Home » General Discussions » General Discussion » Design of a new, free renegade-like game
|
|
|
|
| Re: Design of a new, free renegade-like game [message #434526 is a reply to message #434392] |
Tue, 10 August 2010 20:44   |
 |
R315r4z0r
Messages: 3836
Registered: March 2005
Location: New York
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
With that Client/Server side hit detection... thinking more on it, I realize it's just complete nonsense to have it serverside. Sure, it prevents cheaters, but so what? Why should the game's quality and entertainment value be so permanently and dramatically reduced just because there is fear that a cheater might come in and make in even worse?
Cheaters are temporary, server-side hit detection is permanent. When you weigh it out, it really doesn't make any sense to have it that way. It would just be better to risk having cheaters than to have to suffer through dramatic losses in play value.
I'll tell you right now, I'd still be playing Renegade X 0.5 regularly and frequently if the hit detection was more responsive. To me, it lowers the enjoyability of the mod 80%. When I say dramatic, I mean dramatic. I'd much prefer to deal with the occasional cheater; in fact, I'd gladly put up with them if it meant having more responsive hit detection.
---
It seems I went off on a tangent there... sorry. But, trying to tie it in with the topic, if you do make your own game, try to see if it's at all possible to adjust the hit detection. If you can't, then you can't... but it's something that would really benefit the game when you finish.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Design of a new, free renegade-like game [message #434538 is a reply to message #434526] |
Wed, 11 August 2010 01:39 |
 |
EvilWhiteDragon
Messages: 3751
Registered: October 2005
Location: The Netherlands
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| R315r4z0r wrote on Wed, 11 August 2010 05:44 |
With that Client/Server side hit detection... thinking more on it, I realize it's just complete nonsense to have it serverside. Sure, it prevents cheaters, but so what? Why should the game's quality and entertainment value be so permanently and dramatically reduced just because there is fear that a cheater might come in and make in even worse?
Cheaters are temporary, server-side hit detection is permanent. When you weigh it out, it really doesn't make any sense to have it that way. It would just be better to risk having cheaters than to have to suffer through dramatic losses in play value.
I'll tell you right now, I'd still be playing Renegade X 0.5 regularly and frequently if the hit detection was more responsive. To me, it lowers the enjoyability of the mod 80%. When I say dramatic, I mean dramatic. I'd much prefer to deal with the occasional cheater; in fact, I'd gladly put up with them if it meant having more responsive hit detection.
---
It seems I went off on a tangent there... sorry. But, trying to tie it in with the topic, if you do make your own game, try to see if it's at all possible to adjust the hit detection. If you can't, then you can't... but it's something that would really benefit the game when you finish.
|
I'm sorry, but your connection is just fucked then.
I would bother about clientside hit detection, because it makes cheating 100% easier. It would allow for ROF, WallHacks and relly effective aimbots.
I'm sure clientside hit detection could lead to way more annoying cheats. Hell, coming to think of it, Renegade got off rather lightly, probably because not to many people where interested in cheating this game and had the skill to do so.
BlackIntel admin/founder/PR dude (not a coder)
Please visit http://www.blackintel.org/
| V, V for Vendetta |
People should not be afraid of their governments.
Governments should be afraid of their people.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Design of a new, free renegade-like game [message #434542 is a reply to message #434538] |
Wed, 11 August 2010 02:58 |
nopol10
Messages: 1043
Registered: February 2005
Location: Singapore
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
The hit detection system is actually fine and makes sense, an example of which would be in Team Fortress 2 where there are plenty of servers that are located in or close to where I live and also plenty of players. It just becomes a rather big problem in games like UT3 where there aren't any low ping servers or games with a smaller player base. On one hand, games with small player bases cannot afford to split the player base by having too many servers in different places yet on the other hand it needs to give players a great experience to keep them interested and involved.
I don't actually think this problem can be solved all that easily.
EDIT: On another note, my post count is now in binary. I actually have 10 posts, not 1010.
nopol10=Nopol=nopol(GSA)
[Updated on: Wed, 11 August 2010 03:02] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Design of a new, free renegade-like game [message #434548 is a reply to message #434450] |
Wed, 11 August 2010 06:25 |
 |
JohnDoe
Messages: 1416
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| [NE |
Fobby[GEN] wrote on Tue, 10 August 2010 00:21]It's all about the difference between client-side hit detection and server-side hit detection. A lot of older games had client-side, and newer games have server-side. There are exceptions.
