PDA

View Full Version : Netcode.


edhe
15th Apr 2005, 06:15 AM
With the advent of UTComp's 1.6 netcode that has lots of people creaming, and others worrying, what will happen with Envy?

Will they stick to the old fashioned buggy netcode that forces newstart players to relearn the game completely due to leading their or will Envy be on the receiving end of brand new, properly developed netcode that will make Online gaming seem like Instant Action (up to a point).

Oh yeah.. and think they'll finally get rid of the 'dud projectile' bug? ;)

Imho it will make the transfer of players from SP into MP smoother, and probably make the community more global and, because it's built into the game vanilla style, nobody will get to moan about it being bad or good.

No offence to the UTComp Dev, but putting a multimillion pound company onto the idea will surely bring better results.

Tournament0
15th Apr 2005, 11:19 AM
I think it will be better than UT2004's Netcode, but, it might not make a difference. :hmm:
There will still probably be bugs somehow.

T2A`
15th Apr 2005, 11:33 AM
One thing I'd like to see is better ping.So you'd rather have Epic redo all the networking across the planet? Sounds good.

Making it more like IA would be great, but there needs to be a way around the high pingers having more of an advantage. I've never actually seen it in action, but Raffi, Brizz, et al, say that you have an exponentially greater chance of hitting someone with a high ping under UTComp's netcode.

I haven't seen these things that people complain about with UTComp's netcode at all. Granted, I don't have too much experience with it, but the games I've played on it went much smoother than UT2004's netcode. Hell, just yesterday I was playing some TAM on ViperBU (non-UTComp) and sent a flak shell at Raffi. He was pinging 36ish, I was 45-52ish, and my flak shell totally whiffed and went right by him, yet he gibbed as if it were a direct hit. Another time, same map, I sent two rockets straight into Skold's face and he shrugged it off like it was nothing. People complain that everything screws up under UTComp's code, but in my experience more crap goes wrong with the default code. Sure, I have seen some dead lightning shots, but I'd rather a lightning shot go bad than a precisely-placed flak shell any day.

m&ms
15th Apr 2005, 04:18 PM
T2A, utcomp netcode doesn't help any of those problems.

spineblaZe
15th Apr 2005, 04:27 PM
Erm, UT2004's default netcode is rock solid. Having a high ping to servers has nothing to do with the default netcode, and I know the dud projectile bug has nothing to do with the default netcode either, because I've experienced that offline also.

edhe
18th Apr 2005, 04:34 AM
Originally Posted by that guy who posts a lot of useless crap and needs to be RO'd
One thing I'd like to see is better ping.

:con:

JaFO
18th Apr 2005, 07:57 PM
I hope the new game simply tells players as they join in gigantic letters :

If you can't hit a bloody thing and get fragged all the time it's cause your aim sucks, you don't know what you're doing and your neighbour decided to download tons of pr0n-movies and share his music-collection to the world.

Oh ... and would you please turn off that p2p-program you're running.

signed,
Epic

In other words :

The best netcode in the world can't compensate for the fact that the entire ff-ing internet has not been designed to handle real-time network communication.(period)

Other features of this new netcode would be :
- the game dumping you as soon as you mention the amount of 'lag' in your conversations
- doing likewise for the words : aimbot, cheater, hacker, pwned (and its variants)

edhe
19th Apr 2005, 03:18 AM
How sensible.

But back on topic, would people rather see the 'adjusted' idea of the utcomp netcode, or good old fashioned style UT netcode?

Tournament0
19th Apr 2005, 10:51 AM
How sensible.

But back on topic, would people rather see the 'adjusted' idea of the utcomp netcode, or good old fashioned style UT netcode?

Everyone wants it to be more like UT99.
I don't think this is a good idea. If you want it to be more like UT99, then go and play UT99.
This will be a new game.
:rolleyes:

JaFO
19th Apr 2005, 10:57 AM
No seriously. The internet just isn't suited to the kind of games we play.

The best thing Epic (or anyone else) can hope to achieve is somehow minimize the amount of data (and perhaps use some kind of compression) combined with redundant packages for error-correction.

In fact the best thing for a high-ping connection would be a game that runs as slow as possible with weapons that have an extremely low rate of fire.

There's nothing that can compensate for the fact that your connection has to cross larger distances across compared to other players.
Introducing client-side hit-prediction will only serve to shift the problem to the low-ping connections + it'll make cheating even easier.

