Tell me more ×
Game Development Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional and independent game developers. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote -12 down vote favorite

What system specifications would a game need if it was:

Total players per planet: ~20000

Total players per team:~1M

Total players per map(small volume of space or small surface over a planet): ~2000

Total players: ~10M(world has more players than this amount i think)

  • Two of the players are commanders of opposite quadrants(from HUD of a strategy game).
  • Lots of players use space-crafts as a captain(like 3d fps and rts).
  • Many many players control consoles in those space-crafts as under command of captains.(fps )
  • Some players are still in stone-age trying to reinvent wheel in some planet.
  • Players design and construct any vehicles they have.
  • With good physics engine
  • Has puzzles inside.
  • Everyone get experience by doing stuff(RPG).
  • Commerce, income or totally different resource-based group(like starcraft)
  • Player classes(primitive: cunning and strong, wrapped: healthy, wealthy)
  • Arcade top-down style firing with ships when people get bored
  • very low chance of miraculous things.(mediclorians, wormholes, bugs)
  • Different game-modes: persistent(living world), resetted periodically(a new chance for noobs), instant(pre-built space + hack&slash)

I suspect this would need 128GB ram and 2048 cores.

share|improve this question
1  
"Have you ever heard of a game like" is not a question that's on topic for this site. Though it seems like you're just trying to start a discussion about such a game. You're welcome to ask about it in chat, but questions here are not for discussions. See the FAQ about what types of questions to ask here. – Byte56 Sep 7 '12 at 21:08
Okay changing it a bit to fit the FAQ style. – huseyin tugrul buyukisik Sep 7 '12 at 21:10
Sorry, that doesn't work. See scope: "Your questions should be reasonably scoped. If you can imagine an entire book that answers your question, you’re asking too much." This question is so broad and vague it can't possibly be answered in a reasonable way. You're still asking for a discussion. – Byte56 Sep 7 '12 at 21:14
5  
"system specifications"? Do you seriously expect people to tell how much memory the game needs based on a bullet list of features? – jhocking Sep 7 '12 at 21:36

closed as not a real question by Joe Wreschnig, Byte56, jhocking, Gajoo, Jonathan Hobbs Sep 9 '12 at 8:08

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, see the FAQ.

2 Answers

up vote 1 down vote

All that and you just want to know if I know a game like it?

Okay.

Nope, that 'hybrid' combination is new to me. Audacious, to say the very least.

share|improve this answer
1  
This would be better as a comment. Since this question can't reasonably be answered. – Byte56 Sep 7 '12 at 21:47
up vote 1 down vote

Edit: this was written prior to any edits of the original question. So there wasn't mention of the mass players at the time, among other details.

It sounds a lot like a sci-fi version of Savage (2?). However, some aspects won't mesh well.

This sounds like it would have to be an instanced game (server based like CS or TF2). It wouldn't do well as a persistent world like World of Warcraft because nobody would want to be stuck as the character stuck on the stone-age planet.

It all seems very fast-paced, so puzzles would only serve to bog players down and possibly frustrate them (assuming the instanced game method). If this were a persistent world, then it might be a nice change of pace like the top-down you suggest.

share|improve this answer
i played savage-1. Its only for ~64 players and only stoneage vs quake-3 – huseyin tugrul buyukisik Sep 7 '12 at 20:19
It must be Savage-2 that I'm thinking of; I never actually played Savage-1. Two teams, one person on each team is commander (rts style building buildings and upgrades), rest of the players are troops. 3rd person for most weapons since you start with melee and level up by killing. Research unlocks projectiles that use 1st person view. Siege vehicles that are piloted by players. And resource gathering (which molds into the RTS of commander). – Orin MacGregor Sep 7 '12 at 20:24
Very good find. But what about the player-count cap? Sounds do-able but more importantly, when they conquer a map they must be able to help their allies on another map immediately. What about customly-designing the vehicles? – huseyin tugrul buyukisik Sep 7 '12 at 20:26
Like I said - it's a lot like, not completely like. It's server based with a custom player limit (probably max 64), so it's also just one map. Conquer the map and win, game ends. It's a fast-paced non-persistent game each time, so certain aspects you list simply aren't feasible with that setup (but not saying in general that it's impossible). – Orin MacGregor Sep 7 '12 at 20:33
1  
This is only adding to a discussion, which is not the purpose of this site. – Byte56 Sep 7 '12 at 21:48

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.