Airborne server cfg's

ButchCassidy

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
Likes
2
#1
With Airborne moving to the UE3 this should mean that servers will now be setup using a airborne.ini file.

Can this be confirmed and when will we get the full info on the options.
 

rudedog

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Likes
13
#2
I'm told a server sided list is coming shortly....

However you may want to keep an eye out on one of those other sites for more info........
 
Joined
May 27, 2005
Likes
0
#3
One thing that always impressed me with the Unreal engine was the web based server admin tool, you can change map, make up rotations on the fly, kick/ban players (by pid), switch maps, all from a very nice well thought out web based control panel.

I hope this carries through with MOH:A , there's no reason it shouldn't.


Does anybody know if EA plan to release new maps or game modes in patches? 6 maps really wont last very long. Hell i'll even pay for booster packs like BF2, they'd have to be bigger than 3 maps tho (i cant see them passing up that opportunity).
 
Last edited:

ButchCassidy

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
Likes
2
#4
Blackhat has confirmed there is NO webadmin feature in Airborne.

New content has been confirmed as work in progess.
Maps, Gamemodes and weapons.

How long before we see them is another issue.
 

rudedog

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Likes
13
#7
I'm told Airborne is the first FPS game released on this engine and they (EA) are learning as they go along.

My concerns are how many "features" will be patched later on and the big $100,000.00 Question is WHEN will we see these patches.


7+ gigs of uploaded data (each) to remote servers.... we better start ASAP!
 

OldDog

Administrator Emeritus
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Likes
0
Location
Essex Junction, Vermont
#8
I'm told Airborne is the first FPS game released on this engine and they (EA) are learning as they go along.

My concerns are how many "features" will be patched later on and the big $100,000.00 Question is WHEN will we see these patches.


7+ gigs of uploaded data (each) to remote servers.... we better start ASAP!
Yeah, serious stuff, although I'm going to rely on Woody to get the server files to the right place (call me lazy...;)).

The Unreal engine folks, though, would have built all that stuff in, first FPS or not, I would think. Something doesn't smell right.
 

rudedog

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Likes
13
#9
I could see it it was built on the wow engine but the U3 is a damn fps engine.

Only time will tell, and they say I don't want to believe them, WTH?
 

theMechanic

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2003
Likes
0
#10
Every unreal game or server i have ever installed has a builtin server.ini or a dif named file (both) to use on a server.

It stands to reason that since they fubared the dedicated server at the summit, that they were unaware of this fact. :confused:
 

ButchCassidy

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
Likes
2
#11
This goes back to my overriding question...you have to work pretty hard to take that stuff OUT of the Unreal engine...why?
No reason in this instance that I can see other than this theory.

1) Airborne dev team change engine mid-stream.

2) At that time game release slotted for Q4 2007

3) IW release news of COD4 and guess what it looks awesome and far more advanced than Airborne.

4) EA suits decide they don't want to come off 2nd to ACT and IW so move up release date.

5) Airborne devs are pushing hard on the play anywhere idea for SP.

6) Oops someone chirps up at a meeting "What about the MP" we have only 8 weeks left to release.

7) S**t hits the preverbial fan as team is re-focused on getting MP done FAST.

8) Blackhat looks in diary "Oh god I promised that summit"

9) S**t hits the preverbial fan as team is re-focused on getting MP done FAST.

10) Summit proves to be a success for the community confirming their fears after months of total silence about Airbornes MP content.
It ain't ready!!!

11) S**t hits the preverbial fan as team is re-focused on getting MP done FAST.

12) Woohoo release day BUT only 5 servers worldwide running the game as everyone else is still uploading 7gb OF THE WHOLE GAME in order to run a single 16 player server.

13..Unlucky for some) EA bosses phone Tom Hess and Patrick Gilmore "Hey fellas why is no-one playing this game online?"

14) S**t hits the preverbial fan as team is re-focused on getting MP done FAST.


Well that's my theory anyway..lol
 

Ghost-Ryder

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2003
Likes
0
#14
Good one Butch I like it :)

Back to the Admin panel.

As I stated before I have used Unreal and Unreal engine 2 for like 5 years.
There always was Remote Admin panel with the game all you needed was to set up the http://addy/admin:port and it was done.I am sure they would have to customize it a bit for MOHA but that shouln't take them long.

On the other hand it was easy to log in while playing too.You loged in via console and your Player name would change to ADMIN then used the commands to do what ever needed done.It was fairly easy to use .I hope that still works as it did with all the other Unreal engine games.

I am rusty when it comes to the Unreal engine hope it will come back fast.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

rudedog

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Likes
13
#15
Looks like we have a long road ahead of us, leaning new tricks, but I'm willing to put some time into it, I just hope EA is as willing.

