Yes,but only if we can play at a decent framerate without having a NASA computer.
2 Likes
I personally think that 8km^2 is more than enough. PUBG is doing great with that map size, it may seem small, because the random zones are always forcing you to move across the map, but with a survival game, you wonāt be going everywhere like Forest Gump on cocaine. In 3.0, Russiaās size is pretty good for what it is, a large map, and as far as i know, some workshop maps managed to go up to 8km^2 themselves, which i can only imagine how big it is for Unturned. I really donāt know why everyone here thinks AT LEAST 10km^2 or even 20km^2, thatās just insane. Not to mention the amount of load times and stuff to render, but for it to be actually playable, the player count should at least go to 64, which is gonna degrade performance itself. And then you add bases and inactive buildings to the mixā¦ Iām settled for 8km^2, iāll be more than happy with that. PERSONALLY!
1 Like
Your talking as if 4.0 is going to be as unoptimized as 3.0. Where you got 10 FPS in 3.0, you will probably get 60 fps in 4.0
1 Like
Corrections is always good for me
So, a binary stuffs? lol
1 Like
Ifkr!
(10 char limit)
1 Like
Increasing the max player limits and the map would increase the ram used to run a serverā¦ that means only a few people will afford to run a big server(Nelson and a few hosting companies). There wonāt be a ton of crappy servers in the future if Unturned 4 goes bigger.
You will definitely be able to host servers with lower than maximum playercap, so small servers would still exist.
What do you mean?
Was replying to moonboy saying higher playercaps and bigger maps would keep small servers from existing
Sounds great.
91% of Unturned player doesnāt even have the server-grade parts, Such as RDIMM, and Xeon CPUs.
Basically: Quality over quantity.
Many people WILL still be able to run server that have a 30 or less player slot.
But a server owners that have a good hardwares, will be able to run a great server with a good environment, especially if they invested their money on a server hardware.(We live in Capitalism, Bois.)
Maybe, but itās a competition between server owners. Or the Survival of the fittest.
Bad servers will be banished from the community due to have a bad quality.
Good server will be able to survive and become popular, but if thereās a competitor, they need to fight against their enemies.
Nelson should make 1 8km2 and 1 10-20km2 map.
1 Like
also a map that is 260km2 only took me 4 hours to walk from start to end on arma 3. a 20km2 map will take a fraction of that.
1 Like
Look, i get it, Unreal Engine 4 is far more optimized than Unity and can handle it better, but it will be a factor, thatās what iām saying.
Plus, saying that if iām getting 10 fps in 3.0, then iāll be getting 60 fps in 4.0 is quite an exaggeration. Itās like saying that if iām getting 30 fps in Far cry 3 and iāll be getting 150 in Far Cry 5, which is not the case. Yes, it WILL be more optimized, as Nelson confirmed, but 10 to 60 isā¦ quite a statement.
1 Like
That could work, yeah, but i still think that 10-20 km^2 is quite a large map, if Unturned 4.0 is gonna keep it more acradey like 3.0 (have in mind, i donāt mean Arcadey as in "less survival, more PvP). If itās gonna go full-out DayZ hardcore in terms of survival and maybe even realism, it can go for 20. If it follows Rust, then it can go all the way to 64km^2, which is the large size for the map, 16km^2 being Medium and 4km^2 being the small. I think it was along those lines, though i still think 64km^2 is just insane.
Also, if your computer runs unturned bad press Ctrl-shift-esc and set unturneds priority higher. Or download something that increases your games running speed by disabling useless background programs.
Why are you giving me the first 2 Golden Rules of FPS boosting when i donāt have problems with running Unturned ? Iām running a 1050 with an i5-4460 and 8Gb of ram, i have no problems with running any game of recent. Iām just saying that such map sizes, even with a NASA PC cauce impacts on performance, itās an inevitable thing. I just donāt feel like Unturned needs anything beyond 8km^2, or 10, since 2km^2 isnāt a lot of a change. The 64 player cap (which imo is a must in big maps) will cause problems for servers, more than anything. And of course, the buildables those 64 players leave behind, but that can be dealt with an automatic wipe system. And iām also kind of talking from the perspective of low-spec gamers, since not even a year ago, i was sitting with an i3, 4 gigs of ram and integrated graphics, so i know the feels.
Iām just sharing concerns regarding the performance impact from large maps on both client and server sides.
If you have such a good PC, you wonāt need to worry whatsoever xd. I really donāt know why your complaining, the thing about games is that they will lower your computers performance. Weāre only suggesting larger map sizes. There will probably be still small maps and all, we just want maps to be larger to discourage pvp.
Weāre living in Capitalism, boys. Poor PC is nowhere to use.
Arma 3 is poorly optimzed and can still load big maps wih okey fps