|
Kyrgyz Republic1462 Posts
On March 25 2009 09:15 blapsd wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2009 08:57 Random() wrote:On March 25 2009 08:41 CubEdIn wrote:On March 25 2009 08:29 cava wrote:
This uses the internet. Connecting to anything over the internet has delay regardless of bandwidth capabilities simply due to distance and hops required over numerous amounts of routers. There is no such thing as lagless gaming over the internet. Yet. But see, we manage to play relatively lagless gaming on the internet right now. Even if it's not 100% lag free. Have you tried quake live? It's great, even if it's a FPS. Also, if someone were to tell you 10 years ago what the internet will be like in 2009 you wouldn't believe him/her. Technology and internet speeds are improving each year. This kind of thing may not look so insane next year. And maybe in 3-4-5 year it will start taking over consoles and so on. Have some faith. There's no other we're able to evolve if people aren't at least TRYING new things.  A signal cannot travel faster than light. Even under ideal conditions, i.e. speed of signal propagation = speed of light (which is obviously impossible when there is a number of mid-points, or "hops" that require the data packet to be processed and routed accordingly), the minimum time it would take for a signal to travel from say England to Eastern China would be ~50 ms. Bandwidth will continue to improve, but latency not as much. why on earth do you think people in europe will have to play on servers in eastern china? You will play on your closest server. I can typically play left 4 dead at less than 5ms lag in the uk to a uk server (i have a reasonably good connection). I'm sure that would be fine no? And as for playing other people online, couldnt your just play people also connected to the server you are already streaming from? Hence giving you no additional lag? I'm no expert by any means and if someone else could tell me where im wrong please do, i just dont see why ppl argue about the whole lagging issue with playing ppl the other side of the world. The answer is you simply dont.
This is true of course, I just used that as an extreme example to illustrate that no matter how clever you are, there always exist certain physical limitations that you cannot overcome.
Your example is another extreme, however. 5ms latency means that the server is very likely in the same city as you are, which makes it more of a LAN connection, which is not the purpose of Internet as a world-wide web, is it? I think if you try to play with people from Europe, 40-100ms is a more realistic estimation.
|
|
|
I did read all the articles, and unless I missed something, none of them address the issue. Care to quote?
|
On March 25 2009 09:31 Random() wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2009 09:15 blapsd wrote:On March 25 2009 08:57 Random() wrote:On March 25 2009 08:41 CubEdIn wrote:On March 25 2009 08:29 cava wrote:
This uses the internet. Connecting to anything over the internet has delay regardless of bandwidth capabilities simply due to distance and hops required over numerous amounts of routers. There is no such thing as lagless gaming over the internet. Yet. But see, we manage to play relatively lagless gaming on the internet right now. Even if it's not 100% lag free. Have you tried quake live? It's great, even if it's a FPS. Also, if someone were to tell you 10 years ago what the internet will be like in 2009 you wouldn't believe him/her. Technology and internet speeds are improving each year. This kind of thing may not look so insane next year. And maybe in 3-4-5 year it will start taking over consoles and so on. Have some faith. There's no other we're able to evolve if people aren't at least TRYING new things. A signal cannot travel faster than light. Even under ideal conditions, i.e. speed of signal propagation = speed of light (which is obviously impossible when there is a number of mid-points, or "hops" that require the data packet to be processed and routed accordingly), the minimum time it would take for a signal to travel from say England to Eastern China would be ~50 ms. Bandwidth will continue to improve, but latency not as much. why on earth do you think people in europe will have to play on servers in eastern china? You will play on your closest server. I can typically play left 4 dead at less than 5ms lag in the uk to a uk server (i have a reasonably good connection). I'm sure that would be fine no? And as for playing other people online, couldnt your just play people also connected to the server you are already streaming from? Hence giving you no additional lag? I'm no expert by any means and if someone else could tell me where im wrong please do, i just dont see why ppl argue about the whole lagging issue with playing ppl the other side of the world. The answer is you simply dont. This is true of course, I just used that as an extreme example to illustrate that no matter how clever you are, there always exist certain physical limitations that you cannot overcome. Your example is another extreme, however. 5ms latency means that the server is very likely in the same city as you are, which makes it more of a LAN connection, which is not the purpose of Internet as a world-wide web, is it? I think if you try to play with people from Europe, 40-100ms is a more realistic estimation.
I see what you're saying and you're right. It would never be really global, like the world wide web is at the moment. However I'd be perfectly content playing people from around UK or close by in europe only, not sure how many other people would be. Could someone answer this for me though?...Would playing other people online using this method cause any ADDITIONAL lag if you are simply both playing it through the same server? Because surely its just sending everyone the same information at the same time, and information that you send yourself has to go through a server usually anyway.
|
Holy shit if this is actually as good as they say it is that's insane... could revolutionize not just the gaming industry, but if this compression algorithm is that amazing they could use it for streaming video on the internet, download hosting, etc....
could monopolize all data transfer on the internet with liscensing fees for hosting and make a fortune with it being so much faster than normal downloads.
|
As you are no doubt aware most of us still have, at the most, up to 10 Mbps, and are restricted to less than 100 GB bandwidth per month
Who the hell are these people I keep reading about on TL with ridiculous restrictions on their internet? I pay $40 a month to Time Warner and I plug in a cable modem, that's it. I don't get my downloads 'measured' or my 'speed' capped. WTF? Who would EVER pay for internet that did this? (Besides australia where that level of service is actually a miracle)
|
The great part about this system is that there is seriously NOWAY you can cheat since the games are not installed on your pc or anything,
NO CHEATING ANYMORE FOR THE WINNNNNNNNNNNN
besides that i hate console shit and will probably be playing sc2 for the comming 10 years ( i hope) so shit sucks anyway -.-
|
This sounds too good to be true. I mean you just said that we will be able to:
1. Have awesome quality with crappy hardware.
2. Have almost no lag.
3. Pay $50 a year.
I wish it were true but my imagination isn't that active. I mean is the graphic displayed on your computer going to be processed and produced by the far-away server's processor and graphic card and then sent back to you via your internet connection? This sounds like crazy amounts of bandwidth. But hey, if the algorithm stuff is true won't is affect all types of internet transmission? Can you say 1080p youtube videos that load instantly lol!