Server-side hit detection:
+ Excellent way to thwart client cheats
- Hits must be registered with the server; a laggy server = shots are made an X amount of time after pulling the trigger, depending on the ping.
Client-side hit detection:
+ All shots register instantly
- Client cheats are easy to make, use, and are difficult to get rid of completely.
|
Client-side hit detection is horrible, but Westwood would've made an even worse game with server-side hit detection.
Most good modern games use unlagged server-side netcode. I'm not sure how exactly the UT3 netcode handles it (most likely badly because Epic don't give a shit about PC multiplayer anymore), but with Quake Live it leads to every shot counting as long as your ping is under 80. Technically modern games use server-side, but practically it's client-side detection.
Actually, I guess what makes Renegade's netcode so horrible is the delayed movement because that's handled on the client's side as well...hit detection is the lesser of the evils
lol
[Updated on: Wed, 11 August 2010 06:28] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Design of a new, free renegade-like game [message #434578 is a reply to message #434548] |
Wed, 11 August 2010 11:24 |
 |
trooprm02
Messages: 3266
Registered: August 2005
Location: Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| JohnDoe wrote on Wed, 11 August 2010 08:25 |
Client-side hit detection is horrible, but Westwood would've made an even worse game with server-side hit detection.
|
Actually, they've included server side hit detection from the start....UseLagReduction (you can find it in /data/svrcfg_cnc.ini even), if you've ever tried it you'll see why doing it on the client is such a better idea.
@mac, I like this guy...he seems to know what he is talking about. Have you ever modded Renegade itself? I think it would be great if you could create a few bugfixes for Renegade itself, instead of creating an entirely new game (TT anyone?). Also, the UT3 engine is very boring so I hope you don't go that route...
My: Videos/Website/Forums
[Updated on: Wed, 11 August 2010 11:26] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Design of a new, free renegade-like game [message #434584 is a reply to message #434548] |
Wed, 11 August 2010 13:32 |
|
EvilWhiteDragon
Messages: 3751
Registered: October 2005
Location: The Netherlands
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| JohnDoe wrote on Wed, 11 August 2010 15:25 |
| [NE |
Fobby[GEN] wrote on Tue, 10 August 2010 00:21]It's all about the difference between client-side hit detection and server-side hit detection. A lot of older games had client-side, and newer games have server-side. There are exceptions.
Server-side hit detection:
+ Excellent way to thwart client cheats
- Hits must be registered with the server; a laggy server = shots are made an X amount of time after pulling the trigger, depending on the ping.
Client-side hit detection:
+ All shots register instantly
- Client cheats are easy to make, use, and are difficult to get rid of completely.
|
Client-side hit detection is horrible, but Westwood would've made an even worse game with server-side hit detection.
Most good modern games use unlagged server-side netcode. I'm not sure how exactly the UT3 netcode handles it (most likely badly because Epic don't give a shit about PC multiplayer anymore), but with Quake Live it leads to every shot counting as long as your ping is under 80. Technically modern games use server-side, but practically it's client-side detection.
Actually, I guess what makes Renegade's netcode so horrible is the delayed movement because that's handled on the client's side as well...hit detection is the lesser of the evils
|
No, if the ping is low enough (the effective ping) then the experience will be the same, simply because humans don't notice a 100ms delay.
BlackIntel admin/founder/PR dude (not a coder)
Please visit http://www.blackintel.org/
| V, V for Vendetta |
People should not be afraid of their governments.
Governments should be afraid of their people.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Design of a new, free renegade-like game [message #434590 is a reply to message #434584] |
Wed, 11 August 2010 14:15 |
|
JohnDoe
Messages: 1416
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| EvilWhiteDragon wrote on Wed, 11 August 2010 22:32 |
| JohnDoe wrote on Wed, 11 August 2010 15:25 |
| [NE |
Fobby[GEN] wrote on Tue, 10 August 2010 00:21]It's all about the difference between client-side hit detection and server-side hit detection. A lot of older games had client-side, and newer games have server-side. There are exceptions.
Server-side hit detection:
+ Excellent way to thwart client cheats
- Hits must be registered with the server; a laggy server = shots are made an X amount of time after pulling the trigger, depending on the ping.
