• Ben Hur Horse Race@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      this is a server basterdization of “Good, Fast, Cheap” regarding producing just about anything I’m guessing, which tends to hold true in the real world quite well, yes?

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        As an engineer yeah, but honestly it’s usually pick one to prioritize, one to strive for, and one to ignore.

        We can get it out fast, and it can be not bad but pretty expensive or it can be pretty cheap but not good. If we get it good we can try to do it cheaply and take our time, or we can try to do it quickly and it’ll be expensive.

    • Zagorath@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      That works for some contexts, but no amount of time can get you both total reliability and low costs, so in this case it’s pick one.

      • ramble81@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        10 months ago

        In this context “fast” refers to speed of the system, not time to implement.

    • baconisaveg@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      On spec, on time, on budget. Failure to meet those goals is a result of piss poor planning.

  • 50gp@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    10 months ago

    thats a fuckton of server space, i didnt think playing on random official servers with no admins or good anti cheats would be that popular

      • LazerVHSion@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Running a passworded Palworld server on Linux. Have about 7-10 active players on it and the server instance balloons up to ~33GB of RAM usage in less than 12 hours of uptime.

        Supposedly disabling some features (like base raids) reduces resource utilization, but was curious what stock settings would do.

        When it was restricted to 10GB on a container it would just crash every couple of hours, running out of resources.

  • rab@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    Hey my boss tells me the same and I barely make six figures wtf

  • Rikj000@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    10 months ago

    Imo they should:

    • Ask money for a subscription to go online on official servers (after they ironed out a good anti cheat)
    • Keep the self hosted / dedicated servers as a free alternative
    • Hotzilla@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      No one in their right mind would deploy own servers for this kind of load. It fluctuate way too much and in half a year you have unused servers that are junk. Initial purchase price would be millions, and setup would take months.

      They are definately running in some cloud, and 500k/month is about what you would expect to host servers for a popular game like this in close to launch.

    • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      But then they’d be paying $2M a month! /s

      Tbh they probably already are, $500k/month is a lot of money. They would be able to get those costs down by hiring a few it engineers and renting a few racks at a CoLo. Geographic distribution is hard for a company of their size, though, and maybe it’s not worth making that investment if the game’s popularity isn’t going to last.

      • TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yeah the up front cost of the type of infrastructure necessary to handle the player volume they have is not only expensive, but requires a ton of expertise to be done correctly, AND requires lots individual geographically discrete locations to keep latency down.

        The fear for them would be investing in all that infrastructure just for the game to fall off in popularity after a few years.

  • sunbytes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    The thing is, I don’t need to be online.

    I bet most people are playing single player.

    Apart from the people doing multiplayer 10-20%?) everyone else could just be offline.

    This is for them.

    • lorty@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s even weirder because I’d expect even those playing with friends to be doing so in their locally hosted servers with at most 4 friends I think? The people playing on the official servers are such a minority that I can’t fathom this cost being worth it.