THQ Committed to Increasing Homefront's Dedicated Servers

Let's face facts folks, quite often Australians get the proverbial bum rap when it comes to online gaming, particularly with dedicated servers. When THQ announced Homefront they were committed to supporting dedicated servers for Australia - so far the implementation of that grand statement hasn't exactly gone to plan, but THQ has announced they are committing more resources in an attempt to support Australian Homefront players.

On the Homefront forums, an announcement from the Homefront team was posted, explaining the reasons for Homefront's current poor performance online, and the plans being put in place to improve that performance.

Good morning Australia,

The Homefront team is aware of the issues you have been experiencing since release and the outage that has occurred. As such, we wanted to bring you under the hood to illustrate what has happened, what we have done, and what we plan to do moving forward.

Server Outage A complete outage of our dedicated servers occurred around 10:45PM Eastern Daylight Time on Monday, March 21st – the cause of this is unknown and we are quickly working towards a resolution. We apologize for any disruption to your gaming and will advise as soon as this has been resolved.

Dedicated Servers The dedicated server infrastructure has experienced unprecedented demand, requiring a rapid ramp-up of server capacity. In addition to the increased server capacity we added this past weekend, as of yesterday even more additional servers made their way to the continent – they are being unboxed, racked, & stacked. What will this do? It will increase server capacity an additional 2-fold. As you can see, we are working as quickly as possible to respond to demand.

Low-Ping/Red-bar This is a 3-part issue - The first, extremely high usage on Australian Servers has resulted in Matchmaking placing players in overseas servers (US) to cope with demand. Not the ideal experience or the one that Australian user expected when choosing Homefront. The additional server capacity we implemented should help with this. The second step that’s being taken is to implement a “Ping Limit” (server-side) that should help players find themselves in geographically closer locales with much better connection times. Lastly, the in-game ping meter itself is going to have its limits changed to better reflect connectivity. At present, limits are too strict resulting in nearly every server being full of “red” connections while latency & gameplay experience dictate otherwise. This is a global fix as well and will be included in a Critical Title fix. We will inform you when this patch will go live.

Finally, we want to stress again that Homefront is one of a tiny handful of titles offering dedicated server support on console, and the infrastructure and networking code required to support this is much more complex and demanding than simple peer-to-peer matchmaking you see in most other FPS games. The pay-off is larger maps, more players, and an equal playing field for all – something we believe is critical for fair, balanced online FPS gameplay. Every game that goes the extra mile to provide dedicated servers faces additional teething problems in the first few days as the kinks are ironed out, but please bear with us as we address these – the result will be worth it.

Once again, we thank you for your patience and support.

The Homefront team.


Comments

    I knew the multiplayer was the big thing for this game, but I am surprised that they are still willing to put resources behind it. I'm glad in a way, as I did play the short single player campaign and a little bit of the multiplayer, and it was an alright game. Multi had some good ideas, and hopefully this is a sign that the game has done well despite the reviews. I'm glad for THQ, hopefully they will make Homefront 2 bigger and better. Anyone on here play multi on the PC? I've played on the 360 and can verify the red bar, lag etc, but was curious whether it was a better story on the PC? Cheers

    I've given up on it. My experience with Homefront's multiplayer was as follows:
    *2 hours spent in lobbies with a player count swinging between 10-15 players. You need 16 to start a match on the TDM and Ground Control Playlists
    *1 hour actually PLAYING. This was via the Skirmish playlist which has a lower player count. I usually found myself matched against US players. Lag wasn't noticable, but still I want the "Groundbreaking 32-Person Multiplayer Warfare," as promised on the back of the box.

    Then there's the campaign which was utterly derivative. Avoid like the plague, people!

      The game has only been out since the 17th...one week as of today...and you're "giving up" because the multiplayer has issues...

      Need you be reminded that we're in Australia and the fact they are jumping on this within a week of release is phenomenal support for us considering this is an FPS.

        Let's not forger that even the multiplayer portion is somewhat derivative, and a complete dog's breakfast as far as visuals are concerned.

        I don't care if they are promising dedicated servers, I've palyed plenty of solid matches on P2P multiplayer games. Further to that, I haven't had wait anywhere near as long to find a playable match on any P2P game that I've ever played.

          Wow...talk about /facepalm

          An FPS multiplayer that is "somewhat derivative." Welcome to 2011 mate...shooters have been around for quite a while and there is only so much you can do with them. Especially when it's a present-day/very near future warlike setting.

          The visuals are not that bad either. They're not stellar Crysis-like visuals but they are more than fine. Hell even Black Ops isn't that good looking visually...

          Also, of those many other P2P multiplayer games that you've played how many were within a week of their release that suffered from an influx of far more players than their servers could handle?

          I think you're complaining for the sake of it. The game has been disappointing in some ways but it's still a solid game so don't make it out to be some sort of catastrophic failure that has wronged you when it's only been seven days.

            I don't think I'm complaining for the sake of it. I can't think of a single game released in the past five years where I've had to wait more than 5 minutes (let alone 30) for a match to start: dedicated servers of P2P.

            I don't think that it is too much to ask for a product to be polished if I'm paying near enough to $100 for it. Worse still, I don't think I should have to stand for excuses like the developers not anticipating a high level of interest in their title. Pretty much any FPS title utilizing a modern or futuristic setting is selling reasonably well these days.

            To compound on my complaint of having to wait for a match in Homefront, I also endured several freezes while attempting to connect to lobbies.