Client-side hit detection:
+ All shots register instantly
- Client cheats are easy to make, use, and are difficult to get rid of completely.
|
Client-side hit detection is horrible, but Westwood would've made an even worse game with server-side hit detection.
Most good modern games use unlagged server-side netcode. I'm not sure how exactly the UT3 netcode handles it (most likely badly because Epic don't give a shit about PC multiplayer anymore), but with Quake Live it leads to every shot counting as long as your ping is under 80. Technically modern games use server-side, but practically it's client-side detection.
Actually, I guess what makes Renegade's netcode so horrible is the delayed movement because that's handled on the client's side as well...hit detection is the lesser of the evils
|
No, if the ping is low enough (the effective ping) then the experience will be the same, simply because humans don't notice a 100ms delay.
|
What exactly are you talking about? Renegade? Unlagged server-side netcode?
It probably doesn't matter because the humans don't notice a 100ms delay part means you're a complete tard anyway...wtf aren't you supposed to be a coder or something? No wonder you people are useless.
Troop...Westwood being horrible at making videogames doesn't really help a general argument (well it's not really an argument because every noteworthy modern engine uses unlagged sside hit detection).
aha, that tt guy isn't a coder...still an idiot
lol
[Updated on: Wed, 11 August 2010 14:17] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Design of a new, free renegade-like game [message #434600 is a reply to message #434590] |
Wed, 11 August 2010 16:15 |
|
EvilWhiteDragon
Messages: 3751
Registered: October 2005
Location: The Netherlands
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| JohnDoe wrote on Wed, 11 August 2010 23:15 |
| EvilWhiteDragon wrote on Wed, 11 August 2010 22:32 |
| JohnDoe wrote on Wed, 11 August 2010 15:25 |
| [NE |
Fobby[GEN] wrote on Tue, 10 August 2010 00:21]It's all about the difference between client-side hit detection and server-side hit detection. A lot of older games had client-side, and newer games have server-side. There are exceptions.
Server-side hit detection:
+ Excellent way to thwart client cheats
- Hits must be registered with the server; a laggy server = shots are made an X amount of time after pulling the trigger, depending on the ping.
Client-side hit detection:
+ All shots register instantly
- Client cheats are easy to make, use, and are difficult to get rid of completely.
|
Client-side hit detection is horrible, but Westwood would've made an even worse game with server-side hit detection.
Most good modern games use unlagged server-side netcode. I'm not sure how exactly the UT3 netcode handles it (most likely badly because Epic don't give a shit about PC multiplayer anymore), but with Quake Live it leads to every shot counting as long as your ping is under 80. Technically modern games use server-side, but practically it's client-side detection.
Actually, I guess what makes Renegade's netcode so horrible is the delayed movement because that's handled on the client's side as well...hit detection is the lesser of the evils
|
No, if the ping is low enough (the effective ping) then the experience will be the same, simply because humans don't notice a 100ms delay.
|
What exactly are you talking about? Renegade? Unlagged server-side netcode?
It probably doesn't matter because the humans don't notice a 100ms delay part means you're a complete tard anyway...wtf aren't you supposed to be a coder or something? No wonder you people are useless.
Troop...Westwood being horrible at making videogames doesn't really help a general argument (well it's not really an argument because every noteworthy modern engine uses unlagged sside hit detection).
aha, that tt guy isn't a coder...still an idiot
|
I was talking about your statement that it was practically clientside. It is not. It might do a slight correction based on the ping, but the hit detection is still serverside. Clientside hit detection only works as long as you can trust the client. Which so happens to be *NEVER*. Therefor as a coder you would have to look into alternatives, like using the ping as a correction factor.
A simple example of this would be the following. The player shoots at something, due to a ping of 100, the shot arrives at the 100ms late. The target may have moved away. The server could correct this by comparing the location of the shot, and the place where the target was 100ms ago. This would solve most of the lag issues, but is difficult to implement correctly and efficiently.
BlackIntel admin/founder/PR dude (not a coder)
Please visit http://www.blackintel.org/
| V, V for Vendetta |
People should not be afraid of their governments.
