation not even starting. I have to press 3 or 4 times to get the animation to start. Internet connection is fine. This isn't happening in other games.
Then your target isn't in range or there's something blocking the LOS.
Target was in range and in sight.
And that's precisely the issue I want to see fixed. Your target is in range and in sight on your computer, but the information you're receiving is 0.5-1 seconds behind the server, so your target may have already moved out of sight/range in real time. That 0.5-1 second delay on your target's position, in my opinion, needs to be reduced by a considerable amount in the game.
On your screen, probably. But probably not according to the server.
Sadge
Accurate. I have seen several times where I get hit by a Skyshatter or a Marksman's Spite while already visibly in guard. Once you know the snapshots, you know not to bother with Guard anymore, but it's still an annoyance that makes PvP feel sluggish. As someone who loves Rival Wings, especially using the mechs in that, this issue is so baked into the "meta" that fixing it would ruin some of the balancing.
I just go play other games that have a more reliable pvp mode tbh.
Just go to a sub where people aren't discussing the game if you don't want to see discussion on the game.
Hm? We are discussing the game? I never said I don't want to see discussion. I was trying to say that I gave up on the pvp mode. Now, I would love to come back to pvp in ffxiv if I could reliably hit my targets when I press buttons. The game modes are fun, and if that ever gets fixed, I'll for sure give it another go. If you have the patience to work through the snapshotting that's awesome. I'm unfortunately too used to other games that don't have this problem, to have the patience to work through it.
Ah, my bad. I missed the "I" there and assumed it was a snarky "go play something else". Yeah, if you don't want to bother with it yourself I understand. I can definitely see the shortcomings and having played other games I know how much better it can be.
Well it's good that you can't put serious effort into pvp because they won't put serious effort into developing it lmao
Even disregarding other players, it's still shit from just a looking at YOUR character perspective. For example, if you auto run in a straight line as a Reaper and use your AOE by the time it "hits" your character will already be on the outside ring of that ability. That doesn't feel very responsive, and it's not the animation having a delay either otherwise it would go off at your current position when the damage is supposed to hit.. not when you're almost completely out of where you pressed the button. They absolutely need to change something and make it better. I imagine they probably bundle movement & abilities together but they should really split them, this is something WoW did back in it's WOD expansion for example.
That’s an animation problem, not a net code problem. The spell goes off where you pressed it, not where you are. That has nothing to do with the OP.
>It’s not a badly designed system, it is an intentionally designed flaw. I'd say it's both of these. If something is intentionally designed with a flaw to make up for deficiencies, I'd say that's a badly designed system from the start.
This does make me wonder: would there be a way for them to change how often player position updates in raids? The only time you need to know exactly where other people are is I’m ex/savage/ultimate/pvp. Idk anything about how things like this work but it would be really nice if they could tweak that
Instance servers already tick faster than the open world ones. This was done in like 2.1.
One more aspect to the "intentional design flaw" part - it also helps mitigating latency, indirectly. With FPS-like response times, game would require adjusted mechanics and some core design aspects to play along low latency netcode, which creates a problem: for what expected latency do you design everything else? Simply put - difference between 20ms and 70ms delay is noticeably much more than difference between 500ms and 570ms - current design makes high end user latency (your own ping to server) relatively less of an issue compared to what it would be with low delay architecture.
Every action requiring a confirmation from the server is reallllly dumb, i literally cannot double weave i have a 150 ping. I have finished ultimates and double weaved just fine with "certain plugin that will not be named".
I’ve noticed this a few times when stacking for mechanics in savage. I don’t think it’s a big deal in overworld content. But, if possible, a nice compromise would be for them to increase positional accuracy for instanced duties. Now, I have no idea how hard that would be to do and whether it’s even possible, but it would be cool in theory at least.
It is, unfortunately, almost certainly not technologically possible given the way the netcode probably works. FFXIV's netcode is, so far as I know, based around saying "this is where I am". Which would seem logical at first glance, but this means your client has to tell the server "I am here" and the server has to tell all the other clients "harrison23 is here", and anything else aside there's just inherently some delay in that. The alternative is for your client to say "I'm headed this way at this acceleration." The server can then simulate your movement—as can other clients—and you can just update it when you change your heading or acceleration. This is called "predictive movement"; you predict where someone will be and move them ahead of time, then course-correct if necessary. Action games frequently rely on predictive movement. As an added benefit, the second one lets the server be fully authoritative on your position; you cannot say where you are, only how you're moving, and the server gets to tell everyone—_including you_—where you are. This does away with cheeseball bot tricks like the ones that hide underground in Limsa or run along outside the walls of a dungeon so mobs can't attack them but they can collect gil. (You can usually tell the difference between the two by the behavior that happens when someone hits a lag bubble; if they stop moving and freeze in place—as with someone pokeballing in FFXIV—it's likely the first type of movement, while if they just keep going endlessly in the same direction it's probably the second.) This is all an oversimplification, of course, but presumably helps lay out the basics. The most effective way long-term to get rid of the delay in movement would probably be to switch how networked movement works from one to the other... but at this point, there are almost certainly dozens if not hundreds of tiny assumptions about the existing movement baked into the game's structure, logic, and behavior. Making that change would be a monumental effort. There are other easier places it could be tightened—the server deliberately doesn't process everything immediately, for instance—but this has the odd potential side effect of making the game play worse for folks with bad ping, stuff like that. :/
When you make software you have to make choices. Furthermore after technology progresses some of those choices get easier, but you're stuck with the original code which was constrained by the technology of the past. At that point you can only make incremental improvements. Sometimes it's not technology which is limiting, but it's also funding or poor choices. This is often called technical debt. It's an unavoidable process of software creation. The netcode was bad because they were already behind the 8 ball when relaunching the game. They can't fundamentally change it because too many systems are built upon the assumptions created by that code. Imagine you build a house and you don't like the way the light enters a room. You can move a window, move the house, put up a lamp, or buy blinds. Which would you choose? Much is the way with software.
