Amazon Games: A Tale of How Not To Code a MMO

[Dogtatokun]

Today, we're going to talk about server-side and client-side coding.
Here's a brief and simplistic refresher to catch you up: https://medium.com/castle-archives/making-a-basic-multiplayer-game-b919bc48d17a

So, as was proven with the explosion of cheating issues (which is growing by the day) we have come to know that New World is coded to give the client authority to dictate logic to the server. This is backwards from nearly every other MMO on the market. Even single player games (which require active online) have started to abandon this model. The value in being client sided is that it generally easier to alter (assuming it's not a MMO... lol). This of course means it easier for players to alter things as well (which we have many examples of now).

Let's take a moment and consider why this is bad. Well, first, as we see the cheating has gone insane. I've seen very few games have botting issues on the 2nd day after launch. Second, it limits the ability to check for exploits. This prompts a heavy handed to deal with potential exploits. They can either set strict limits (like the afk and anti botting system in place now). Soon, you all will notice lag and high latency will lead to kicks or bans, as detecting delayed feedback was their solution to deal with invicibility (again this shows how amateur the coding was). The best case scenario for AGS (not the players) is to make EAC more invasive and run regular file verification. However, this will tank performance even more.

The third major issue is that file manipulation has become wide spread. Again, the solution is to make EAC more invasive.

The fourth major issue is adding content. Every time content will be added to New World it will take extremely long maintenance times (as we've already seen). Further, everything will be piled upon an already crumbling base. This will open up new opportunities for cheaters.

Nothing I said above is incorrect, but some of it is guesses. Don't come at me with "provide proof" because the proof is already out there. You can't client side code a game that is multiplayer and expect it to go well. Unless it is peer-to-peer or you expect some degree of cheating.

Now the real question is, how can New World be fixed (it's broken whether you like it or not. and i'm glad you like it)?

I genuinely think they'll have to pull a FF14. They'll have to go back to the source and rebuild the game. Thus leading to a relaunch. Anyone else have other ideas?


TL;DR The game is client-side coded. The cheating will only get worse. It will be hard to detect. Only those who are dumb will get caught. The root issue needs fixed instead of constant band aids.

[TRJoker]

No, cause ... there is no other way.
Well there is one ... abandon the game ... was used by many devs before ... but that seems to be no way for Amazon.
Hmmm ... ok, perhaps if they refund everyone.

[Steve]

FFXIV veteran here. Lots of work needed? Probably. Total teardown? Let's slow down a bit.

FFXIV got torn down because literally everything about 1.0 was bad. Vases crashed systems. Saying the UI was bad was arguing there was a UI at all and that's a tough argument to make. It wasn't so much server snapshotting in content as it was server long, loving stares into oblivion. And so on and so forth and so on.

Besides, this is a Bezos production. Look at Blue Origin. This isn't a guy who admits defeat. He just throws more money at it or moves the goalposts. (Space isn't where he thinks it is. Anyway.)

One of the reasons FFXIV was able to make such a successful turnaround is that it turned its back on PvP. The Feast is the only thing any of the PvP crowd there care about. The other game modes are neglected until a new glam item gets added for wolf marks, then people derp Frontlines until they get the scrip.

It worked. I'd say do that. Drop the PvP nonsense. Drop some cash on an actual writing team that will do better than "we can't have mounts because, uh, spiritual possession of donkeys and horses". Take advantage of the client-side privs by scripting some really badass PvE encounters.

"But PvP!"

Welp. It worked for FFXIV. Just saying.

[Subsonic]

1. You ban the cheaters, as and when you detect them, server side anti cheat code.
2. EAC is ring 0, as it gets updated it catches things.
3. Cheating is inevitable.

Many MMO's I've played have had roll backs, its not uncommon, the most similar/worst situation I can think of is the Division, where it had exploits galore even worse than this due to it having instanced reloadable content.

I personally still think its ok, as long as they ban the cheaters and stay on top of it, the only time I think where the "Never trust the client" comes it to play is on highly competitive games with strong MMR structures and tournament systems.

[PortalShifter]

Did they literally code this PVP-focused game to work via the client side?

LOL! That would be a HUGE disaster because cheating will always be a problem in the game forever.

[TRJoker]

引用自 Calteru：

FFXIV veteran here. Lots of work needed? Probably. Total teardown? Let's slow down a bit.

FFXIV got torn down because literally everything about 1.0 was bad. Vases crashed systems. Saying the UI was bad was arguing there was a UI at all and that's a tough argument to make. It wasn't so much server snapshotting in content as it was server long, loving stares into oblivion. And so on and so forth and so on.