Anything that claims to magically fix this stuff is make-believe.

edhe
19th Apr 2005, 11:31 AM
Everyone wants it to be more like UT99.
I don't think this is a good idea. If you want it to be more like UT99, then go and play UT99.
This will be a new game.
:rolleyes:

Did you actually read the post, lardass?

Do you actually think your comment is in any way relevant to the thread? Can you even justify your opinions?

Discord
19th Apr 2005, 07:14 PM
Introducing client-side hit-prediction will only serve to shift the problem to the low-ping connections + it'll make cheating even easier.

It's not clientside, JaFO. Here's something I managed to drag from the flames over on INA in a gut- wrenching feat of derring- do :eek: :

First of all, technically the word netcode is a tad misleading: UTComp's Enhanced Netcode does not have any impact on the actual network data being sent between clients and servers. The better word would be predictive weapon firing. However, due to the fact that gaming communities typically refer to this as netcode, we decided to use a term that players would easily be able to identify. Please do not write us angry emails claiming Enhanced Netcode isn't really netcode: we know.

As opposed to past "netcode" modifying mutators for the Unreal Tournament series, our netcode does not decide anything clientside that would normally be decided server side, or change the position players are displayed at. Our netcode works similar to Half-Life's, by having the server remain the ultimate authority.

The entire point of this is to remove the aim differences between various pings: while many players can deal with "lagged" fire, (having to lead targets depending on their pings) several players cannot, or would rather not if they had the option. Players using Enhanced Netcode can simply fire directly at targets, regardless of their ping.

Technical facts about Enhanced Netcode:

Hitscan Weapons:
How it works: The client draws its own client effects. The client sends info to the server. The server decides if the player would have hit if he were not lagged.

The immediate downside is 'through the wall' hits. These are not nearly as noticable in UT as you might imagine. Most experience with it comes from counter-strike, where the movement caused by damage is also reverted to 0 ping conditions. What this means is, that unlike CS, you won't get stuck behind a wall being hit over and over. You will be hit only if you would have been hit versus a lower pinger. This is currently capped at 350 milliseconds.

Another downside is that the client may register hits, or misses that will not actually register on the server. These are rather infrequent, but will happen nonetheless. The majority of these come from already existing innaccuracies in UT's netcode. In ut2k4, when you fire a shot, the shot is not only not guaranteed to be fired when you shot, but also is not guaranteed to be even aiming in the same direction, or from the same place as you shot. For example, if you move your mouse *QUICKLY* from left to right or up to down. There is basically a random cone of fire, even on weapons like the shock rifle and lightning gun, and even on lan. This is why snap-shots are so innacurate in ut2k4. Basically, the errors are made more visibly noticable.

Projectile Weapons:
Projectiles are reverted much like the hitscan weapns, but are currently limited to 75ms. You cannot be hit behind a wall by the projectiles.

Downsides: The immediate downside is that the projectiles are actually slightly harder to dodge vs a higher pinger. However, the magnitude of this effect is equal to the effect that the high pinger feels from the lower pingers projectiles. For example in the case of a 10 pinger vs a 75 pinger, they will both have equal difficulty in dodging projectiles, the approximate difficulty of a 85 ping player. Above 75 ping, the lower ping player has an advantage in dodging.

Shock Combos:
Your own shock balls are moved forward approximately as far as your ping, so that you do not have to lead them.

Downsides: The shock ball will look to be in a slightly different position when the actual combo explosion occurs. This is only visible to the firer, and has no real impact on play, but it looks wrong.

Other facts about Enhanced Netcode:

* If the server has Enhanced Netcode enabled, every player can decide whether they want to use Enhanced Netcode or not. Players who prefer the regular UT2004 netcode can simply check an option in their F5, Miscellaneous menu and revert back to the normal netcode. This will have no impact on other players. Server admins who prefer not to use Enhanced Netcode can disable it entirely for all players by either changing the setting in their server.ini, or by voting the option off via the Voting--> Gametype --> Settings menu.
* Enhanced Netcode is in most cases as accurate than the normal netcode is. However, many effects now take place on the client instead of the server. This has the direct result of causing some innacuracies that would normally be transparent to the player, visible.
* Enhanced Netcode does not make it any "easier" to hit targets. It only makes it so that you don't have to fire ahead of opponents. For players who are unable to effectively adjust to their pings, it will make a difference, but it's not going to give them any better accuracies than they would get under lan conditions.
* Enhanced Netcode does not favor higher ping players. However, if those players had difficulties aiming in front of their targets to compensate for their ping times, it will obviously minimize their usual ping disadvantage. As much as we'd like to make things 100% even regardless of pings, this just isn't possible. For now, minimizing higher ping disadvantages is as good as we can do.
* Enhanced Netcode will not currently work with custom weapon mutators. So, for the time being, you would be best served to only use the enhanced Netcode with the standard weapon loadout.