Governments should be afraid of their people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Design of a new, free renegade-like game [message #434612 is a reply to message #434392] |
Wed, 11 August 2010 17:03 |
 |
[NE]Fobby[GEN]
Messages: 1377
Registered: July 2004
Location: Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
I think a player's experience in a 'server-side' hit detection game depends almost entirely on their connection and the location of the server. The higher your ping, the longer it will take for your hits to register. 1000 ping = a full second delay if I'm not mistaken.
I have a 1.2 MB connection (great), and I'm Canadian, but if I'm playing in a central European server, my ping goes up to 250, and I have to shoot a bit ahead of my target. No system is perfect, but playing at a local server with a good connection will get you roughly the same (or similar) experience as client-side hit detection.
Unreal Tournament 3 Total Conversion to C&C: Renegade
Check out Renegade X Today!
Mod Wars Veteran
|
|
|
|
| Re: Design of a new, free renegade-like game [message #434616 is a reply to message #434600] |
Wed, 11 August 2010 17:52 |
|
JohnDoe
Messages: 1416
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| EvilWhiteDragon wrote on Wed, 11 August 2010 18:15 |
| JohnDoe wrote on Wed, 11 August 2010 23:15 |
| EvilWhiteDragon wrote on Wed, 11 August 2010 22:32 |
| JohnDoe wrote on Wed, 11 August 2010 15:25 |
| [NE |
Fobby[GEN] wrote on Tue, 10 August 2010 00:21]It's all about the difference between client-side hit detection and server-side hit detection. A lot of older games had client-side, and newer games have server-side. There are exceptions.
Server-side hit detection:
+ Excellent way to thwart client cheats
- Hits must be registered with the server; a laggy server = shots are made an X amount of time after pulling the trigger, depending on the ping.
Client-side hit detection:
+ All shots register instantly
- Client cheats are easy to make, use, and are difficult to get rid of completely.
|
Client-side hit detection is horrible, but Westwood would've made an even worse game with server-side hit detection.
Most good modern games use unlagged server-side netcode. I'm not sure how exactly the UT3 netcode handles it (most likely badly because Epic don't give a shit about PC multiplayer anymore), but with Quake Live it leads to every shot counting as long as your ping is under 80. Technically modern games use server-side, but practically it's client-side detection.
Actually, I guess what makes Renegade's netcode so horrible is the delayed movement because that's handled on the client's side as well...hit detection is the lesser of the evils
|
No, if the ping is low enough (the effective ping) then the experience will be the same, simply because humans don't notice a 100ms delay.
|
What exactly are you talking about? Renegade? Unlagged server-side netcode?
It probably doesn't matter because the humans don't notice a 100ms delay part means you're a complete tard anyway...wtf aren't you supposed to be a coder or something? No wonder you people are useless.
Troop...Westwood being horrible at making videogames doesn't really help a general argument (well it's not really an argument because every noteworthy modern engine uses unlagged sside hit detection).
aha, that tt guy isn't a coder...still an idiot
|
I was talking about your statement that it was practically clientside. It is not. It might do a slight correction based on the ping, but the hit detection is still serverside. Clientside hit detection only works as long as you can trust the client. Which so happens to be *NEVER*. Therefor as a coder you would have to look into alternatives, like using the ping as a correction factor.
A simple example of this would be the following. The player shoots at something, due to a ping of 100, the shot arrives at the 100ms late. The target may have moved away. The server could correct this by comparing the location of the shot, and the place where the target was 100ms ago. This would solve most of the lag issues, but is difficult to implement correctly and efficiently.
|
http://esreality.hexus.net/?a=post&id=1768002
read the comments if you're really interested
there is no slight correction. there is total correction aka backwards reconciliation aka the server accurately calculating what you saw on your screen by maintaining a cache of snapshots or no correction (if your ping's too high).
i played quake live, et and warsow often enough to know that the aiming is just like in renegade even though it's calculated server-side. if it's in your crosshair and you click - it takes damage. you don't lead your shots like in old server side calculated games (halo pc is the worst example of this...horrible server side netcode). the only difference is that the movement isn't fucked and delayed
i still don't understand the ridiculous "humans don't notice 100ms" statement. i notice 30ms and i'm sure everyone else does...just play a single player game for comparison...or imagine your mouse lag 30 ms and you'll go crazy. 125hz = standard mouse = 8ms delay i believe...gaming mice have 1 ms delay for a reason
lol
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Nov 01 10:31:03 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00984 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