Sometimes those long and winding roads are the most enjoyable. Only time will tell.
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Likes
0
Location
Shrapnet.com
#16
I'm told Airborne is the first FPS game released on this engine and they (EA) are learning as they go along.

7+ gigs of uploaded data (each) to remote servers.... we better start ASAP!
Yep, MOH:A is EA's first UT engine title, so they are creating the wheel (moving all the devs from Q3 that is).

FEAR had the 7GB problem too (although it was around 4 i think). Eventually though, they released a dedicated server that was only 250mb. I'm sure the same will happen with MOH:A down the road.
 

ButchCassidy

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
Likes
2
#18
Well the engine actually supports 64 players and Vehicles!!

And I'm kinda getting tired now of hearing certain Admins at certain sites imply we should be grateful that MP even exists and there are reasons outside of the EA's control that prevent all the things the community wanted included in the game.

Well forgive me but we didn't ask them to change Engine mid-development.
We didn't ask them to seek our advice on what should be in the game.
These were THEIR decisions not ours and they instead chose to go chasing the ultimate SP experience at the cost of developing the MP version of the game.
So what the hell do they expect a pat on the back?
And finally the truth is I simply don't believe the unspecified reasons given.
Too convenient to blame something that you can't talk about.

The truth is looking more like that EA have cut the development time and the Airborne team have simply run out of time.

Why they started so late on the MP is only a question that they can answer but it is now coming back to bite them.

Modern players want to play online ALL the figures prove it from MMRPG to BF2.
Multiplayer is no longer just an add on it's fast becoming the only reason people will buy a game.

Info on the Airborne MP was not released deliberately because they had nothing to release that was going to "Rock our World" and it sort of reminded me of how IW kept quiet about COD2's MP only for everyone to discover that it was far and away the worst MP version for the whole series.

The big companies like EA are focusing on Console and they have very valid reasons for doing so.
They are simple to build for as the specs are all identical.
They have no real fears about piracy and they have no need to provide additional support like Anti-Cheat software but the biggest reason seems to be that they can charge almost what they like for a game on console and if they hype it right the kids get parents to buy it in truckloads.

None the less the PC market has made a startling comeback over the last 24 months due mainly to the incredible power of new hardware like Dual and Quad core CPU chips and huge new mega graphics cards which are easily outstripping the console market spec wise.

Add this to the fact that outside of first world countries like Japan, USA and Western Europe.
The PC is the preferred choice of platform.
Because of the very fact it can be repaired easily and upgraded easily at relatively low cost.
With all of the new hardware many people are now are upgrading to machines that will only be matched by new consoles that are not even built yet.
And smart developers are realising this.
Grant Collier Infinity Ward for instance publicly apologised at a recent community summit to the COD community reps.
Stating that IW had not even wanted to release COD2 on PC because they felt it was not good enough but were overruled by the men in grey suits at Activision.

COD4 is being built with a huge swath of features for the PC community and IW themselves have focused on giving a massive amount of Information and Support to the PC COD community and the game is not even released.
The lessons learned the hard way by IW over their failure to support COD2's MP have resulted in a much more upfront and pro-active involvement and the rewards are being seen with a huge resurgence in COD's PC community.

I would have thought that EA would have seen the light with Pacific Assault and to a certain degree I think the intent was and maybe still is there to support Airborne.
But they need to be a lot more open about what they can actually do and what they will do instead of trying to spin their way out of a pretty big bump in the road that they have created by not implementing features that they were saying were "givens" a year ago.
 

rudedog

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Likes
13
#19
Well said, butch.

My whole issue is, I will not report on things not actually seen with my own eyes. I've been there done that and paid the price for looking like a fool. Hey if they showed me a dedicated server and said you can't talk about it right now, all things would be different. They did not and could not deliver any solid evidence after I asked over and over again before I posted my original MP review.

What I'm afraid of is that we are getting all these promises about patches and their content but for some reason they can't talk about the details.

I have to ask this, why are they working on all this content if they can't talk about it? I really hope it's not because; they don't know where to draw the line in regards to "give the customers what we promised\hyped" or "add all this to an expansion packs to sell later on". I know Blackhat does not want to talk publicly about something until he can confirm, then why talk about patches at all? You should be keeping that to yourself and from ALL sites.

Hint patches are not expansion packs you sell us, patches are free fix es for issues you missed or did not have time for during the regular dev cycle.

If Blackhat does not trust his own dev team to deliver on something they are CURRENTLY WORKING ON, then how can we trust EA for a game they want to sell us based on unspecific promises of features that MIGHT come later on - THAT THEY CAN'T TALK ABOUT???

How quickly these other sites forget what happened in the past. Hell I was promised things over and over again in the SpearHead, BreakThrough and Pacific Assault days. "We are committed this time", "It will be absolutely different from the previous game", "our devs are devoted to this expansion/game and are in it for the long haul".