Short version: it moves your shot back in time (serverside) by the amount of your ping. The upshot, apparently, is that it makes it easier to hit and harder to dodge.

Seems like six of one and a half- dozen of the other to me, though I haven't played it yet. I don't think I'd want to be forced to use that. Dealing with latency is kind of part of the game... and you move a helluva lot farther in 60ms in UT2k4 than you do in CS or CoD. It's an interesting idea and I'm glad somebody was motivated to investigate, but I'd put it in the "still- too- new- to- UT- to- get- excited" category.


And please, guys. Nowhere is it written that just because you're posting about UTComp you HAVE to flame people. I thought this was the well- behaved UT forum...

Discord
19th Apr 2005, 07:20 PM
Srry for self- reply, but I find the subject interesting and that previous post was already waaay long.

Anyhow, here's some further Q&A from the same unbearable thread... Q courtesy of yours truly and A courtesy of Boksha, who is not a UTComp dev but who makes it his business to know these things nevertheless. Probably the best secondhand source on a subject like this you could want.

1. How weird does that look, exactly?
2. Do you guys like it?
3. Is it known yet whether this will be used in competition?
4. I'm still fuzzy on this -- did ZeroPing use clientside hit detection?
5. Is there an option to force all clients to use the same "netcode?" If not, is such an option under discussion?

1. Not that weird, at least for instant-hit weapons. There is always some weirdness involved of course, like with the shockrifle, the shot itself looks instant-hit, but your opponent won't be bounced backwards until 60ms later when the hit gets replicated. The hitsound also gets delayed until the hit gets confirmed by the server.
I've seen some odd happenings with projectiles though, where the projectile jerked back in a Z-shaped path. I'm not sure if that's still possible in the latest versions of the netcode.
2. I don't. I prefer lag over ping correction, mostly because of afformentioned weirdness.
3. In Europe, it might be if both sides of a match agree to.
4. Some versions did.
5. You can only force enhanced netcode off by disabling it serverside. There's currently no way to force it on.

Sir_Brizz
19th Apr 2005, 08:24 PM
Discord']It's not clientside, JaFO. Here's something I managed to drag from the flames over on INA in a gut- wrenching feat of derring- do :eek: :




Short version: it moves your shot back in time (serverside) by the amount of your ping. The upshot, apparently, is that it makes it easier to hit and harder to dodge.

Seems like six of one and a half- dozen of the other to me, though I haven't played it yet. I don't think I'd want to be forced to use that. Dealing with latency is kind of part of the game... and you move a helluva lot farther in 60ms in UT2k4 than you do in CS or CoD. It's an interesting idea and I'm glad somebody was motivated to investigate, but I'd put it in the "still- too- new- to- UT- to- get- excited" category.


And please, guys. Nowhere is it written that just because you're posting about UTComp you HAVE to flame people. I thought this was the well- behaved UT forum...
This is actually worse in alot of cases than client side hit detection, then.

Kantham
19th Apr 2005, 09:08 PM
Ban UNR3AL again.

Everything that you post must contain :hmm: or :con:

Never satisfied and you post like unr3al , you used numbers in the ''tournament>0<<< account'' that make me about UNR3AL TOURNAMENT0 that remind me that nerd that posted 100 post in a single day.

It is not the first time ppl blame him for his own post. And ppl here start to get Really anoyed.


Think twice before posting. Ping is a no-problem for epic so don't blame them for that.

Sorry for posting that in your thread Edhe.

JaFO
20th Apr 2005, 09:19 AM
I don't know about you, but I'd rather have to lead my targets then watch bullets/projectiles travel along weird z-shaped paths and similar weird/unrealistic effects.

I think what Epic (and any other company) should do is take the other route :
make instant-action appear more like 'real' internet/lan-games ...