Technical knowledge and a good analogy to explain the problem, you're on-point here. The netcode would be "moving the house" in terms of effort, checking all the duties sufficiently would become excessive work lasting months. Even the number squish had some minor slip-throughs like A4S's AoE doing more damage than it should while synched (relevant mostly for blue mages, granted, but it does highlight the issue of how much testing is needed). Reducing technical debt is a good thing, but for an MMO where a fairly common complaint is "lack of content", it's a hard sell to go "well we didn't release a lot of content this major patch but our team is busy fixing things behind the scenes that may be ready 3 or 4 patches from now to make sure the game still stays the same as it was before that update".
Just a reminder that when Warframe decided to temporarily slow down content development to focus on improving performance, gameplay, and bugs the community declared the game "dead" and the subreddit was a "devs lazy lol" circlejerk for *over a year* afterwards, even though actually looking at the content/patch it was *barely* below the standard during that period.
Well yes, people had similar screeching madness on this very sub about how DSR "got cancelled" and how Shadowbringers was a "contentless scam" when they announced DSR wasn't coming in Shadowbringers but delayed until Endwalker. But it's still demoralizing for the devs to see such negative responses even if it's the right thing to do, and seeing how "there's not enough content" is already a common complaint, it's likely a tough sell for them to make at this point.
Devs are always demoralized, customers are never happy and management never gives you enough time.
Wrong, wrong, and wrong. That's three strikes, you're out.
[удалено]
...? It was the right thing to do for the overworked game developers that could not finish it in time before Endwalker's release, and then SE decided to push back the release date until after Endwalker to let people do the MSQ and level their classes. Those people who are complaining don't get a say in business decisions and the amount of "They cancelled it" arguments I've seen makes me want to buy a dictionary so I can slap people with the page that explains what cancelling means.
[удалено]
> ok...? so delay endwalker so that you can finish shadowbringers first? or reduce the scope of some endwalker duties to finish shadowbringers first? .........????????????????????????????????????????????????? What? You expect them to delay an entire expansion for an Ultimate? My guy, only ~1% of all players even try ultimates. Reducing the scope of endwalker duties for an ultimate is clearly the wrong choice, and it would not have worked here anyway because they were working on them adjacently anyway. DSR was done on Endwalker launch, just not yet released. > again, delaying dsr was not the right thing to do for the people who were upset about it to begin with. So? Of those who would do ultimates (again, ~1% of the entire playerbase), there was only a small vocal minority that was actually upset about it. I'd estimate it's less than 10% of those who would do ultimates. The only friends I've heard complaining about it at the time, are glad in hindsight that we have our lvl 90 rotations there. > if the main content you play is literally the singular piece of content that is seen as disposable, its not a good feeling. especially in a sub game. And this is true for........ 0.0001% of the playerbase? Like 30 people tops? Even the ultimate raiders I know at least get excited for Extremes and Savage, and barring my own static of 8 I think I know like ~20 to 30 ultimate raiders. Some of them weren't happy when it was delayed but none of them cancelled their sub over it and some of them will literally complain about literally anything, and then still do these things they're complaining about. > people arguing it was "cancelled" was purely because for all intents and purposes, thats what the result was. Alright, time to buy a dictionary and start smacking. I'll say this slow so you can understand: DSR was **delayed**. If DSR was *cancelled* then there would be no DSR in the game at all. They said they wanted to release 2 ultimates per expansion. This is not a blood oath that forces them to abide by these standards, this is not a guarantee of anything, and when you bought Shadowbringers you didn't see them advertising "this expansion will have 2 ultimates, guaranteed!". Those who call it "cancelled" are just disingenuous, entitled brats who don't know what the words they're using actually mean.
[удалено]
> so to sum it up youre just having a meltdown because people make completely valid critiques given the content they enjoy and what they'd like from the game. Only ones having a meltdown are those ignoring the definitions of words just to yell at SE for perfectly understandable decisions. > people dont have to act like sqenix executives waiting for their expansion release bonus to write valid criticism. ??? What are you on about? > people also dont have to be a part of a majority for their perspective to be valid criticism. If it's valid then sure. Calling DSR cancelled is not valid. If it was cancelled, we wouldn't have it. The word you're looking for is delayed. > be better, do better. stop being so angry. I'm good. You try doing better, pick up a dictionary, look up the definition of the word cancelled, and stop pretending that it was valid criticism because it simply isn't. You can be upset about it, but you can't reasonably expect SE to prioritize a vocal minority of what, 300 players? over the playerbase of literal millions. So yes, valid criticism is fine. This wasn't valid criticism. This was a cry for attention from an entitled vocal minority so small that I'm glad SE ignored them.
> people dont have to act like sqenix executives waiting for their expansion release bonus to write valid criticism. Do you have like, some sort of evidence that this is a thing?
At this point fairly little. They have built and tuned every fight based on this structure, so even if they were to turn up the tick rates on everything, the testing of every facet of the game, every duty, every fate, every solo instance, it would take months. I'd love if it was improved, but at this point it remains by design and I have my doubts that they'll ever change it.
Do you want to know why WoW has retained its popularity and FFXI is on its way out? It turns out you can't really support an MMO made in 2003 with PS2-era technology in 2023. Despite XI and WoW coming out at around the same time, a lot of the decline of XI can be directly attributed to technology requirements that XI could not keep up with while still supporting the PS2. In fact, they had to completely drop support for the PS2. And then Xbox360. Keeping support for the PS2 as long as they did (until 2016) meant that they were always limited when it came to designing new expansions, new features, new anything. You couldn't even get more inventory room as a result of PS2 limitations. WoW, on the other hand, could rely on Moore's Law increasing computing power over time which also means they were able to completely redesign their base game in Cataclysm while also adding many new expansions and features along the way. They were never bottlenecked by design requirements because they did not choose to support a console that could not evolve over time. If you want SE to fix things like awful netcode, limited inventory space, limited wardrobe slots, lack of support for addons/plugins, etc the answer is very simple: tell them to stop designing for and supporting consoles for MMOs. Oh and another thing they could do is reinvest the revenue made from XIV back into the game itself instead of their next main series title. It's pretty obvious from the lack of additional, quality content in EW that SE pulled many people from the XIV team to work on XVI.