Besides, this is a Bezos production. Look at Blue Origin. This isn't a guy who admits defeat. He just throws more money at it or moves the goalposts. (Space isn't where he thinks it is. Anyway.)

One of the reasons FFXIV was able to make such a successful turnaround is that it turned its back on PvP. The Feast is the only thing any of the PvP crowd there care about. The other game modes are neglected until a new glam item gets added for wolf marks, then people derp Frontlines until they get the scrip.

It worked. I'd say do that. Drop the PvP nonsense. Drop some cash on an actual writing team that will do better than "we can't have mounts because, uh, spiritual possession of donkeys and horses". Take advantage of the client-side privs by scripting some really badass PvE encounters.

"But PvP!"

Welp. It worked for FFXIV. Just saying.

Ok, true, without PvP it is not such important if you can cheat easily, agree.
But its still ... well ... lame.
But thats just an opinion, others may have no problems with it.

[Dogtatokun]

引用自 Evol：

1. You ban the cheaters, as and when you detect them, server side anti cheat code.
2. EAC is ring 0, as it gets updated it catches things.
3. Cheating is inevitable.

Many MMO's I've played have had roll backs, its not uncommon, the most similar/worst situation I can think of is the Division, where it had exploits galore even worse than this due to it having instanced reloadable content.

I personally still think its ok, as long as they ban the cheaters and stay on top of it, the only time I think where the "Never trust the client" comes it to play is on highly competitive games with strong MMR structures and tournament systems.

1. When you can detect them. On client-side coding you can only catch those bad at it.
2. It needs be more invasive (even kernel level) if they want the game to remain client side.
3. Correct.

Rollbacks cannot fix this. The files are accessible. Roll back, people will just do it again in 5 minutes. Only legit players get hurt. When your game economy is player dependent and end game is pvp reliant... one should never trust the client.

[Dogtatokun]

引用自 PortalShifter：

Did they literally code this PVP-focused game to work via the client side?

LOL! That would be a HUGE disaster because cheating will always be a problem in the game forever.

Yes, this is confirmed. I confirmed it last week... before they got me.

引用自 Calteru：

FFXIV veteran here. Lots of work needed? Probably. Total teardown? Let's slow down a bit.

FFXIV got torn down because literally everything about 1.0 was bad. Vases crashed systems. Saying the UI was bad was arguing there was a UI at all and that's a tough argument to make. It wasn't so much server snapshotting in content as it was server long, loving stares into oblivion. And so on and so forth and so on.

Besides, this is a Bezos production. Look at Blue Origin. This isn't a guy who admits defeat. He just throws more money at it or moves the goalposts. (Space isn't where he thinks it is. Anyway.)

One of the reasons FFXIV was able to make such a successful turnaround is that it turned its back on PvP. The Feast is the only thing any of the PvP crowd there care about. The other game modes are neglected until a new glam item gets added for wolf marks, then people derp Frontlines until they get the scrip.

It worked. I'd say do that. Drop the PvP nonsense. Drop some cash on an actual writing team that will do better than "we can't have mounts because, uh, spiritual possession of donkeys and horses". Take advantage of the client-side privs by scripting some really badass PvE encounters.

"But PvP!"

Welp. It worked for FFXIV. Just saying.

FF14 was terrible at launch, yes. But that was because of sloppy coding, not because of incorrect coding logic. The core issues cannot be fixed without giving the server authority. And you can't just code this game to do that. They have to rebuild, ignore the problems, or be heavy handed.

[Subsonic]

引用自 Dogtatokun：

引用自 Evol：

1. You ban the cheaters, as and when you detect them, server side anti cheat code.
2. EAC is ring 0, as it gets updated it catches things.
3. Cheating is inevitable.

Many MMO's I've played have had roll backs, its not uncommon, the most similar/worst situation I can think of is the Division, where it had exploits galore even worse than this due to it having instanced reloadable content.

I personally still think its ok, as long as they ban the cheaters and stay on top of it, the only time I think where the "Never trust the client" comes it to play is on highly competitive games with strong MMR structures and tournament systems.

1. When you can detect them. On client-side coding you can only catch those bad at it.
2. It needs be more invasive (even kernel level) if they want the game to remain client side.
3. Correct.

Rollbacks cannot fix this. The files are accessible. Roll back, people will just do it again in 5 minutes. Only legit players get hurt. When your game economy is player dependent and end game is pvp reliant... one should never trust the client.

Ring 0 is kernal level EAC is kernal.
LOL, yeah we done here, you don't know what your talking about, kid, you basically want an anti cheat system akin to a Arena FPS game in a action based MMO, which wont happen ever in my or your life time, unless you want it to be a 200 player max game.