So instead of trying to negate lag in on-line games we should be thinking of ways to add lag-like effects to off-line games.
That would make it easier for players to practice with the effects of a 'real' on-line game.

edhe
20th Apr 2005, 09:35 AM
That's pretty arse over tit. You'd want top notch performance offline, not a bogged down game that's trying to be a pain just to try to train you to go online.

They're moving to less ping based weaponry (i hope) so maybe that'll help against those who can't fathom some latency differential. I still think if they can make a workable 'prediction client side drawing of effects' work well then that'd be a break through, on the otherhand i'd rather have raw and comprehendable good old-fashioned latency, than psuedo non-latency.

JaFO
20th Apr 2005, 01:00 PM
I wasn't thinking of using that 'simulated' lag to all off-line games.
I think an on-line simulator-mode does have some merit in a game that's going to have problems with lag (and similar effects), because I see no reason in trying to compensate that which can't be compensated.

Especially for a fast-paced game like UT trying to 'predict' stuff is almost useless.
Perhaps Epic can add minor prediction to weapons (say +/- 10-20 ms), but anything more and the risc of visual weirdness is just too great.

There's so much happening/changing in such a short period of time that any attempt to compensate is has to take care of an enormous amount of variables in order to reduce the amount of weird effects.

I think the only way such 'prediction' has a chance of succes is if there's a minimum amount of players, but then the data needed to transmit/receive changes becomes so little that lag becomes less of a problem as transmitting additional redundant data becomes easier ...

T2A`
20th Apr 2005, 01:42 PM
I actually wouldn't mind the option of being able to simulate lag and packetloss offline. I tried a couple days ago to start a dedicated server with ucc on my computer with lag and packetloss but I couldn't get it to work. The ping was always ~16 rather than the 150 I tried to force on it.

I suck online compared to offline, mainly because I've played offline for so long, that even with my low pings, my aim goes completely out the window in most cases. Learning to deal with ping without having to try to find a server that's playing the game you want with the right amount of people you want via a mutator or something would be great.

Discord
20th Apr 2005, 04:23 PM
'prediction client side drawing of effects'

That would be great if it would work, but AFAIK that would just cause warping.

Warping in online play is caused when the server predicts a high- pinger's location and sends that info on down the pipe to other clients. Then, the HPB turns out to be somewhere else entirely and the server updates instantly upon receipt of that info... et violá, the warp. Moving that prediction downstream to clients would probably just make the effect more pronounced? I dunno, but I think so...

CG5Addict
21st Apr 2005, 01:55 PM
End the netcode drama! :o :rolleyes:

fresh&minty
21st Apr 2005, 07:34 PM
EPIC codes net codes like old people make love.

All I can hope is that they fix their ass projectile issues. DUD rox for life. Common it's an epic games feature.

JohnDoe641
21st Apr 2005, 08:09 PM
Actually, I don't remember the projectile bug being in Unreal, but then again, I haven't played Unreal DM online in years. But yeah, it's not an Epic game without rockets and flak not doing any damage. ;)

Sir_Brizz
21st Apr 2005, 09:47 PM
NEWS FLASH: EVERY GAME HAS THIS PROBLEM.

fresh&minty
21st Apr 2005, 09:53 PM
nope just unreal 2 engine games, sorry to burst your fanboy bubble.

edhe
22nd Apr 2005, 03:29 AM
Or UT, which isn't an unreal 2 engine.

Sorry to busrst your ego bubble (or wait, was that a passing satellite that managed that?).

fat&munchy \o/

Sir_Brizz
22nd Apr 2005, 09:04 AM
Or UT, which isn't an unreal 2 engine.

Sorry to busrst your ego bubble (or wait, was that a passing satellite that managed that?).

fat&munchy \o/
Or Quake1,2,3. Or Half Life. Or Doom.

Just because YOU PERSONALLY (not you edhe) haven't experienced the problem doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I've seen it on every one of those games.

JaFO
22nd Apr 2005, 08:26 PM
Half-life definitely had 'issues' as soon as the pings reach certain limits as well.
I can definitely recall seeing 'dud rockets' in Half-life/TFC ... however most servers pinged well below 100ms on average (filter set to 150ms ping max tended to result in dozens of servers)

The only reason a lot of players haven't seen such issues in those games is because there's tons of servers so the risc of running into a high-ping/crappy server is a lot lower (and in case of CSS/HL2 practically zero).

