1. OCAU Merchandise now available! Check out our 20th Anniversary Mugs, Classic Logo Shirts and much more! Discussion here.
    Dismiss Notice

Star Citizen

Discussion in 'PC Games' started by Mikuji, Oct 10, 2012.

  1. bart5986

    bart5986 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,481
    Location:
    Brisbane
    For the client? Thats already solved using either network draw distance/bubble or network draw distance update rate using a bubble. I forget the term but basically only players that are up close will get a fast update rate, the further out it goes, the slower the update rate.

    This already exists in quite a few games, even Battlefield.

    For the server?, I'm not sure of any real world examples, I'm sure its difficult. Latency and network speed between local servers means its manageable if coded done correctly.

    It really depends on how talented the developers are I guess.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2020
  2. GumbyNoTalent

    GumbyNoTalent Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Messages:
    8,866
    Location:
    Briz Vegas
    Not even a thing in my discussion... I'm not discussing game anything, just simple theoretical maximum data tranbsfers for network performance per TCP connection!

    Also your solution is limited to what ever it is in Battlefield which is way less then 30K.

    So thats me I'm signing off because the discussion is just me repeating that networking is the issue for the current concurrent issue for MMO shards, and you jumping all other the place like Donald Trump saying shit that is meaningless to the discussion topic.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2020
    Fortigurn likes this.
  3. bart5986

    bart5986 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,481
    Location:
    Brisbane
    But for the client? The maximum internet speed is not really an issue.

    There would not be a situation where you would have so many players that close, that a reduction in update rate would not solve it and also be mostly unnoticeable.

    Even during intense situations, an update of every 3 seconds is not a big deal if the ship/player is outside the maximum distance you can target/shoot etc.

    And in even more intense situations, it can just reduce the visibility completely.

    Yes but its the technique.

    Obviously there is no way we can know to scale, but if you have 30k in an area, but you can only see 1k players, and you update 500 players every 3 seconds, the 400 players every 1 second, 50 players every 0.2 seconds and the remaining closest, 50 players every 10ms, then it works, at least theoretically.

    I wish I could remember which games besides battlefield had this tech, I specifically remember one which pioneered it but I forget the name. I'm pretty sure a lot of games use this now, especially battle royals.

    Edit: See here for Battlefield 1 for example and how it works.

    https://i.imgur.com/ghayrqZ.jpg

    Replication Graph from Unreal Engine also touches on this subject. You can see them discuss it here

    At various points in the video it talks about updating characters depending on distance as well as many other aspects that save resources for both the client and the server.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2020
  4. GumbyNoTalent

    GumbyNoTalent Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Messages:
    8,866
    Location:
    Briz Vegas
    Predictive positioning is not as Roberts puts it "real time", and is why people complain in Battlefield that targeting long distances in a predictive model is shit and you have to aim at blank space to get a kill "most" of the time. Even then the numbers of objects that can be tracked on current computer tech limits the maximums because you must cover the lowest common denominator (processing power of old CPUs), which is why these games are still capped < 64 not 30K, interesting your examples are all of tech that have limits betlon 100 for the gaming arena. Again if it was easy these engines would have modeled their arena to the 1000s.

    Again, nothing to do with networking.

    PS - finishing my lunch then I need to work out how to record 1000s of messages/sec over limited bandwidth and high latency for monitoring system, only 1 way traffic yet limited in the amount of data that can be processes.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2020
    Fortigurn likes this.
  5. bart5986

    bart5986 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,481
    Location:
    Brisbane
    These games are capped at 64-100 and not 30k because of two reasons

    1. A single server can't handle more then 64-100.

    2. Most engines are unable to load in a seamless large world that could fit 30k players, just a simple map, which is easy on client resources and existing engines can do it.


    Having a working technology that solves the server issue, and using an engine that allows enough space means you could do more players. Obviously without a publicly available example of the server technology, we have no idea how well it works.


    There are no resources required for clients to manage players outside the specified bubble as the client has no knowledge of these players until the server decides they should. There is no networking, CPU or ram requirement for client computers to manage players that the server has not told the player about.


    All the big difficult issues are server related, the client related stuff has already been solved in various games.
     
  6. FerrisXB9R

    FerrisXB9R Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Messages:
    3,181
    Location:
    AB, CAN
    The problem, which you haven't seen in your example, is that the overarching server/s needs to monitor every single client to decide WHEN it needs to give more knowledge to the client. Are you starting to grasp the problem? This is purely using your server logic here btw.
     
    miicah and Fortigurn like this.
  7. DangerMaus

    DangerMaus Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2014
    Messages:
    1,231
    Seems like you are the only one who missed the obvious or failed to understand it.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2020
    Fortigurn likes this.
  8. bart5986

    bart5986 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,481
    Location:
    Brisbane
    There is a mix of client and server related discussion here though, I'm just pointing out that the client is mostly solved.

    Deciding when to give the client more information is not the difficult part either though, as thats already implemented in many games.


    Creating a master server with slave servers that all work together to manage thousands of players? Thats difficult.

    Whats more difficult is that the Duel Universe tech claims to be able to manage a lot of split servers in a very small area, which seems even more difficult and where gumby's limitations start to make a lot more sense.