            I believe that if a publisher ships a derivative, broken game, then they should be on the end of a lambasting. If you don't, that's fine; but a broken game is not acceptable by my standards.

              Issues with multiplayer at release for an FPS are extremely common, mate. That's life. The fact they are jumping on it so quickly within a week of release to solve a problem for Australian gamers is amazing.

              Look at Black Ops on PC (got no experience on the console versions), at release you could get a game easy but it was hardly playable and that was only if you could manage to get through the game lobby that was just as bugged as the gameplay. Even nowits still hard to find a good game that doesn't have latency issues for a good portion of the match. Personally I'd prefer your Homefront situation of the Black Ops one.

              Also, anticipating sales is one thing. Anticipating multiplayer numbers is completely different. Homefront isn't the first game to go through this. Rift just went through the same thing. It happens.

              Oh and nearly paying $100 for it? That's YOUR fault for not being a smart shopper. You could easily nab a copy on 360 or PS3 for under $70 and a PC copy (digital in my case) for $40.

                I was commenting on the RRP more than anything else, as I ordered mine through Play-Asia. My apologies for the misdirection.

                I'm aware that multiplayer shooters encounter issues post launch. But I have never encountered anything like this, as I've stated previously. Sure when Black Ops launched (I played on PS3) there was the occasional disconnect, but I could still jump straight back into a match. Same deal with Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (again on PS3). My point is not that the issues don't occur with competing titles, it is that they are so much worse with Homefront. Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure that Black Ops, Modern Warfare 2 and BF:BC2 had launch day (if not, then soon after) patches.

                As far as anticipation goes, if you're single player campaign clocks in at less than 4 hours (which Homefront did), you sure as hell better have the infastructure there to deal with interest in multiplayer.

                Once again, I am aware that these issues are not exclusive to Homefront in principle. As far as severity goes, Homefront is miles ahead of the competition.

                  See, I look at it differently. As I said, I'd rather struggle to get into a game that when I do get in I can play as opposed to get one quickly that has such bad latency issues it is nigh unplayable, only to repeat that process with multiple servers for the same amount of time you wait to get one or two good games.

                  Black Ops first patch was within a couple of weeks and really did stuff all as it fixed the latency issues for some yet those who didn't have latency issues prior to the patch started having them. It's still a ways from perfect and that came out in November.

                  Also, if MMO's can be overwhelmed due to underestimating player numbers then an FPS can easily be forgiven for the same mistake.

                  I might also mention that Homefront was developed by Kaos Studios...where as MW2, BO and BC2 all had big name developers with far more disposable income. Hell, Kaos' first game only came out in 2008.

                Where did you get it for 40$ Obviously you got it on PC, is the multi better on PC? I'd play it for 40$

                  I got it from cdkeysdirect. They have Steam compatible cd keys for it.

      I'd pre-ordered it with great anticipation and was completely disappointed with just about every aspect of the game. So much so I took it back on the Sunday following its release. The multiplayer issues were bad enough, but the game looks & plays like a 5 year old FPS. Shame, as it had a lot of promise!

      Oh, and to head this discussion off at the pass, I don't care that it'd only been a few days after release before I returned it, I'm tired of playing beta tester for devs (yes, DC Universe Online, I'm looking at you too!). If a game doesn't work as it should out of the box, then forget it!

    Dammit, where's my copy already?

    I'm glad to hear they're taking this seriously... and I'm encouraged by their efforts in Australia.

    I was fairly intent on trading this in for Crysis 2, but I've decided that THQ has indeed been supporting us more than most pubs. Therefore I feel I should give them more than a week to correct the problems.

    However, if they don't come through with the goods, I will envoke my nerd rage omerta upon them. =D

    Well I guess we should be happy they're at least doing something about it, and there wasn't even any comments about how the problems are because of the game being 'exremely popular' with 'unprecedented players on servers' which is nice.

    However the concept of a 'ping limit' should have been in game from the start. This has been a staple of multiplayer games for years and to not have one is just stupid. The only reason to not include one is if you think your fanbase is so small it will mean that noone will be able to play because they are on such far corners of the world away from each other.

    Also this coment "ping meter itself is going to have its limits changed to better reflect connectivity" is laughable as I have heard plenty of complaints of red bars, but noone says it is accompanied by lagless games.

    I can still kill people fine, but you do notice the lag quite a bit with some jumping forwards suddenly etc
    If it was lagless then I bet the game would be completely different to how it is right now.

    The Campaign was a joke though, Hated it

    Its as simple as this. If your trying to compete with COD you have to measure up. Which they dont.

    I can turn on my xbox and be playing a game of COD in under 2 minutes. It takes a minimum 10 minutes to get a game of Homefront.

    I never had lag issues when playing COD with Americans.

    my copy is unplayable with the console freezing issues and was returned for a full refund under threat of going to fair trading.

    will Crysis 2 be much better? prob not but atleast it works.....

    So far I've found the multi quite likable. From what I've gathered reading forums though, VAC isn't implemented properly or at all at this point in time. Whether this is true or not the PC version is riddled with hackers. Played about 8 hours Sunday night and was constantly head shot from across the map with all kinds of guns. The steam forums have a lot of people taking screenshots of hackers or reporting names. Really does put a dampener on the experience. Besides that though, I've had a blast using the gadgets, mostly the hellfire and the wolverine.

    Servers are fine as of today so anyone who wants to jump back on homefront is able to, played for 5 hours straight no real problems easy to connect to games, im from australia and i was playing americans, no lag, nothing completely fine.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now