Smurfzilla
22nd Apr 2005, 09:45 PM
Let the netcode discussions continue. Nothing is more funny hearing people discuss Netcode, when they can't even code. It's kinda like reading the Sunday comic's.

fresh&minty
22nd Apr 2005, 11:47 PM
who says those debating can't code?

brizz I call FOS on you, you preach the praises of your views with the frenzy of a religious nutjob

Quake games didn't have the projectile bug, only unrealengine 2 games do. The engine is also famous for being utter **** for netcode and gameplay. But it looks pretty and gives good fps when cranked so people love it. Yet even on LAN you get dud shots.

Preach on brotha man

Sir_Brizz
23rd Apr 2005, 11:37 AM
Let the netcode discussions continue. Nothing is more funny hearing people discuss Netcode, when they can't even code. It's kinda like reading the Sunday comic's.
I'm not a programmer? News to me...

f&m I don't give two ****s about what you think. Every Quake game from Quake 1 has had dud projectiles. The only difference is the tolerance level. The Unreal Engine is more sensitive to packet loss than the Quake engine is.

You can't debate netcode when you don't even know how to code it because of this exact reason. EVERY game that can be played over the Internet will experience dud projectiles. It's just a fact af networking. CliffyB commented on it several times, and on the mods list Steve Polge and him have explained exactly what the problem is. It would happen on EVERY game. It doesn't matter how good the "netcode" is.

Get off it. I call n00b on you :rolleyes:

Renegade Retard
23rd Apr 2005, 12:13 PM
Brizz, if UT2004's net code was so bad as fat&muchy claims it to be, then I should have never been able to play it before I got my cable connection, huh?

;)

Selerox
23rd Apr 2005, 12:18 PM
I'm pretty sure there was a major Quake 3 game (possibly CPL, I'm not 100% sure), that involved a dud shot which would have won the player the match. Not too sure, but it was definitly Quake3, and it definitly involved a dud shot. I don't play Quake3, but I know from people who do that you can get dud shots in the Quake series as well. They're less common than in UT, but they do happen.

As for the netcode, as long as it's stable and it works, then it's all good in my book.

yurch
23rd Apr 2005, 02:10 PM
I think the prediction method is an interesting one, I'm becoming familiar with it's use in HL2. Anyone who's played a more bizzare instance of 'netcode' like the one Descent3 defaults to (Imagine a game where every shot is a potential 'dud' - there is no shot delay or prediction of any kind for the client, and this includes visual effects) can appreciate the things that even UT99 does to resolve discrepancies.

The prediction system certainly has potential in shooting-accuracy-first based games like CS, HL, CoD, or 'Realism' games. Action games with an emphasis on dodging projectiles are probably better off without the system; players won't appreciate having less time to dodge low-velocity projectiles. Especially if the max ping that the prediction kicks in is raised.

If 'prediction' is to be applied to hitscan weapons or not is probably up for debate, personally I'd say no for UT.

As for the 'dud' issue, I'd be seriously impressed if any game ever managed to eliminate the problem without full-on clientside hit detection - and that would only solve it from one end, Shooter or Shootee.

Smurfzilla
23rd Apr 2005, 09:05 PM
Brizz,

I know you code. Aenubis is my roommate. Evenground is running on my server at the moment. I appreciate the work. I'm sure you appreciate the humour, that I was commenting about.

-smurf

Discord
23rd Apr 2005, 10:13 PM
I think the prediction method is an interesting one, I'm becoming familiar with it's use in HL2.

Yeah, there's the post I was looking for. I was wondering when the realism guys were going to pick up on this one. :)

Me personally, I think latency makes a decent abstract substitute for environmental factors (wind, humidity, barometric pressure, rifle's got gunk all over it, etc. etc. etc.) that can't practically be coded into a game. I can see how others might call BS on that, though.

yurch
24th Apr 2005, 12:44 AM
Well, from a realistic gamer's standpoint you could now theoretically code accurate ballistics and other jazz and not have lag screw it all up. After all, what's important in this type game is the accuracy of the simulation for the shooter. It's not like the other guys are gonna be watching and dodging the bullets.

It doesn't eliminate lag of course, a shooter with a 120 ping is going to see the guy drop at least 120ms after he shoots, but this is a visual issue that's going to be there no matter what. At least he doesn't have to lead an extra 120ms.