[Dogtatokun]

引用自 Evol：

引用自 Dogtatokun：

1. When you can detect them. On client-side coding you can only catch those bad at it.
2. It needs be more invasive (even kernel level) if they want the game to remain client side.
3. Correct.

Rollbacks cannot fix this. The files are accessible. Roll back, people will just do it again in 5 minutes. Only legit players get hurt. When your game economy is player dependent and end game is pvp reliant... one should never trust the client.

Ring 0 is kernal level EAC is kernal.
LOL, yeah we done here, you don't know what your talking about, kid, you basically want an anti cheat system akin to a Arena FPS game in a action based MMO, which wont happen ever in my or your life time, unless you want it to be a 200 player max game.

I know what Ring 0 is. But I didn't know EAC had that level of access. So, yes, I might be incorrect from time to time. Now the real question is, if it is that invasive why isn't it effective? Again, this would be fixed by a server-side coded game.

Again, you ignore the larger point and try to stick to the only ground you can stand on.

[Subsonic]

引用自 Dogtatokun：

引用自 Evol：

Ring 0 is kernal level EAC is kernal.
LOL, yeah we done here, you don't know what your talking about, kid, you basically want an anti cheat system akin to a Arena FPS game in a action based MMO, which wont happen ever in my or your life time, unless you want it to be a 200 player max game.

I know what Ring 0 is. But I didn't know EAC had that level of access. So, yes, I might be incorrect from time to time. Now the real question is, if it is that invasive why isn't it effective? Again, this would be fixed by a server-side coded game.

Again, you ignore the larger point and try to stick to the only ground you can stand on.

The larger point of what ? You suggesting that the mmo is coded incorrectly but you don't have a single ounce of ability to understand how or why or when that code works, basically you think you know stuff, post some click bate and try to suggest its truth, but really you don't have a clue whats going on in netcode, memory and backend services.

[Dogtatokun]

引用自 Evol：

引用自 Dogtatokun：

I know what Ring 0 is. But I didn't know EAC had that level of access. So, yes, I might be incorrect from time to time. Now the real question is, if it is that invasive why isn't it effective? Again, this would be fixed by a server-side coded game.

Again, you ignore the larger point and try to stick to the only ground you can stand on.

The larger point of what ? You suggesting that the mmo is coded incorrectly but you don't have a single ounce of ability to understand how or why or when that code works, basically you think you know stuff, post some click bate and try to suggest its truth, but really you don't have a clue whats going on in netcode, memory and backend services.

lol okay. I'm not suggesting anything is truth. I'm plainly stating it is, because it is. My only error was no knowing the degree of access EAC has.

[TRJoker]

引用自 Evol：

引用自 Dogtatokun：

I know what Ring 0 is. But I didn't know EAC had that level of access. So, yes, I might be incorrect from time to time. Now the real question is, if it is that invasive why isn't it effective? Again, this would be fixed by a server-side coded game.

Again, you ignore the larger point and try to stick to the only ground you can stand on.

The larger point of what ? You suggesting that the mmo is coded incorrectly but you don't have a single ounce of ability to understand how or why or when that code works, basically you think you know stuff, post some click bate and try to suggest its truth, but really you don't have a clue whats going on in netcode, memory and backend services.

So seems you have the knowledge ...ok. Just 1 little question:
Why does nearly no Dev since nearly 15 Years now uses a cilentbased engine for PVP games?
It makes sense to use client based mechanics ... in many ways.
So if EAC was that good as you say ... why do other Devs their coding fully server based .... even if its NOT a PvP MMO?

But ok ... you are the hero ...
perhaps the others want to read this:
https://segmentnext.com/battlefield-2042-anti-cheat/

[Stralgarr]

Cringe devs

[Mepho]

引用自 Evol：

[...]
Many MMO's I've played have had roll backs, its not uncommon, the most similar/worst situation I can think of is the Division, where it had exploits galore even worse than this due to it having instanced reloadable content.
[...]

The Division was indeed a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and exploitfest, especially in the dark zone, but I don't remember any rollback happening.
In fact I remember dropping it because I refused to exploit but it became the norm and I was ostracized for not having the best items like I was a moron for not exploiting and dropped it.

[PortalShifter]

引用自 Dogtatokun：

引用自 PortalShifter：

Did they literally code this PVP-focused game to work via the client side?

LOL! That would be a HUGE disaster because cheating will always be a problem in the game forever.

Yes, this is confirmed. I confirmed it last week... before they got me.

RIP New World. PVP cheating will be unfixable.