Does anyone know, from a purely cost POV, the difference between a MM system vs Persistent Servers? I understand that regional servers have been an issue for EA in previous BF games, so is this just a way to aggregate players and reduce costs?
Amazon's AWS website breaks down the cost of running dedicated vs on-demand servers.
| Cost of continuously running servers | $36,270 | ||
| Cost w/Autoscaling and On-Demand | $18,150 | 50% savings over continuously running servers | |
| Cost w/Auto Scaling and Spot (estimated) | $5,430 | 85% savings over continuously running servers |
EA is saving at least 50% using on-demand servers vs continuously running dedicated servers. They save even more if on-demand spot servers are available, which is unused server capacity Amazon offers at a discount.
https://aws.amazon.com/gamelift/pricing/
It's no wonder EA loves the new matchmaking system where servers are shut down at the end of every round.
@DuaneDibbleyWhat you say is true. I'm sure DICE could migrate everyone in the server over to a new instance after the game ends. But that probably adds complexity to the matchmaking system. We don't know if DICE is using Amazon's matchmaking system or their own implementation. Amazon's matchmaking system might not even have the capability of migrating players to a new instance.
Bottom line, DICE probably chose the easiest and cheapest solution. Which is shutdown the game instance when the round ends, dump all the players back into the matchmaking pool, and start a new game instance on the cheapest on-demand/spot server available.
@OskooI_007Amazon does not offer ANY 'matchmaking' functionality. They provide you with a scalable cloud infrastructure in which you can run your K8S or whatever. The matchmaking is completely on Dice's end. After checking the AWS documentation provided below, this sentence is not true.
I personally could live without ANY matchmaking other than finding a running server in my region that has room for my party (usually 6-9 players in the evening) and put us all in this one server. Preferably on the same team, preferably not in a match that is close to the end of the round. Put us there and we will play the rotation together until we get tired or run out of our alcoholic beverages.
@DuaneDibbley wrote:
@OskooI_007
Amazon does not offer ANY 'matchmaking' functionality. They provide you with a scalable cloud infrastructure in which you can run your K8S or whatever. The matchmaking is completely on Dice's end.
Amazon does offer matchmaking. It's called FlexMatch.
Game developers value flexibility in their matchmaker to iterate quickly and identify the right set of matchmaking rules that make their games fun. But a matchmaker with that flexibility is difficult to build in-house and at scale because doing so requires expertise in distributed compute. FlexMatch lets developers skip that lengthy upfront development effort and dive right into optimizing their rulesets. Now, FlexMatch is also accessible in standalone mode so developers can place formed matches on any game server solution.
https://aws.amazon.com/gamelift/features/
Could someone explain in detail the potential costs in case of renting a server by a given player? How much does it translate to Server Browser, Addons, Procon Layer Tools, any infrastructure, software development involved? In possibly humane language.