Of course, I can't leave well enough alone. When the client totally simulates it's own hit effects with NO delay, it's alarming how many dud hits you can get with just a few minor "changes". I'm finding small 'dud' errors with as little as 10ms ping - I say players today are probably just spoiled. ;)

Sir_Brizz
24th Apr 2005, 04:20 PM
Brizz,

I know you code. Aenubis is my roommate. Evenground is running on my server at the moment. I appreciate the work. I'm sure you appreciate the humour, that I was commenting about.

-smurf
Yah, sorry. After reading flatulenence&'morety's post, I couldn't bare any more cynicism ;)

McTank
24th Apr 2005, 07:36 PM
Did anybody stop to think that maybe UT Envy will have it's own version of enhanced netcode? I would much rather have that than the old UT2004 netcode, and the new UTComp "enhanced netcode" (even though it's not really enhanced netcode). Not to mention, half the internet connections out there will be faster by the time UT Envy hits. This thread is complete paranoia. :S Carry on. :D

Discord
24th Apr 2005, 08:02 PM
half the internet connections out there will be faster by the time UT Envy hits.

Eh... I dunno if it'll happen that fast. But thankfully, yes, it's finally starting to happen. :)

edhe
25th Apr 2005, 03:43 AM
felched&milky

p.s. this not is complete paranoia, it's actually meant to be open to *discussion* about what people might think they'll see in the next iteration of the UT series.

Then moaners and whiners came along.

PsychoMoggieBagpuss
25th Apr 2005, 04:17 AM
TBH I never saw anything like it in Q1, but then again if you got hit by a rocket there was usually another one closely following behind it and if you didn't have armour it was instant kill anyway.

God I loved that game :D

Sir_Brizz
25th Apr 2005, 08:42 AM
felched&milky

p.s. this not is complete paranoia, it's actually meant to be open to *discussion* about what people might think they'll see in the next iteration of the UT series.

Then moaners and whiners came along.
It is inevitable.

edhe
25th Apr 2005, 09:01 AM
Of course, wouldn't be forums without stupid kids that think they know everything and are egotistitical enough to post it the way they see it instead of the way it is.

-AEnubis-
25th Apr 2005, 04:56 PM
Discord']Short version: it moves your shot back in time (serverside) by the amount of your ping. The upshot, apparently, is that it makes it easier to hit and harder to dodge.

Well, if they make the move to minimal hit-scan, that the concept of "easier to hit, and harder to dodge" is kinda silly. It would slightly defeat the purpose, if they make a bunch of projectile weapons, that would include occasions where "you can't see them coming".

Epic hasn't done anything like client side prediction in the past, because of how it would effect weapon balance, and I'm sure also because of the dodge. A quick concise move, that can't be predicted.

Honestly, I don't know why this discussion is so heated. I could feel a 10ms difference when playing UT. Now, if I'm sub50, if feels like lan, and I play at 10ms pings frequently. I think net play in this game feels as good or better then any other game I've every played.

Internet routing will dictate where we play, probably forever, or until encryption is so crazy we can safely shoot information through the sky, and bounce it off low obriting satelites, and me and edhe can compete in the same competative ladder.

And what about improoving hardware? Broad band connetions are rampant, and competative, giving constant upgrades to service lately. There are company's in america, ISP's with gaming packages that garuntee their bandwidth. I think if Epic simply sticks too what they are doing, and make their realistic adjustments to it, everything will be fine.

Mostly though, I think jafo is talking the most sense. If you don't want false positives, then epic needs to patch physics (and I don't mean in game).

Discord
25th Apr 2005, 06:54 PM
And what about improoving hardware?

Hehe, people are going to think this is all I talk about. But anyway...

Chick this sh!t out. (http://www.verizonfios.com/)

It's currently in test marketing, and those markets expanded recently. Another couple of years and cable will be all but done for, or so it seems from here. IIRC part of the motivation behind it is vastly expanded on- demand television.

Assuming it does well and gets decent market saturation (and why not? If it was available here I'd have subscribed yesterday), the impact on online gaming will no doubt be beyond substantial.

I think net play in this game feels as good or better then any other game I've every played.