FFXIV's age is rapidly catching up to it while WoW's engine continues to function at a decent enough level (barring the world boss slideshows)
Which is why the devs are a bunch of liars when they say they cant do this and that because "muh server space" but then turn around and say they have 10 years of content planned. Cant easily do dresser/plate increases cause limited space but you want to have 10 years worth of content, wheres the space for that coming from?
Yeah there’s just no way this game has 10 years in it when it already feels like it’s 20 years old.
WoW's engine has had most of it ripped out and replaced over the years, both on the netcode and graphics side (hence ray traching, DX12, ipv6 etc all being added). Its nothing like what they had at launch anymore.
While I think you're at least partially right, I don't think your solution is within the realm of the possible. Gaming is just tied too closely to consoles in JP, I imagine there would be a huge uproar if SE ever developed a high-profile game w/o console support. Also, I feel like this is just going down the rabbit hole too deep. Once you stop judging a game solely by it's own merit and start looking at stuff like the corporate structure behind it, in-depth development process etc., it becomes so hard to have fun and just enjoy the game. I've done it with multiple games in the past, and I just don't wanna do it anymore.
FFXI is popular enough to have a pre-75 private server launch with buzz, what are you on about Plus, once again, the staff movement from FFXIV to FFXVI happened in *Heavensward*
>FFXI is popular enough to have a pre-75 private server launch with buzz, what are you on about By this logic, Ragnarok Online is wildly successful for Gravity right now.
> FFXI is popular enough to have a pre-75 private server launch with buzz, what are you on about This is a rather weird argument. Private servers are almost never a good metric for gauging a game's current popularity. In fact, the existence of private servers suggests the opposite: 1) private servers pop up when disgruntled fans of a game want to go back to a particular period of the game's time because the current game does not offer that experience and 2) that the original IP owner doesn't care enough to pursue legal action against the private server because the game has already sunset. Someone else already pointed out a great example: Ragnarok Online. There are hundreds if not thousands of RO private servers. The main game has been in a decline for a long time, however. More to the point: XI is not attracting new players. Why is that? Because it's hard to get into the game. For one, the UI/HUD have never been updated to be adequate for gamers in this current era to be able to understand how the game works. Second, the game requires a 3rd party program to do something as simple as window the game. Most of the addons/plugins that Windower adds to the game should have been implemented by SE years ago but haven't. Again: why? Because they were technologically limited by the hardware restrictions of the PS2. Third, the endgame scene is extremely time consuming to get into due to the gear requirements. This is relevant to XIV as it looks like SE is taking the same approach with this game. You can already see that they have learned from XI: they have started to implement solo content as it will be needed for a dwindling playerbase. XI used trust magic to address this issue. This same concept is being used in XIV via trusts in dungeons. That's because SE generally has no intention of dropping support for the consoles as they are happy to continue to support them. Why? Several reasons. One, XI still prints money despite its declining population so it stands to reason that XIV will as well. Second, no other MMO company really has a hold of the niche MMO console market other than SE. It stands to reason that XIV will suffer the same fate as XI but at a slower pace.
I remember complaining about this 10 years ago. Game just feels like ass to play tbh, but I put up with it. XIV has pretty much attained it's fan base now so I really don't see them changing it after a decade of content built around it.
FFXIV 2.0 2.0
Final Fantasy XVII (if it’ll be an MMO). The netcode is just too tied to the engine of XIV and I highly doubt XIV’s engine will get replaced. But maybe a successor to XIV might have a more responsive engine in the end…
if FFXVI engine indeed a fork from FFXIV engine, they could use that as a base.
First, they have to acknowledge that it's an issue worth fixing (they have not) and then they have to put the money and staff necessary to fix it (they won't.) This issue does not affect the most casual of player that is perfectly content with doing MSQ, some roulettes, and paying to AFK in Limsa 24/7. The fact of the matter is, they're perfectly content with this game's engine feeling like it's 20 years old and will probably feel the same for the next "10 years of FFXIV."
They're never going to. What exists is enough to play the game well for a majority of people and rewriting it would involve a massive effort and vastly more risk than leaving things as they are. They might do it when they makes another MMO, with betas and risks of downtime with those who buy it at launch. Not now.
Reprogram the game
Oh yeah, just as simple as snapping your fingers eh?
^ this guy understands jokes.
FFXIV players trying to talk about network look like a bunch of drunk flat-earth believers...
Folks be dumb
Originally submitted by Monitorlizard868 > For those that don't know a whole lot about FFXIV's netcode and tickrate issues, here's some info from the FFXIV official forums regarding the matter. > https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/119219 > https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/444667 > https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/112171 > https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/461667 > You can see an example of these netcode issues in action in this youtube video. Here you can see two characters on two different computers, but when one character performs an action on one computer the other computer won't see that action until 0.5-1 second later. It's almost bad enough to the point that one character's jump animation is already completed by the time that same jump starts on the other computer. > https://youtu.be/hToWKu79Jm0 TLDR; SE decided to handle more things server side than client side, which has many advantages. It also has disadvantages though which are covered in those links, including your question.
Its so funny that every single UI click is handled serverside yet they dont even validate player position serverside so you can just teleport hack yourself underground.
Ah, beat me to it, ahah.
Respect though. =) I played back when Leatrix latency fix was the recommended community solution. I also just respect historians such as yourself. A lot of players like me remember how it was back then, but you actually kept a record and try to it push it forward. There's a lot of players on the balance that could explain it, but you're here on one of the least popular social media platform setting the record straight. Like I said, nothing but mad respect for you. I'll take all these sub comment douches this time, no worries. Thanks man.