|
they are going to need some massive upstream bandwidth
|
On March 25 2009 14:04 garmule2 wrote:Show nested quote +As you are no doubt aware most of us still have, at the most, up to 10 Mbps, and are restricted to less than 100 GB bandwidth per month Who the hell are these people I keep reading about on TL with ridiculous restrictions on their internet? I pay $40 a month to Time Warner and I plug in a cable modem, that's it. I don't get my downloads 'measured' or my 'speed' capped. WTF? Who would EVER pay for internet that did this? (Besides australia where that level of service is actually a miracle)
Australians T_T
Edit: didnt see the "besides australia" 
|
On March 25 2009 10:51 -orb- wrote:
Holy shit if this is actually as good as they say it is that's insane... could revolutionize not just the gaming industry, but if this compression algorithm is that amazing they could use it for streaming video on the internet, download hosting, etc....
could monopolize all data transfer on the internet with liscensing fees for hosting and make a fortune with it being so much faster than normal downloads.
Mehh I probably would have heard about this amazing 'new' algorithm already if it really was so amazing since streaming and compression is what my dad works on for a living. This entire thing seems like it really getting blown out of proportion.
I'm still waiting for additional information at this power, however.
|
WOW JESUS
GO WATCH THE GDC PRESENTATION!!!!
it's like 100x better than i imagined
holy fuck!!
|
On March 25 2009 08:57 Random() wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2009 08:41 CubEdIn wrote:On March 25 2009 08:29 cava wrote:
This uses the internet. Connecting to anything over the internet has delay regardless of bandwidth capabilities simply due to distance and hops required over numerous amounts of routers. There is no such thing as lagless gaming over the internet. Yet. But see, we manage to play relatively lagless gaming on the internet right now. Even if it's not 100% lag free. Have you tried quake live? It's great, even if it's a FPS. Also, if someone were to tell you 10 years ago what the internet will be like in 2009 you wouldn't believe him/her. Technology and internet speeds are improving each year. This kind of thing may not look so insane next year. And maybe in 3-4-5 year it will start taking over consoles and so on. Have some faith. There's no other we're able to evolve if people aren't at least TRYING new things. A signal cannot travel faster than light. Even under ideal conditions, i.e. speed of signal propagation = speed of light (which is obviously impossible when there is a number of mid-points, or "hops" that require the data packet to be processed and routed accordingly), the minimum time it would take for a signal to travel from say England to Eastern China would be ~50 ms. Bandwidth will continue to improve, but latency not as much.
You'll eat your words when PPPoW (PPP over Wormhole) comes out!
|
United States3824 Posts
This is pretty cool.
To Bob: You'll eat your words when subspace data stream comes out
That's from Star Trek Voyager BTW
|
United States3983 Posts
This sounds exactly like ggpo.
Except a big company decided to streamline it and market on a larger scale to make money.
|
On March 25 2009 16:13 ZoW wrote:
This sounds exactly like ggpo.
No. No it doesn't.
The only similarity it bears to GGPO is that both involve games and the internet.
|
great now i can play halo without buying a 360 =]
|
You've got to remember that hc players are the niche and casual players are the vast majority. This opens excellent business plans aimed for families and casual players, not unlike cable/satellite television packages etc.
Of course the technology itself is not geared towards hc gamers (which begs the question why a hc gamer like day would praise the solution here, eventhough he should be tech savvy enough to know it doesn't work for the target audience of this site. Peer to peer marketing mayhaps?
Anyhow, it's a brilliant business plan. It's just not aimed for us.
|
For 50$ a year, I'd rather just add a kickass video card to the computer I'm going to have already anyways.
|
On March 25 2009 15:18 SonuvBob wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2009 08:57 Random() wrote:On March 25 2009 08:41 CubEdIn wrote:On March 25 2009 08:29 cava wrote:
This uses the internet. Connecting to anything over the internet has delay regardless of bandwidth capabilities simply due to distance and hops required over numerous amounts of routers. There is no such thing as lagless gaming over the internet. Yet. But see, we manage to play relatively lagless gaming on the internet right now. Even if it's not 100% lag free. Have you tried quake live? It's great, even if it's a FPS. Also, if someone were to tell you 10 years ago what the internet will be like in 2009 you wouldn't believe him/her. Technology and internet speeds are improving each year. This kind of thing may not look so insane next year. And maybe in 3-4-5 year it will start taking over consoles and so on. Have some faith. There's no other we're able to evolve if people aren't at least TRYING new things. A signal cannot travel faster than light. Even under ideal conditions, i.e. speed of signal propagation = speed of light (which is obviously impossible when there is a number of mid-points, or "hops" that require the data packet to be processed and routed accordingly), the minimum time it would take for a signal to travel from say England to Eastern China would be ~50 ms. Bandwidth will continue to improve, but latency not as much. You'll eat your words when PPPoW (PPP over Wormhole) comes out!
Rofl.
But seriously, I never said it will be completely lag-free. I'm saying it will be as good (if not better) then it is now. You can play 90% of the games at a competitive level with <100ms latency, and even if I play, say, dota with Testie, I get 150-200 ms from a host in Canada, which is on the other side of the globe. I'm thinking that if various factors manage to drop this to about 100, we'll have no problem playing any game online.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
