32 or 64 player max?

[Rujman]

Which will it be? With the hugeass warfare maps, I think a 32v32 orgy would be quite fun.

[Sublime]

I doubt 64 players would be available. Don't forget how fast-paced UT is. Large amounts of players may work on other FPSs where the pace is slower but in UT you've got people jumping around all over the place and it would feel far too crowded with that many players, even on Warfare.

In the latest PS3 Magazine it said "Epic is aiming to support 16-20 players online" although that may just be for the PS3. The PC will probably be more.

[rAt.8^].bAg]

Most people would not have a system that could handle that many players. Gameplay would slow to a crawl.

[-Sephiroth-]

64 players would be incredibly spammy, more players doesn't mean more fun.

[Ultron]

More players _can_ be fun, though. Sometimes I like carving through lots of bodies.

[Molgan]

They have said 64 players is possible if the server got the quad to handle it, and it's even possible higher numbers then that can be done. I think the Titans and Slaughter are busy already setting up the rigs for 64p action. ^^

[ProjectUT]

On Average, 12 in single player and 24 in team, is quite enough.
64 is too much and you can't really get much done in the match except for dying.

[HavokChaos]

I agree, Ive been in some larger match's and while the chaos is delicious, the ability to perform simple actions such as....walking...spawning..shooting..are usually reduced to 5 second spurts of destruction. You cant get much done when there are to many chef's in the kitchen soto speak.

On the other hand. some maps are so large, and the play count low, where you spend hours just trying to find someone to shoot at. Which in this case, im sure Epic will find a way to balance the scales.

[Slaughter]

Actually I am simply preparing for 32 player action. I don't have the server/bandwidth budget (err, make that benefactor) that Titan does.

That doesn't mean that I won't TRY 64-player for a bit just for fun.

[rAt.8^].bAg]

Sure, it is technically feasible, but what's the point? To me, having 40-50 or more players would make UT almost like an RTS - just mass your armies and have at it. It would take a lot of the individuality out of the game.

[Insidiae]

I doubt 64 players would be available. Don't forget how fast-paced UT is. Large amounts of players may work on other FPSs where the pace is slower but in UT you've got people jumping around all over the place and it would feel far too crowded with that many players, even on Warfare.

In the latest PS3 Magazine it said "Epic is aiming to support 16-20 players online" although that may just be for the PS3. The PC will probably be more.

If you ask me it all depends on how big a map is, big map means more players to me.

[Dozinator]

Good Post

I have 4ea. UT 2004 server and when UT3 comes out. I plan to make the switch.
They are AMD Optron 280 servers and with UT2004 the best match we had was 10 vs 10 ONS and that was a blast. 32 player would be OMG.

I am sure when the UT3 Demo comes out. We will begin the Test to see how far we can max out the server like my UT Bro Slaughter

[ScottUT]

In the latest PS3 Magazine it said "Epic is aiming to support 16-20 players online" although that may just be for the PS3. The PC will probably be more.

If thats the case, Ill just wait a while and get it for the pc.