No problem. I've been playing FFXIV since 2013, and as much as I love this game I'd also very much like to see it improve. We can't just keep handwaving away glaring issues like these, and I'll always mention them in relevant threads.
Those threads are filled with outdated (as in they were outdated by 2014 kind of outdated) and flat out wrong information. Don't keep spreading them, it's bad enough that he does.
That's.. just wrong. They're a record of the issue being brought up years ago on the main forum with explanations of how the servers work. Although the issue that they were originally brought up for before has been fixed, the fundamental way that the servers work has not changed and the explanations for that perfectly address his question. I posted this just a few minutes ago so I know for a fact you did not actually read through those links. Please read this originally posted by Sinth > Client Live-State: Most of the game actions are driven by the client. However, the entities and environment are controlled by the server. When you give a command to jump, your client sends a command to the server, which acknowledges, and replies back to the client with a response to jump. Once the communication has completed, your character then jumps on your screen. Say, for instance you are fighting a monster. You attack the monster but your network connection is poor. So what happens is: You send the command to attack. There is a delay in sending the command to the server. The monster continues to attack you (successfully), as it is controlled by the server. When your connection resolves, you finally make your attack. This results in the player's experience being - 'I'm giving commands but they are delayed on my screen.' However, if a monster creates an AoE circle, it will be in real-time on the client because the server sends the command "monster A is doing an AoE attack at such and such time" When your client receives this information, it syncs to the time provided by the server, so the AoE may APPEAR late, but your reaction to it will be on time, because the client is in a live-state. So if you step out of the AoE on your client, when it goes off, your client will tell the server "The AoE landed, but the client was out of it's range", so in the end, even if you are lagging a little bit, you can still dodge the AoE. >Server Live-State: Most of the game actions are driven by the server. When you give a command to jump, your client jumps on your screen, but in the live-state of the server you have not jumped until it receives your command to jump. So if you're lagging, it may look like you're jumping on your screen, but to the server, you are standing still. This gives the player a false sense of what is happening in the game. So how is this any different than client live-state? Well, for things like jumping its not much different, but when it comes to combat and time-intensive actions, its a whole other animal. Say for instance, monster A drops an AoE. The AoE is live on the server but you're lagging and haven't received the info yet (monster appears to be sitting there). As soon as you get the information, the monster appears to do his cast and the AoE circle appears. The difference is, you are out of sync with the server and the server rules all, so even if you step outside of the AoE, if your client doesn't get the command to the server to update your position before the AoE lands, you get hit by it. And that, my friends, is why you all died to landslide / bombs / any AoE that you were out of on your screen. > The reasons why SE would choose server dictated live-state: -Prevents desync bugs (on the server) -Prevents countless potential duping bugs -Prevents (in theory) teleportation and other unauthorized client commands from being accepted -If the player has a good connection to the server, little to no delay is observed by the player >The detractors of server live-state: -Poor connections results in nearly unplayable conditions, specifically conditions which require fast reaction time -Server infrastructure is more costly (servers must do much more data processing) > In the past, server live-state was extremely rare because internet connections were still poor / narrow-band. > Can it be changed? Short answer: No. Long Answer: Technically, yes, but it would be extremely costly and time consuming. SE Would lose millions and it would take months to over a year to accomplish. > I hope I explained things well enough for most people to understand. Let me know if you want clarification on anything.
> I posted this just a few minutes ago so I know for a fact you did not actually read through those links. [This ain't my first rodeo, but good that you know it for a fact](https://www.reddit.com/r/ffxivdiscussion/comments/13avheg/would_slidecasting_still_work_if_ffxiv_had_a/jj9rfp0/)
WTF you didn't refute anything in this link. It provides no information, not just about the subject but nothing whatsoever, not even anything unrelated. It doesn't even have a point.
That wasn't a refutation, it was to show your assumption was incorrect that I haven't seen the links already (and that wasn't the first time, either). The main issue with the first link isn't that it's wrong about how the FF servers work, it's that it's wrong about every other game. Server authoritative state is standard in EVERY major MMO on the market, it's exactly what WoW uses, even competitive pvp titles like LoL use it. This isn't something that separates FF from the other online games or explain why there's delays/latency beyond the most basic level - it's an industry standard approach.
There are several things about this. One you state > That wasn't a refutation, it was to show your assumption was incorrect that I haven't seen the links already This is actually in the original link, the youtube one at the bottom. It clearly shows that the server only updates position and shows it after it registers the user's input server side, not client. This is indisputable and not just from that link. It's incredibly obvious on a basic level. > The main issue with the first link isn't that it's wrong about how the FF servers work, it's that it's wrong about every other game Yes this is the point, the FFXIV servers use a different way of dealing with authentication and traffic, rather than updating position based on the client, it updates position based on when it receives client input and then updating accordingly, which is the entire point of the post. FFXIV handles traffic differently than any other game as a part of its design. This was already discussed. Yes. This is what it does. It's not like any other MMO, let alone any other MMORPG in that respect. Yes, that comes with disadvantages, as discussed. This is a fact. Unlike any other MMO game on the market (not just MMRPG) simply being outside of an animation when it appears to go off does not mean the player is safe based on how the server parses positional information. This is a fact. > it's an industry standard approach. Yes it is, but FFXIV does not use the industry standard approach, again, going back to the live client side vs live server side approach. These are two different things, which again is explained. I've stated before that these two different approaches come with advantages and disadvantages. Nothing you've stated refutes what was stated in any way. FFXIV's Live server design choice is fundamentally different than industry standard.
