Quest/PC 772 Replace soft/hard cap system with one set cap
complete
Fionna
With the smaller player cap needed for cross-platform worlds, this presents a conundrum for world-builders. For a hangout map to be joinable, you would want to set the player cap high. But the hard cap being double the soft cap is not performant or will break a world's assumptions about player numbers.
Why not just have one set limit, and no hard/soft cap separation? The dual behavior is rather confusing and unclear, and really limits how to handle Quest worlds.
Log In
Fax
complete
Thank you for your request! Last year, we gave world creators the ability to set the "maximum" and "recommended" capacity themselves.
We'd love to hear how this has impacted your worlds!
bd_
Having soft and hard caps separately configurable would probably be best here. It's good on PC worlds to have some room for people to join - though perhaps double is a bit much
CyanLaser
I would like my quest world to have a higher player limit, but since the cap is actually double, I am required to put it low to ensure that even max players won’t be a bad experience. Doing so then forces public instances to appear empty and make the map itself look inactive and less people would want to join. For a social app, the soft cap and hard cap doesn’t make sense.
owlboy
This was a predicament I was in with The Pug. I talked about it some here:
No matter what action is taken, we definitely need a better system in such a resource-constrained environment.