Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 58

Thread: Linux MMORPG Game Engine Sees Major Update

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MaestroMaus View Post
    No it can never be my problem any more. I bought a PS3 a few months ago and now that I have, I realized I should have done that a long time ago.
    Heh... I've a PS3 and a Wii... That's not a commentary on Linux Gaming, mind- but I will only buy things that're available on the systems I choose to use and own. I only use Windows to verify something on a game port or to reverse engineer device drivers. Ever.

    Seriously though, I remember reading/hearing somewhere that he was indeed very fond of DX11 but that he would continue to release his games on Linux for now. This is supported by this article.
    Yep. It's my understanding that it's no longer a "priority" but he's not going to snub things like that- to not support the OS is to cut one's nose off to spite one's face. Moreover, if he wants any "in" on the Netbook/Handheld/Mobile Phone market, he's going to have to still "do" Linux stuff because WinCE isn't there. You want to target, you have to deal with iPhone/Android/Limo/OpenEmbedded. Seriously.

    You don't know if Doom 3 was ever released for Linux? What kind of gamers are you guys?
    Doom3, Quake4, QuakeWars, and soon QuakeLive. Someone's trolling and not doing a very good job of it.

    Here I give you something to think about:
    - Every ID game since Quake had been released on Linux with a native installer and in most cases without support. Why would they stop now?
    - The Linux game market always has been crap compared to the Windows game market. However it is at it's all time best right now. Why would they stop now?
    - If they don't like to support Linux any more, how come they are still porting Quake Live to Linux?
    It's people doing the sky is falling, the sky is falling at the drop of a hat because it's in vogue- they misconstrue ONE thing the man says and run with it.

    EDIT: Heh, I just noticed Svartalf in the slashdot comments on the article.
    Heh... I'm one of the honest advocates and evangelists for Linux gaming and have been for quite a long time.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Nifty... Neat idea even. I'm more interested in Uningine doing something because the odds of a Linux version from the studio that does a game with that engine is going to be more likely to be providing native Linux binaries.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Toronto/North Bay Canada
    Posts
    877

    Default

    what kind of epic networking does unigine boast?

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by L33F3R View Post
    what kind of epic networking does unigine boast?
    Does it really matter? Crytek has rolled their own for Crysis. Ditto others... If you want a cross-platform framework that does the same thing that DirectPlay does, but does it better, you'll pick Grapple or RakNet.

    [edit]

    Massive MMO stuff's going to be "fun" though. It's not a simple, easy thing to do- and it's the reason behind why I said that the bunch preaching that the games can be local to the company and served across the net to itty-bitty set-top boxes and special clients on PC's and Mac's were selling snake oil.

    An example of what I'm talking about- I explained this to someone in private while I was out on holiday:

    frank@frank-laptop:~$ traceroute www.phoronix.com
    traceroute to www.phoronix.com (209.62.40.52), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
    1 10.0.0.1 (10.0.0.1) 5.184 ms 7.231 ms 7.371 ms
    2 10.91.176.1 (10.91.176.1) 23.188 ms 25.024 ms 26.316 ms
    3 66-169-205-97.ftwo.tx.charter.com (66.169.205.97) 26.752 ms 27.098 ms 30.150 ms
    4 so-6-0-0.edge4.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.71.216.5) 30.427 ms 30.856 ms 31.150 ms
    5 ae-34-89.car4.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.68.19.134) 32.730 ms ae-14-69.car4.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.68.19.6) 32.039 ms ae-24-79.car4.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.68.19.70) 32.399 ms
    6 THE-PLANET.car4.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.71.122.2) 31.486 ms 22.229 ms 17.638 ms
    7 et1-1.ibr02.hstntx1.theplanet.com (70.87.253.54) 27.592 ms 29.284 ms 31.746 ms
    8 et1-3.ibr02.hstntx2.theplanet.com (70.87.253.58) 31.842 ms 34.555 ms 33.647 ms
    9 po2.car02.hstntx2.theplanet.com (74.55.252.102) 34.365 ms 40.392 ms 41.184 ms
    10 ev1s-209-62-40-52.theplanet.com (209.62.40.52) 41.929 ms 42.539 ms 46.734 ms
    frank@frank-laptop:~$

    This means I experienced roughly a 45ms latency to Phoronix from the hotel. That's a fairly clean link there, especially for a hotel ISP one. I was pleasantly surprised.