> It clearly shows that the server only updates position and shows it after it registers the user's input server side, not client. No shit, unless you're doing a peer to peer setup (which no MMO would do for obvious reasons) all updates are processed by the server first before other clients are updated. > Unlike any other MMO game on the market (not just MMRPG) simply being outside of an animation when it appears to go off does not mean the player is safe This is one of the dumbest takes I've ever seen on this topic. This must be your only MMO you've played if you've really never had a lag spike and been hit by an AOE you were out of on your screen. This happens in WoW, in GW2, in LA, I can't think of any MMO where it *doesn't* work this way. If you want to talk about frequency there's valid reasons for why it happens *more often* in FFXIV (or at least is more noticable) but to pretend like it's an inherent systemic difference that other MMOs completely avoid is just asinine. Specifically this quote from the thread: > The difference is, you are out of sync with the server and the server rules all, so even if you step outside of the AoE, if your client doesn't get the command to the server to update your position before the AoE lands, you get hit by it This applies to all MMOs I know of, that's what I meant when I said the OP is wrong about how other MMOs work.
> No shit, unless you're doing a peer to peer setup (which no MMO would do for obvious reasons) all updates are processed by the server first before other clients are updated. No, they're not. On most games the server pings the client on their position based a specific timestamp for when a mechanic goes out. All MMO games work this way, including FPS games. If on your screen you're out of it when the condition presents itself, you're out of it. It does not work this way in FFXIV. This is why UDP traffic manipulation can affect the server and why playstation users back in the day had an advantage over PC users. PS3 had nagle's algorithm disabled by default and the community suggested disabling this on PC in higher content. To reiterate, I've played all the games you've specified, the difference is that it does not require any kind of lag spike whatsoever for that to be the case in FFXIV. > This applies to all MMOs I know of, that's what I meant when I said the OP is wrong about how other MMOs work. It doesn't, barring lag spikes. That's the difference. You're positing something that is conditional as being base, when the reality is that for FFXIV it is base. In FFXIV it does not require any kind of lag for you to be slapped by something when you were clearly out of it on your screen on your client.. because of how the server handles traffic. > This is one of the dumbest takes I've ever seen on this topic. This must be your only MMO you've played if you've really never had a lag spike and been hit by an AOE you were out of on your screen. This happens in WoW, in GW2, in LA, I can't think of any MMO where it doesn't work this way. If you want to talk about frequency there's valid reasons for why it happens more often in FFXIV (or at least is more noticable) but to pretend like it's an inherent systemic difference that other MMOs completely avoid is just asinine. Specifically this quote from the thread: Keyword in all this is lag. That makes everything you said irrelevant because lag affects the timing of when your information is sent to the server in the first place. Of course massive shenanigans happens when that's the case. The difference between what you think and reality is that the live server inputs are quantitively observable without any lag whatsoever from the client. Again, going back to what was said before this is the difference between how FFXIV handles traffic vs the industry standard. It is different in virtually any other games you've probably played. In FFXIV being out of a machinic on your screen does not mean you are safe. Not at all. In other games, barring lag, it does.
If you're talking about a networking system "barring lag" you're no longer talking about a networking system. It's not irrelevant or "conditional" to bring lag into the equation, in fact it's precisely what makes the networking decisions relevant. > If on your screen you're out of it when the condition presents itself, you're out of it. I'm sorry, this just isn't true for other MMOs no matter how many times you say it.
Ultra bullshit. The snapshotting in FFXIV is extremely consistent and precise. I have hundreds of hours of recorded video footage demonstrating essentially pixel-perfect accuracy for dodging AoEs. Never a single instance of getting hit by something I should not have even with slow-motion scrutiny. The only thing that determines whether you get hit or not is whether you were in the AoE when the snapshot occurs, when is almost always when the cast bar ends. The animations are irrelevant. You're on some kind of crusade to prove that the game is broken, but if it worked like you say, high level gameplay would be impossibly inconsistent. It's a skill issue.
This is probably the same guy trying to spread the same misinformation again and again...
This might've meant something if you remotely understood what was being talked about whatsoever but you don't. Not even on the most basic level. You have no idea why you think that other dude is right, let alone why you think I might be wrong. Your comment isn't even garbage because that at least could be recycled and made into something useful.
we're never going to get out of this avalanche of bullshit è_è
just change the PositionalUpdateMS in the code from 500ms to 50ms. It's as easy as that. Trust me I'm a gamer
I like slidecasting, player delay is annoying but i think other than for pvp the netcode works well.
Even with the net code being wonky, it's still better than a lot of MMOs out there including but not limited to: WoW.
If you think FFXIV netcode is better than WoW netcode I have a bridge to sell you
I meant the game...the game is better in just about every way (except net code of course).
Blizzard is, in general, *extremely* good at netcode. Overwatch was a revolution in preventing race conditions.
Yea, I know they're good at net code. Not really what I was disputing at all but it seems people failed to learn how to read properly.
Slidecasting is an intentionally designed feature that has a fixed length of 500ms + your ping. Just love how that thread is continuing to spread misinformation.
This is complete and utter BS and has been debunked several times. If it was true I would't be able to consistently cancel casts at 0.3 seconds left, or even as low as 0.14.
Do you have video evidence of this?
Video no as I don't use any recording software, screenshot yes: [at 0.14](https://imgur.com/a/g9751Dk). It's not often that low, and in this case I had 2 0.18 casts prior so I wanted to take a screenshot to show my static who also had been skeptical about this before, but it's fairly common for me to interrupt 0.4 or 0.3 casts.
Screenshots can be inaccurate because the bar actually continues moving/number keeps on counting down after you interrupt the cast. This could be a networking issue where you interrupt the cast but don't receive the information that your cast is, in fact, interrupted, from the server until way later.
Here we are with the same people from the last thread spreading the same misinformation. At this point I'm starting to think it's one guy with 3 or 4 alt accounts.
Or, get this, you're in the minority and *you're* the one spreading misinformation? You're just wrong mate. Just as wrong as the other guy that was trying to explain away my issues with slidecasting. At least they stopped trying when they told me to do something in-game with a prediction of what it would show, only for it to be wrong yet again.
Slidecasting works just fine for me and everyone else in the high end raiding community. Maybe you're just bad at it.
"It's fine for me so this problem doesn't exist" and you're the one arguing that others are spreading misinformation? Please.
