My son has purchased Overwatch and Battlefront. When he plays multiplayer both games regularly disconnect or won't let him connect. They give messages about issues with the server. I have posted a question in the EA support area on their site, but it is useless as obviously nobody's bothering to check and respond to it.

I was also wondering how one technically would distinguish between today's immersive 3d games and the early arcade games. It's more than 2d vs. 3d. It's also that the old games, like Donkey Kong, had different screens and you would move from one level to the next in a linear manner, like turning pages. In contrast today's games have whole worlds that can be endlessly explored and which are more or less continuous.

My son has purchased Overwatch and Battlefront. When he plays multiplayer both games regularly disconnect or won't let him connect. They give messages about issues with the server. I have posted a question in the EA support area on their site, but it is useless as obviously nobody's bothering to check and respond to it.

I doubt anyone here will be able to help you with that. But first of all, check your internet connection.. are you having issues with any other games? Check that you have the relevant ports open on your network.

I was also wondering how one technically would distinguish between today's immersive 3d games and the early arcade games. It's more than 2d vs. 3d. It's also that the old games, like Donkey Kong, had different screens and you would move from one level to the next in a linear manner, like turning pages. In contrast today's games have whole worlds that can be endlessly explored and which are more or less continuous.

Yes, games today are much, much bigger. Hell, someone emulated an Atari 2600 in Minecraft. This is mostly due to increased processing power, memory and storage.

If I give you a single sheet of paper and a charred stick, the story you can write will be several orders of magnitude smaller than what you can do with a word processor (or even a typewriter and an endless stack of paper).

I'm really not sure what your question is.

how one technically would distinguish between today's immersive 3d games and the early arcade games. It's more than 2d vs. 3d. It's also that the old games, like Donkey Kong, had different screens and you would move from one level to the next in a linear manner, like turning pages. In contrast today's games have whole worlds that can be endlessly explored and which are more or less continuous.

the technical gamedev terms are:

level based design - a level / dungeon / area / screen is loaded, then you play, then the next level is loaded, then you play that, and so on. donkey kong, galaga, pacman all come to mind. even the original wolf3d, quake, etc. all level based. load screens are used when loading a new level. players generally don't like waiting for load screens.

seamless / continuous / open world - areas / levels are loaded or generated as the player approaches, with no load screens. skyrim comes to mind, although like most "open world" games it has both open (wilderness) and level based sections (interiors).

Note that "open world" can refer to either the way the levels are loaded, or a gameplay style - as in "go anywhere - do anything - at any time", as opposed to being forced to follow a story line. i prefer the terms "seamless" or "continuous" when referring to "open world" style level loading, and reserve "open world" for use as a game play style or feature.

BTW, you were teaching a class, weren't you? hows that going?

how one technically would distinguish between today's immersive 3d games and the early arcade games. It's more than 2d vs. 3d. It's also that the old games, like Donkey Kong, had different screens and you would move from one level to the next in a linear manner, like turning pages. In contrast today's games have whole worlds that can be endlessly explored and which are more or less continuous.

the technical gamedev terms are:

level based design - a level / dungeon / area / screen is loaded, then you play, then the next level is loaded, then you play that, and so on. donkey kong, galaga, pacman all come to mind. even the original wolf3d, quake, etc. all level based. load screens are used when loading a new level. players generally don't like waiting for load screens.

seamless / continuous / open world - areas / levels are loaded or generated as the player approaches, with no load screens. skyrim comes to mind, although like most "open world" games it has both open (wilderness) and level based sections (interiors).

Note that "open world" can refer to either the way the levels are loaded, or a gameplay style - as in "go anywhere - do anything - at any time", as opposed to being forced to follow a story line. i prefer the terms "seamless" or "continuous" when referring to "open world" style level loading, and reserve "open world" for use as a game play style or feature.

BTW, you were teaching a class, weren't you? hows that going?

Yes I am teaching a class. Thanks for asking. It's going well. I did all the theory and board game stuff in the first semester and now the students are making video games. Some people here were giving me a hard time, but I found the solution in the use of an online curriculum that just takes students step by step through building ready made games. It is a simple engine and I just learn alongside the students. If there are problems with the game builds we can't figure out, I just send the file to their tech people and they tell me what needs to be fixed.