Pass that through our EA decoder ring equals; "or until the big shots at EA tell us to stop". And you have the gal to say "I will never trust EA no matter what they say... Well yeah, I will only trust EA with what they deliver. Sorry guys I'm not some young kid or some big cooperate backed site who depends on your exclusives to sell more subscriptions, I'm in it solely for my members. I would have thought you knew that by now.

I really really hope Airborne gets traction out of the gate so EA actuality supports this game "this time". If not.... well you all know the history of EA and the Medal of Honor series. It will simply repeat itself all over again. But this time I have a feeling the fan boys will blame sites like mine for the downturn in support. I on the other hand will know I did the right thing and tried to help out.

Thanks for trying Blackhat and thanks for sticking by sites who reported on what they where actually shown, as well as offered you feedback. I told you exactly why the community was going to be up in arms. We all told you (FPSadmin for the server\MP side of things) what we needed for the BEST MP experience, we all believed EA changed this time, we really did!

That was until my first hands on experience with the MP side of the game.
It just happened to be totally different from what we where promised (there's that word again). That same part of the game you where so secretive about and kept asking for feedback and suggestions. I could see if we asked for outrageous things but all we asked for was the same things we've been asking for from the beginning of the Medal of Honor series, here I'll list some of them again for you.
- Working AC out of the box
- Dedicated server files
- Linux bins
- MP hooks for the modders
- Server sided rcon command list
- Server sided features including (banning, full logging, message broadcast to clients, kicking, working GUID, MOTD.......)
- Working in game browser (sort, mods, game types...... all working, yes working not like all your past in game browsers)
- Everything server sided being a var we can set
- Weapon and class restrictions
- Spectator mode
- Demo recorder
- Several levels of rcon for admin purposes
- HTTP redirect
- Auto team balance
- Mixed game type
- and the list goes on.... Note nothing over the top all basic stuff that should be included in a 2005 game
People will say we gave you that list last year. NO, we gave you that list back in the Medal of Honor, Spearhead days. IT HAS NOT CHANGED ONE BIT. We are not asking for some crazy features, we are simply asking for what should have been the standard in the past four Medal of Honor games. You say you have the old team back together, did everyone loose the memo?

I really hope we see all those (3) changes Whiskey reported on with his exclusive second hand look. Glad you can take the time to answer our questions and give us your own personal assurance's that we will see all those recommendations you asked for, seeing as I was the most vocal, as well as the most focused on what you needed to make this game a smashing MP hit.

I may sound like a whiny kid, but I'm old enough to know I report on what I actually see and not what I'm promised. I know when a publisher promises features they can't actually talk about something is just not right. If you the developers can't trust your own company then how can we, the customers trust your company?

* I removed these two sentences because some would think this is unprofessional * I'm more appalled at EA with the lack of respect they show sites, who are willing to stand up and call it like it is but offer critical feedback to help make it better, only to be shunned from the "inside".

Funny I was called an EA employee for all the criticism I voiced towards IW for Call of Duty2 and the lack of a Call of Duty 3 on the PC. I also remember specifically telling them , "at least EA listens to me when I voice my concerns in public or private" and doesn't black list me. Well at least that's how it use to be with EA.

It's funny, IW has come a long way and it shows. What I saw at the Call of Duty 4 summit was breath taking, what they promised in public, with full details mind you, they delivered on. If anything they surpassed their promises. WOW how things have changed.

Good luck EA with your product I really want to see it succeed. However if it fails out of the gate before all these patches are released, then guess what.... I think you all know what will happen, just look at the history of EA and the Medal of Honor franchise.

When EA starts trusting themselves on a game they're developing themselves, then and only then will I start trusting EA.

One of the PC community guys summed it up best - Hint it was the same comment from Pacific Assault summit/days - Loki there, history repeating itself again!. "Next time bring us (I doubt I'll be invited if this ever happens) at the beginning of the game and let us work closely with you during development, no we don't want free trips across country but a conference call or some Q/A from home (I think we the PC community has shown we can be trusted with information\bits that are not public yet) would help you actually make the best FPS game on the PC.

It always seems you like to bring us in at the last minute to show off some unpolished part of the game that misses the mark completely. Then state we don't have the time. Then bring us in earlier if you're so focused on our feedback and making a great game.

How much do you pay these so called consultants\producers? We all work for free because we have a passion for the game, we play it, we host it, we enjoy supporting it.

Jim Landi

Not so Rude
- Rudedog
 

ButchCassidy

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
Likes
2
#20
"Gulp" Well Jim you got that off your chest fella and no mistaking.

I just wish they would take all this onboard but I fear we are indeed staring at a disaster in the making unless they really up their game.

Blackhat needs to stop with the spin and get in touch with what is being asked for.

No support for Admins means No Servers it's that simple.
 
Top Bottom