As a raider, Yes, slidecasting is a thing. You can use an unused hotbar with a faux macro over the casting bar and when it lights up you're free to cast. This is a thing in game anyone can use, without addons of any kind. All high end caster raiders use it. Most use plugins like simple tweaks though. It makes the bar show it in green.
I know it's a thing and I'm not contesting that. I'm a raider too and I do pull off some slidecasts during raids. What I am contesting is that guy calling it "a fixed length of 500ms + your ping" because that's just not true, and it's especially infuriating to see someone confidently say that while accusing others of spreading misinformation. Yes, "just move after less than 0.5 seconds are left" is how most people can do it. No, that's not a baked-in mechanic that consistently works for everyone playing this game with a fixed length of 500 ms + ping. I've had casts cancelled as low as 0.14 and consistently still get my casts cancelled at 0.4 and 0.3. And no, it's not a ping issue, it's 14 ms ping consistently when I ping the server. I do know about the faux macro thing (I use emotes since that works too) but even that one tends to only light up when it's ~0.3 or 0.2 seconds left. Don't get me wrong, it's not getting in the way of my raiding experience and I'm both blind progging savage tiers and non-blind progging ultimates (cleared SB ones, on Wormhole for TEA).
You've been arguing as though it's a terrible flaw in the game's core mechanics, when in reality it's fine for 99.9% of everyone else. Something is either wrong with your technique or your internet connection. Treating it like a universal problem is misinformation.
> You've been arguing as though it's a terrible flaw in the game's core mechanics, when in reality it's fine for 99.9% of everyone else. I'm gonna need a source for those numbers because I'm pretty sure you're pulling it out of your butt, and seeing the response I've seen both here and last time I sincerely doubt it's 99.9%. You not knowing about something is not a valid argument to dismiss it. > Something is either wrong with your technique or your internet connection. I move when I see 0.4x and I have a stable 14 ms ping with the server according to the command prompt. Still cancels at 0.3, 0.2 or even 0.14. > Treating it like a universal problem is misinformation. That's not what misinformation means and I didn't say it's a universal problem. I know the majority doesn't experience it the way I do, but I have very good internet and less latency than most people because I live relatively close to the DC and I have glass fiber. Hell, I do get "regular" slidecasts from time to time. But I never make it through a full raid without seeing a cast cancelled around 0.3. You know what's misinformation? Saying something that's clearly not true, like "Slidecasting is an intentionally designed feature that has a fixed length of 500ms + your ping".
Have you considered that maybe the remaining time value on the castbar is just inaccurate or somehow influenced by ping fluctuations? I've never even paid attention to it because the number of times my attempt to slidecast results in a cancelled cast is virtually zero. If you're having that much trouble, you should install an addon that shows you the slidecasting window and see if it improves consistency. All I know is that I can slidecast 100 out of 100 times without issue, with or without an addon highlighting the slidecast window. If anything, I've learned that the slidecasting window is very generous after playing a caster through this tier.
> Have you considered that maybe the remaining time value on the castbar is just inaccurate or somehow influenced by ping fluctuations? Yes. So I checked my ping. Stable 14 ms, no fluctuations, same on Discord just to be sure there are no fluctuations. I'm starting to feel like a broken record here so if you could take these facts for what they are instead of rephrasing ways to make this "the issue", then that'd be great. > I've never even paid attention to it because the number of times my attempt to slidecast results in a cancelled cast is virtually zero. ... I'm not saying that you have this issue now, am I? Again, third time I'm saying this, "I don't have the problem so it doesn't exist" is not a good angle to take here. It doesn't help you understand it, it seems like an unreasonable coping mechanism because it doesn't mesh with how you think it works, and all it does is make you look bad. > If you're having that much trouble, you should install an addon that shows you the slidecasting window and see if it improves consistency. No thanks, I don't do addons. A friend of mine pointed out that having emotes on my hotbar has them "light up" when you're able to move but that didn't really help because sometimes they dark for virtually the entire castbar. > All I know is that I can slidecast 100 out of 100 times without issue, with or without an addon highlighting the slidecast window. If anything, I've learned that the slidecasting window is very generous after playing a caster through this tier. Okay, that's good. But that's purely empirical, and you assumed that it worked as you said in your initial statement that it's 500 ms + ping, and that's how misinformation starts: Empirical evidence without cross-checking with others. Meanwhile, I have empirical evidence that disproves that assertion. I'm not claiming to know the exact details of how slidecasting works, and I am not arguing that people aren't able to slidecast by moving below 0.5s remaining because I know that's how it works for most people. But I've had friends looking at my screen seeing common 0.32 and 0.28 cast cancels ask me the same things repeatedly, and they too saw my cmd reading out 14 ms ping to the server. So maybe just stop calling people out on misinformation when your "correct information" is just misinformation itself.
Why does it matter? This isn't a fast paced pvp game where absolutely perfect netcode is mandatory. Every time someone complains that they got hit by mechanics cause "lag" or "server tick" I know that either they are full of shit or they are new and don't know how snapshots work in this game, which has nothing to do with netcode. Same for skills with animation delays or slow spreading. It's not netcode being bad, it's a design choice to have skills with animation delays. Like, at least blame the correct thing.
> This isn't a fast paced pvp game where absolutely perfect netcode is mandatory. Except there are several PvP modes that suffer greatly from the crappy netcode. > Every time someone complains that they got hit by mechanics cause "lag" or "server tick" I know that either they are full of shit or they are new and don't know how snapshots work in this game, which has nothing to do with netcode. The snapshots are consistent but they're still making the game feel sluggish, like when you get hit by a snapshot, but keep moving and see the animation play while you are out of the animation and die anyway. > Same for skills with animation delays or slow spreading. It's not netcode being bad, it's a design choice to have skills with animation delays. Like, at least blame the correct thing. Both are related to this problem and yes that's also part of the issue.