I have a follow-up question. It seems like a huge percentage of today's games are rpg fps open world. Basically Assassin's Creed variations (in terms of mechanics). Why is this?

I have a follow-up question. It seems like a huge percentage of today's games are rpg fps open world. Basically Assassin's Creed variations (in terms of mechanics). Why is this?

You might want to check on some stats before you start thinking about it too much. It may be a cognitive bias that makes it seem that way to you. I don't see there being an over representation of them, but my view is probably skewed by the fact that I'm not interested in those types of games and so don't really notice them.

I have a follow-up question. It seems like a huge percentage of today's games are rpg fps open world. Basically Assassin's Creed variations (in terms of mechanics). Why is this?

LennyLen is correct there. Check your stats.

The world of games is ENORMOUS. The Apple app store boasted 631,091 games at their 8th anniversary last year. There are ten or so good FPS games, perhaps a hundred or so FPS games total. Certainly it is less than 1% of that market.

On PC, that percentage is a little higher. A search on Steam shows about 1500 FPS games of about 28000 games, or about 5% of the games. But Steam skews heavy toward that type of gamer, the heavyweight games rather than casual games.

So what percentage of these 1%-5% of the marketplace use open world mechanics? The number is small enough you can count it yourself, but picking a random page from my Steam search, it looks like about 2 per 25-item page, or roughly 8%. Those are either major AAA games, or procedurally generated small-market games.

You are talking about mainstream games with lots of money for advertising. That's why you are making that comment.

As frob was saying, video game world has reached an epic proportion, and there are just a huge amount of games out there. Ever check out the iOS/Android stores? Try download and play those freemium games. Back in early 2000s, Flash was a popular medium for many small developers. Places like Kongregate and Newgrounds were popular back then. None of these are FPS like you mentioned.

My son has purchased Overwatch and Battlefront. When he plays multiplayer both games regularly disconnect or won't let him connect. They give messages about issues with the server. I have posted a question in the EA support area on their site, but it is useless as obviously nobody's bothering to check and respond to it.

I used to work tech-support for a local ISP. Nearly every time this was happening, it's because NAT was enabled on the router, or if you are using a wireless ISP, NAT was enabled on the wireless receiver. It is very likely not to be a game server issue or a problem with EA. Look up on google how to disable NAT on your router, or contact your ISP and have them disable it on the modem if they have one that uses it.

If it's not that, it's possible that data usage may be heavy on your internet service from other people streaming Netflix, or downloading files. Things like that. Generally that isn't the cause, but if your ISP throttles your bandwidth to a max of 1.5Mbps (not 1.5MBps, big difference, believe it or not), then you might experience enough lag to get him kicked if anyone else is using heavy data while he is playing.

I was also wondering how one technically would distinguish between today's immersive 3d games and the early arcade games. It's more than 2d vs. 3d. It's also that the old games, like Donkey Kong, had different screens and you would move from one level to the next in a linear manner, like turning pages. In contrast today's games have whole worlds that can be endlessly explored and which are more or less continuous.

I suppose that depends on what you mean by "distinguish". But it seems you're referencing the way some environments are rendered. Open-World isn't exactly new, but it's definitely the latest form of gameplay as linear and branched storylines go. With VR on the rise, I can only imagine it's going to improve. Generations are becoming increasingly more desensitized to fantastic new realities, so they're finding better ways to improve immersion. It's exciting! With technology, the only way to go is up.

I used to work tech-support for a local ISP. Nearly every time this was happening, it's because NAT was enabled on the router, or if you are using a wireless ISP, NAT was enabled on the wireless receiver. It is very likely not to be a game server issue or a problem with EA. Look up on google how to disable NAT on your router, or contact your ISP and have them disable it on the modem if they have one that uses it.

I'm guessing this is trolling, but if you disabled NAT (Network Address Translation), then you wouldn't be able to access the internet through the router. NAT is what converts from a private address to a public address. You would have to plug directly into the modem.

Did you maybe confuse NAT with Universal Plug and Play (UPNP)?