    You have to cope with a lot of 45-150ms or worse latencies for the traffic you're processing. If your timing atom is larger than 200ms, you feel the drag on a FPS or similar type game. Some games actually have smaller atoms- 100ms. At 100ms, you have precisely 55ms to address all interactions that the player just made with the world in toto, along with all the other players in toto, before the next timing frame if you use the connection from the hotel as your example. You have 85ms in the case of a link like mine (which is NOT the norm right at the moment- not even close...). If your ping time plus the time you need to process everyone's interactions exceeds the atom timing size, you start losing stuff, lagging stuff, or both depending on the design you chose for things. Motion estimation compensates for some of this, but it doesn't fix as much as many make it out to. Streaming RUDP does as well- it's part of why Q3:A plays as nicely as it does online over the Internet. But, it's not going to make doing an MMO easy or nice in that regard.
    Last edited by Svartalf; 05-25-2009 at 11:54 PM. Reason: Expanded on my remarks... :-D

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Toronto/North Bay Canada
    Posts
    877

    Default

    isnt latency the reason they strategically place servers at certain locations. eg, Chicago or Dallas. Or Germany for Europe representation.


    Looks like your trace-route doesn't even leave Texas. Most people dont game in a hotel room they do it at home with purchased internet connections.

    I have a stable 55.5 MS to Phoronix.com from Toronto. My ISP eats up 13 MS of that.

    Heres a distance representation.


  6. #46
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by L33F3R View Post
    hell if i know but they in beta.
    They're making it for Vista only. Yay.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    833

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by L33F3R View Post
    isnt latency the reason they strategically place servers at certain locations. eg, Chicago or Dallas. Or Germany for Europe representation.


    Looks like your trace-route doesn't even leave Texas. Most people dont game in a hotel room they do it at home with purchased internet connections.

    I have a stable 55.5 MS to Phoronix.com from Toronto. My ISP eats up 13 MS of that.

    Heres a distance representation.

    The internet doesn't work like an airplane: it's not air-distance. Your data can roam around the entire world if you are very unlucky. In general it goes over a couple of hops until it reaches the destination which can be at various places. Placing servers does not help since your players can come from everywhere and this especially means all sorts of crappy hops in between introducing lots of lag.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Toronto/North Bay Canada
    Posts
    877

    Default

    obviously, that would be a really stupid airplane route. Your packets may go around the world if you are on HE or Cogent. Heck if i want to connect to chicago using cogent it takes it to new york first.... But any decent network is going to get you from A to B with few hops.

    1 192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1) 0.365 ms 0.356 ms 0.346 ms
    2 * * *
    3 xxxx.xxxx.rnc.net.cable.rogers.com (66.185.xxx.xxx) 9.673 ms 9.676 ms 9.768 ms
    4 xxxx.xxxx.phub.net.cable.rogers.com (66.185.xxx.xxx) 9.368 ms 9.499 ms 9.492 ms
    5 xxxxxxxxx.wlfdle.phub.net.cable.rogers.com (66.185.81.xxx) 37.751 ms 37.863 ms 37.856 ms
    6 64.71.241.118 (64.71.241.118) 27.045 ms 23.850 ms 23.829 ms
    7 eqix.asbn.twtelecom.net (206.223.115.36) 24.315 ms 24.553 ms 24.538 ms
    8 hagg-03-ge-1-0-0-538.hsto.twtelecom.net (66.192.246.210) 52.712 ms 52.436 ms 52.691 ms
    9 po1.car02.hstntx2.theplanet.com (74.55.252.70) 53.247 ms 53.514 ms 53.216 ms
    10 ev1s-209-62-40-52.theplanet.com (209.62.40.52) 56.665 ms 56.749 ms 57.045 ms

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    833

    Default

    This is not how the internet works. It's a self organizing routing system. Routers can send packages through different routes depending on the current network situation. Furthermore less hops is not always faster. If a hop in between becomes a lagger for one reason or another you might be faster taking a detour using faster and less stressed hops. So it's not that easy as "less hops = faster".

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    113

    Default

    I guess you could say it's like avoiding the freeway during rush hour traffic. Sure, city streets are slower and have traffic lights, but you still got home 2 hours earlier than if you took the freeway.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •