DominionSpy Posted November 27, 2004 Share Posted November 27, 2004 With all this talk of synchronisation, I was wondering that since it would require all of the sync information to be sent between the server and client, how much bandwidth will a Blue client or server consume? Obviously you can't say exactly, but what's the estimated b/w compared to 0.4? Link to comment
Black Dragon Posted November 27, 2004 Share Posted November 27, 2004 well, from the what the pictures once showed on the blue info page, its (or was) very low. it showed 3kbs upload, and almost 0 download, and no packetloss whatsoever Link to comment
kyeman Posted November 27, 2004 Share Posted November 27, 2004 It's expected to be alot less. Although more is synced, we have better methods of accomplishing that syncing. We didn't simply addon to the data that is synced in 0.4. Like any other online game we shoot for a target bandwidth of around 56K. So 2-3Kb upload and 3-4Kb download maximums. I'm not sure 0.4 or lesser versions were able to meet that target for all situations, but I'm confident Blue will. Our new network layer has a sliding window which ensures noone gets more data than their connection can handle. Latency will still be an issue. If you're pinging greater than 500 I don't think you can expect smooth gameplay. Anything below 300 should be reasonably smooth. Link to comment
DominionSpy Posted November 27, 2004 Author Share Posted November 27, 2004 Yey - that's a wonderful answer I had read/heard that the network layer had been totally reworked but I was skeptical as to whether it could make that much difference. I was remembering the dreadful mess we had when 0.4.0 was released and everyone was having major lag issues Link to comment
j0keR Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 Rumor has it that the netcode in MTA currently is from a third-party, and not everything is synched because they couldn't find the memory addresses. So far it has been confirmed that they're actually working on the netcode this time and that they have found all the memory addresses they need. Considering these set-backs from earlier versions, I think MTA turned out much better than it really should have. Link to comment
orappa Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 Rumor has it that the netcode in MTA currently is from a third-party, and not everything is synched because they couldn't find the memory addresses. So far it has been confirmed that they're actually working on the netcode this time and that they have found all the memory addresses they need. Considering these set-backs from earlier versions, I think MTA turned out much better than it really should have. I think the first MTA (GTA3:MTA 0.1) may have had that, but all current netcode is entirely their own. Link to comment
eAi Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 I'm not sure what you're talking about j0keR... "Memory addresses" and netcode are not at all reliant on each other. We could write an amazing netcode with no "memory addresses", and find thousands of "memory addresses" with no netcode... The netcode in 0.4 is all our own work, and to be honest, thats pretty obvious from the way it plays. If we were to get netcode from a 3rd party, we'd get some decent netcode. eAi Link to comment
Recommended Posts