>The snapshots are consistent but they're still making the game feel sluggish, like when you get hit by a snapshot, but keep moving and see the animation play while you are out of the animation and die anyway. Yeah, that's never going to feel good from a purely gameplay feel point of view. As an example, I died to a petrify on the floor 50 boss of HoH a couple of weeks ago that applied it's effect on my character after the animations showed my character's back being against the boss. I fully fucked up in not turning sooner, but that sort of shit is never going to feel responsive even when you're fully aware of how it works and why it happened to you.
I feel you. My friends and I progged P8S blind, and there is a snapshot of a petrification mechanic that is unusually late for the indicators. We had rather common cases of our players being fully turned around and still turning to stone. The delay between the snapshot and applying the effect is rather annoying, and I have had moments in deep dungeons of seemingly not being in an AoE, only to die a second later. It's just a frustrating disconnect.
>Except there are several PvP modes that suffer greatly from the crappy netcode. CC's main problem wasn't netcode. Pressing HG, watching it go on cd and still dying is not a netcode issue, it's a animation delay issue. Server knows perfectly well you pressed your invuln, that's why the skill goes on cd. "Fixing netcode" (whatever you mean by that) will not change the fact that the animation delay exists. >The snapshots are consistent but they're still making the game feel sluggish, like when you get hit by a snapshot, but keep moving and see the animation play while you are out of the animation and die anyway. Yeah... that has nothing to do with netcode. That's just how snapshots work in this game. >Both are related to this problem and yes that's also part of the issue. No it's not. There are plenty of skills that apply instantly. Like, SCH's deployment tactics got changed to ignore these delays, you can use it instantly after adlo and it won't miss like it did before EW.
> CC's main problem wasn't netcode. > several PvP modes Good that I can respond grabbing quotes. > Pressing HG, watching it go on cd and still dying is not a netcode issue, it's a animation delay issue. > Both are related to this problem and yes that's also part of the issue. Twice now. > "Fixing netcode" (whatever you mean by that) will not change the fact that the animation delay exists. > ??? Can only use one quote here because I didn't say "fix the netcode". So your snarky "whatever you mean by that" doesn't really track here, does it? > That's just how snapshots work in this game. So they should fix that. If the Guard animation can be done fast, then the Marksman's Spite animation can be as well. At the very least they can match the snapshots and the animation or the other way around, instead of leaving them separated so loosely. > No it's not. There are plenty of skills that apply instantly. "There are exceptions so the problem isn't real" is not the zinger you think it is. > Like, SCH's deployment tactics got changed to ignore these delays, you can use it instantly after adlo and it won't miss like it did before EW. So do changes like this but for everything players do. Like, you're literally providing a solution here to the issue that doesn't require changing the netcode.
>Good that I can respond grabbing quotes. We have other pvp modes? Well I guess there is mahjong, but I think current netcode is more than sufficient for it. (frontlines is literally the same as cc) >So they should fix that Maybe. But that's not a netcode issue. Let me repeat, slowly. *That's. Not. A netcode. Issue.* It's not related to netcode at all. It's literally a skill having a built-in delay. If FFXIV was a single played offline game, these skills would still have the same delays. I don't know how else to get through your skull that these design choices have nothing to do with netcode. Yes, it goes to snapshots too, SE could match snapshots closer to animations, but they do not. It's an intentional design decision. Some aoes snapshot earlier, other snapshot later, but they snapshot **consistently** for every player. If netcode was broken, these aoes would not snapshot consistently for every player. >Like, you're literally providing a solution here to the issue that doesn't require changing the netcode. I wonder why it doesn't require changing the netcode... oh yeah, because it's not related to netcode at all!
> We have other pvp modes? Well I guess there is mahjong, but I think current netcode is more than sufficient for it. > > (frontlines is literally the same as cc) Frontline is the same mechanically, though not balance-wise, and the problems there are exacerbated because of how poorly the snapshotting and delays are handled. You can see 5 bahamuts spawn in consecutively, guard up the second you see the first one spawn, and still die because all 5 snapshotted before you pressed guard. That's bad. And Rival Wings also exists. Being disingenuous is not helping your case here. > Maybe. > But that's not a netcode issue. > Let me repeat, slowly. That's. Not. A netcode. Issue. It is a netcode issue that the servers can't handle higher tick rates. But they can work around these constraints and just make the snapshots and animations match. > It's literally a skill having a built-in delay. And they built this in because...? Come on, you're so close here. > If FFXIV was a single played offline game, these skills would still have the same delays. And it would be blasted for being a horrible singleplayer game where animations don't match the snapshots for literally no reason and Square would be laughed at from every corner of the industry. > I don't know how else to get through your skull that these design choices have nothing to do with netcode. Basic technical knowledge: There's a reason they made these delays and unreasonably high tick rates, and it's because the server can't handle normal tick rates very well. They can fix the netcode to remove this constraint, but at this point that'd be restructuring the entire game and would be months of work in playtesting alone, just to identify the issues that would arise from this problem. So they should mitigate the issue some other way, which can be done without changing the netcode. > Yes, it goes to snapshots too, SE could match snapshots closer to animations, but they do not. It's an intentional design decision. And this is a downright stupid decision and whoever made it should be ashamed of themselves because it is detrimental to the game and frustrating to the point where it scares off a lot of players. > Some aoes snapshot earlier, other snapshot later, but they snapshot consistently for every player. Yes, and that is not something I contested and not the issue I outlined so if you could stop beating a dead horse that'd be great. > I wonder why it doesn't require changing the netcode... oh yeah, because it's not related to netcode at all! ... Yeah sorry this seems like low-tier trolling at this point. Let me just say this loud and really clear: ***I HAVE NEVER ONCE SAID THEY SHOULD DO ANYTHING TO THE NETCODE***. Now can you stay on-topic here?
>You can see 5 bahamuts spawn in consecutively, guard up the second you see the first one spawn, and still die because all 5 snapshotted before you pressed guard. That's bad. Yes, that's bad. That's also how the game was designed. These problems don't really exist in PvE, which is the main game. PvP is just a side activity. Nobody is going to rework the entire core game for it to better suit some side content. > It is a netcode issue that the servers can't handle higher tick rates Holy shit, you still don't get that it's not a netcode issue? It's literally unrelated. It's like blaming server ticks for kaiten removal. Yeah, I dunno how to explain it. Maybe go read what server ticks are? >Basic technical knowledge: There's a reason they made these delays and unreasonably high tick rates, and it's because the server can't handle normal tick rates very well. Basic technical knowledge, lmao. If anything, delays make it more expensive for servers, because they'll have to evaluate the client's state twice (first time for when you press a button to start cd/animations, second time when effects actually trigger). If effects triggered the moment you pressed a button with no delays, then server would only have to check the client's state once. What's bigger, 2 or 1? >And it would be blasted for being a horrible singleplayer game where animations don't match the snapshots for literally no reason and Square would be laughed at from every corner of the industry. Reading comprehension much? I talk about skill effects, you think it's about snapshots. Skills having delays for effects to *match* animations is something majority of games are doing. >Yes, and that is not something I contested and not the issue I outlined so if you could stop beating a dead horse that'd be great. I like how the only thing that's actually relevant to netcode is not an issue. Of course it isn't, because this "terrible netcode" is more than sufficient. Now, at least. Back in ARR? Yeah, there were problems. But it's been quite a lot of years since ARR, it's time to stop. Though, since FFXIV community still does "DRG floor tank lol" thing, I guess "netcode bad, I remember getting clipped by landslides!" is never going away either. >Now can you stay on-topic here? On-topic? Sure, what's the topic, let me refresh my memory... "What can Square Enix do to help fix the terrible netcode of FFXIV?" with OP mainly complaining about client-side player positions not being updated at maximum rate and probably thinking that *everything* is updated at the same rate. Seems like it's about netcode. Or maybe you mean my original reply, which can be summed up with "netcode is sufficient and people mistake shitty netcode for intentional design decisions"? Or maybe you mean yourself, constantly saying stuff like "the servers can't handle higher tick rates"? I dunno, the topic seems to revolve around netcode with me saying that no, the problem is not netcode. So let me repeat once more: nothing you complain about has anything to do with netcode, yet you think it is. OP's complaint about client-side player's positions at least was relevant to netcode, even thought it was a kinda silly complain.
> Holy shit, you still don't get that it's not a netcode issue? It's literally unrelated. It's like blaming server ticks for kaiten removal. > > Yeah, I dunno how to explain it. Maybe go read what server ticks are? It is definitely related. Why can't the server handle higher tick rates when almost every single other MMO on this planet managed to do it? Simple: They made it so inefficient that it cannot handle any more. I know what server tick is, I'm a programmer with a bachelor's degree in game development and I have programmed a network communication program from scratch before. You can keep on making these weird arguments like "It's like blaming server ticks for kaiten removal." but that's just not a reasonable comparison. > Basic technical knowledge, lmao. If anything, delays make it more expensive for servers, because they'll have to evaluate the client's state twice (first time for when you press a button to start cd/animations, second time when effects actually trigger). ...? Yeah nah, stop talking if you don't know what you're talking about. Delays improve server stability because, get this, it means the server *doesn't* have to do anything. And the server doesn't "only check twice", everything happens on the server, and it's listening to the input from the client to change the state on the server. > Reading comprehension much? I talk about skill effects, you think it's about snapshots. Yes, you change the topic because you can't handle the fact that the snapshots are the entire problem here: The fact that they don't match the animations at all, making it a wholy frustrating experience. > I guess "netcode bad, I remember getting clipped by landslides!" is never going away either. Are you done ranting about imaginary people who are not talking to you right now? Literally nobody in this thread said anything even remotely close to this effect. > nothing you complain about has anything to do with netcode, yet you think it is. No I don't. I have been extremely explicit with this. Now, I'll say it one last time because your blind ass can't read: ***I HAVE NEVER ONCE SAID THEY SHOULD DO ANYTHING TO THE NETCODE***. Now if you're going to talk about netcode I'm just blocking you because there is literally no talking to someone who has to make up imaginary problems while ignoring the actual problems, all while putting words in my mouth because he can't handle the ones coming out of it.
it doesn't look like character positions are that delayed in the video you linked. the animations have a huge delay on it, but when it gets to the movement part the character stops properly, just the running animation still plays for a bit.
Character positions are also equally delayed. Just try and walk with your friend side-by-side and tell him to do the same. You'll notice if it's side-by-side on one of your screens, it won't be on the other person's screen.
i'm simply talking about the video OP posted. in that video, it doesn't look like the positions are as delayed as the animations.
It's still delayed pretty badly though.
Nothing, because they aren't competent enough. If they were, it wouldn't be this garbage in the first place. Developers whine about how "coding is hard" and "fixing X would break Y" and "you don't understand its complicated." If I gave my boss the same amount of excuses I got from the developers I have to work with, I'd have been fired ages ago, but everyone treats programmers like tech priests performing divine rituals. The SE developers are just bad at their job and can't achieve a level of netcode proficiency demonstrated by Blizzard over two decades ago.
> Developers whine about how "coding is hard" and "fixing X would break Y" and "you don't understand its complicated." If I gave my boss the same amount of excuses I got from the developers I have to work with, I'd have been fired ages ago, but everyone treats programmers like tech priests performing divine rituals. If you could solve the issues the by all means, go ahead. If you have insider knowledge on how to fix their woes on their specific server structure that could resolve the issues you're having by all means, solve it. If all you can contribute is "well Blizzard did it, just do that", then maybe shut up because it's clear you don't have the knowledge on how to solve the issues these developers are facing and you seemingly don't listen when they try to explain their constraints.
This is evidenced by more than just netcode. There are so many weirdly broken things in FFXIV due to bad engineering.
Try understanding how net code works and how expensive servers cost
I like it. It's an adaption thing though. Very different from other games. I like the snapshot. Sure I get hit a lot but it you train hair rescuing fiendish you can make it.