Yeah, it's quite nice as long as you don't try to extend your ping range too far. Every so often I feel like getting crazy and hitting the European servers, and IMO UT2k4 doesn't play nearly as well with ping @ 250 as UT did. Naturally, though... UT was built for dial- up. The crazed movement may also factor into that, but there it is.

JaFO
25th Apr 2005, 07:14 PM
And what about improoving hardware?

That's not going to solve the problem. At best it will move the problem to another area/gametype.
Why ?

Sure you extend the range of the average user, but considering the fact that the number of servers / game get more scarce as new games are released it's most gamers are going to need such a high-speed connection just to find a server at all.

Also consider the fact that p2p-servers have become popular. That kind of stuff is eating our precious bandwidth as well. And the next 'hot' item that's going to steal 'our' bandwidth are the services such as Skype aka VoIP telephone-services.
Internet-based games are facing ever more competitors for bandwidth that hasn't been improved all this time ...

-AEnubis-
25th Apr 2005, 07:53 PM
The network will grow to accomodate it. Another thing I've noticed in playing this game is routing has gotten tons better since the UT Days. Even now playing UT, my "playable ping range" has increased. I can play sub 50 in the entire eastern united states, if server specs provide.

Hardware will be the main cause for how much more playable any game is on the internet. The software is then written in for said hardware, and is limited by said hardware.

gregori
6th May 2005, 10:34 AM
justt make the damn code as fast and ,eficcient and smooth as possible,
Epic have been at it for 10 years now,it's a multiplayer focused game, netcode should be the top priorty, make Envy accessable to all.

Selerox
6th May 2005, 10:49 AM
justt make the damn code as fast and ,eficcient and smooth as possible,
Epic have been at it for 10 years now,it's a multiplayer focused game, netcode should be the top priorty, make Envy accessable to all.

In my opinion, work on netcode should take precedence over any and all work on AI. Despite the "bot-lobby", it's a multiplayer game first and formost. Great AI is fine, but netplay comes first.

gregori
6th May 2005, 11:14 AM
exactly!

Selerox
6th May 2005, 11:41 AM
I was agreeing with you. No need to agree with me for agreeing with you. Takes too long for a start ;)

JaFO
6th May 2005, 12:22 PM
pff ... best network-code in the world can't fix packetloss and crappy connections.
Better fix the AI so people without decent internet can still enjoy multiplayer-games without having to run 2-player servers ...

And lets not forget the joys of co-op games in UT.

-AEnubis-
6th May 2005, 01:31 PM
Too late. What's co-op again?

Renegade Retard
6th May 2005, 03:12 PM
Aaaaahhhh, a co-op single player campain in a UT game.

*drool*

Kriegs-Maschine
9th May 2005, 04:39 PM
I hope they put better netcode. The flak ball doing no damage is annoying, some weapon shooting through floor (mostly hitscan) is stupid. And the worse from this is to be good with hitscans, you must have like 24 ping no more... I can't play over 66. Only with hitscan, if a target is moving sideway and you shoot when the target is in the middle of your crosshair, you won't hit him... its really gay, it make me suck with those hitscan guns, else if it would hit when its suppose to hit, I would own a lot more with them.

edhe
11th May 2005, 06:17 AM
Or you could adjust to the ping like the good players and lead your targets. by (OMG! 66 ms!)

If i can compensate for 100+ then you can compensate for something near reaction time. Fact is that latency is part of the game, like reload time or splash damage. Something you can either be victimised by or learn and master and use to your advantage.

/me remembers a 300+ping IG kill on an FC dodging down from on top Citadel, mid air kill \o/

Xaero_UT
11th May 2005, 07:43 PM
i would like to see netcode enable for envy, this would be much fairer on people who cant get adsl, or cannot afford it (for whatever reason)

currently i am on 28.8k dialup, and trust me, its hard, i only go on good servers which half my ping to about 180. still while i am a challenge, its probably not a hard one

however, on my clans server, netcode is enabled, and i can beat players, i would never have had a chance to beat.

to put it simple: netcode does not change ure skill in actuall play, but enables good players that do not have adsl, to be able to play, as (much as possible) they normally can..

bulletlag=crap

however, this will not affect me for envy, as by end of july i will have adsl..but still, its good to see epic thinking about the disadvantaged

edhe
12th May 2005, 03:28 AM
I think you've brought up another decent point - a fair few newstart gamers could be on dialup, and that kind of netcode could help them appreciate the game better, attract more players.