    Yes and have a look at the huge "Simulated 30,000 players" writing in the post.

    I didn't think I needed a disclaimer when its literally in the video title.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2020
  9. Fortigurn

    Fortigurn Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    13,191
    Location:
    taipei.tw
    Nothing to see here, move along please.
     
    DangerMaus likes this.
  10. XanaTos

    XanaTos Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2013
    Messages:
    1,128
    3 seconds of not been able to shoot or target is not a big deal. Really now. I'm 100% sure, to assume people would quit a game over that.

    Talking about networking on a FPS game when you keep telling me this is a space game and it's completely different networking.
     
  11. bart5986

    bart5986 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,481
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Once again, you should just stick to liking posts.

    3 seconds of not being able to shoot a target who would take you a whole minute to get within range of to then shoot, how is that a big deal?

    This would only affect people with hacks who can instantly teleport, or who can enable unlimited range weapons to hit people on the other side of a planet.
     
  12. XanaTos

    XanaTos Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2013
    Messages:
    1,128
    Duel Universe and SC are to different games built on 2 different engines. Not sure why you're talking about Duel Universe.
     
  13. DangerMaus

    DangerMaus Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2014
    Messages:
    1,231
    If it's so obvious why did you fail to make the distinction between players and simulated players when you said "actual event of 30,000 players at once"?
     
  14. XanaTos

    XanaTos Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2013
    Messages:
    1,128

    You must be a big player of MMO's and FPS games if you think 3 seconds is nothing.
     
  15. bart5986

    bart5986 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,481
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Well now I realise I should have, but I did not think it was necessary, as it was literally written in my post.


    If a combination of 5 pixels on your screen update every 3 seconds, why does it matter?

    You can barely see those pixels and your weapons can not reach those tiny three pixels 30 km away.

    I'll give you a better example since you are struggling so badly.

    If you are flying in a plane at 5000 ft, is it important how often a person down in their house is updating? What would change if it was faster or slower?
     
  16. XanaTos

    XanaTos Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2013
    Messages:
    1,128
    LOL, you really have NFI what you're talking about.
     
  17. bart5986

    bart5986 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,481
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Its hilarious you don't understand such a simple concept. You should stick to liking posts.
     
  18. FerrisXB9R

    FerrisXB9R Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Messages:
    3,181
    Location:
    AB, CAN
    Yeah honestly Bart, being a CCNP and reading Gumbys post about concurrent connections, he's not wrong. Which is why hearing about server meshing is one thing, but throwing stupid big numbers about in regards to it is a whole different kettle of fish. There's only so much turkey you can squeeze through a pipe, regardless of what a visionary sez.

    This boils down to the previous stance I've had. "Cool idea, I'll believe it when I see it". Nothing to do with Dual Universe. Networking as it stands, and infrastructure across the planet really doesn't have what it takes to make this vision a reality as far as I can see. Being smart can only get you so far, sometimes you really need a paradigm shift in brute force to achieve something.

    edit: and the problem I have now, is I've been a backer since day 1. Give or take, I've got a backer number card with 4 digits. I have been patient for such a long time now, and seen so many "promises" and deadlines woosh past so many times I'm just.... hype-exhausted. I no longer have any excitement with statements from CR. Every time I load up the latest version it's still a clusterfuck of high fidelity, utterly poor performance tech demo that I can't see the end. At no stage have I gone, "sweet, fucken nearly there, can't wait!". It's always, "well, looks cool, pity there's fuck all to it/its buggy as fuck/miles to go."

    So any and all statements from CR for a few years now have been, "oh yeah? prove it."

    Meanwhile, they're still raking in cash from the promise of what they will bring. I've been waiting since 2012. I'll still wait. But I'm no longer willing to accept ANYTHING out of CR as truth until it's irrefutably proven.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2020
    FoxMaN and Fortigurn like this.
  19. Fortigurn

    Fortigurn Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    13,191
    Location:
    taipei.tw
    Yes. Apparently you didn't read this.

    No one is objecting that you didn't put a disclaimer on it. They're pointing out the hilarious blunder you made in posting a video which you claimed was an actual event of 30,000 players, and you saying explicitly that this was evidence that this "had been done", when in fact you didn't even realise it was a simulation, not a real event of 30,000 players, despite the fact that the video said this very clearly. You just grabbed it because you were desperate for anything to provide evidence for your as yet totally unsubstantiated claims.

    Of course I read it correctly. As I and others pointed out, it said this was a simulation. It was you who didn't read it properly. Let's be clear on this; everyone else who has posted on this video correctly identified it as a simulation. You didn't even read the video title properly, and thought it was real. This spectacular incompetence is symptomatic of your failure to support your claims with evidence, and the hasty way at which you grasp at straws without applying any critical thinking.

    It is not a demonstration of the technology you claimed; tens of thousands of simultaneous actual players.
     
  20. DangerMaus

    DangerMaus Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2014
    Messages:
    1,231
    Depends if you or someone else is communicating with the person on the ground or their actions are capable of influencing the situation at 5000ft. Lets change the random person on the ground to a flight controller shall we?
     

Share This Page

Advertisement: