Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

FREE SOFTWARE GIVEAWAY

We have 4 x Pro Licences (valued at $59 each) for 2d modular animation software Spriter to give away in this Thursday's GDNet Direct email newsletter.


Read more in this forum topic or make sure you're signed up (from the right-hand sidebar on the homepage) and read Thursday's newsletter to get in the running!


Incoming hilarity: abaraba is back, and this time he's fixated on P2P networking!


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
82 replies to this topic

#1 Gaffer   Members   -  Reputation: 422

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 30 August 2009 - 05:50 PM

You folks may remember abaraba from his "fix your timestep" internet crusade: http://gafferongames.com/2008/10/20/fix-your-timestep-crazy-internet-stalker/ Now he's back to make sure that everybody switches from client/server to P2P networking!
Quote:
i wish to argue how peer-to-peer model is faster, much faster, than currently popular server-client model… and in fact, it has so many advantages over S/C that it is mindbogglingly unexplainable why in the world no online multiplayer game use it. why, why, why? but, if there are any games to use it after all, then please let me know about them. ok, here it goes...
his rationale for all this?
Quote:
P2P updates are asynchronous, there is no FAST/SLOW here, no waiting – you only have FURTHER and CLOSER, and further is not SLOWER it is only more behind in the past, but the rate of update is NON INTERRUPTED, has CONSTANT streaming flow. theoretically working on FULL 60Hz and more, where frequency only depends on upload bandwidth, size of packets and number of peers. there is no lag, no glitches, no slowdowns, no waiting on server… only time dilation, depending only on DISTANCE.
(boggle?!) read on for pure hilarity: http://gafferongames.com/game-physics/networked-physics/#comment-11576 cheers all

Sponsor:

#2 Codeka   Members   -  Reputation: 1157

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 30 August 2009 - 06:01 PM

He suckered us in already.

#3 Sirisian   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1793

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 30 August 2009 - 06:03 PM

yeah the 2 deleted threads should tell you something. Didn't realize it was the same person. :P

#4 Gaffer   Members   -  Reputation: 422

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 30 August 2009 - 06:20 PM

Just read through that whole thread - the thing you guys need to understand here, and this is essential to really understand what that abaraba guy is all about - he's not a troll, he actually believes what he's saying.

Yep, he's actually that crazy.

#5 Codeka   Members   -  Reputation: 1157

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 30 August 2009 - 06:26 PM

Yeah, that was the impression I got as well. Stil, I wasted so much time replying to that thread before I realised that he actually had no interest in learning anything and clearly completely ignored parts of responses (and in some cases, entire responses) which didn't fit what he was trying say...

Oh well, live and learn :-)

#6 Gaffer   Members   -  Reputation: 422

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 30 August 2009 - 06:44 PM

My guess is that in addition to being stir-crazy, the guy has english as a second language - and doesn't really understand it too well. In fact, I highly suspect that he takes all replies to his posts and feeds them through google translate, replies in his native language, then google translates it back. Seriously, this would explain a hell of a lot :)

#7 Sirisian   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1793

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 30 August 2009 - 08:07 PM

I made a post with math and took the time to refute his numbers. I have too much free-time. Hopefully I didn't make a mistake myself though.

It would be saner if he had any networking experience.

Oh yeah and how fast is a 56k modem? I mean is it really only 56 kilobits/sec max? I haven't seen one in years so I forgot what speed they ran at.

#8 Gaffer   Members   -  Reputation: 422

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 30 August 2009 - 08:19 PM

I'd *love* to see this guy sweating it out actually trying to ship a console game. Especially considering the 360 TCR that you must function at 64kbit/sec up and down ... try doing that with P2P @ 32 players. I'm waaay too lazy to do the math right now (it's 12:35AM on a sunday night), but the packet header overhead would probably eat up the entire 64kbits, especially if he goes with the 60Hz packet send rate!!! :)

#9 Ysaneya   Members   -  Reputation: 1247

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 30 August 2009 - 09:52 PM

Mandatory Unskilled and unaware of it link.



#10 0BZEN   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2025

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 30 August 2009 - 10:47 PM

It's like talking to a wall. That's just too scary, he may actually suffer from a condition.

P2P is a pain in the ass. The extra bandwidth requirement and update rate are trivial problems when compared to host migration, and achieving consistency (with exotic NAT router settings and all), packet forwarding, ect...

15peers @ 60hz, you'd be way over the requirements of 64bk/s, your updates would have to be 9 bytes in size, which is less than the actual packet header size. Especially on consoles where you have extra security overheads.

Maybe he is the long lost brother of the guys who found a way to compress everything into one byte (cant find the thread here but it was pretty funny).

#11 Katie   Members   -  Reputation: 1375

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 31 August 2009 - 12:00 AM

"I mean is it really only 56 kilobits/sec max?"

Yes, but it includes protocol bits -- typically 8 bits take 9 to 10 bits to transmit (with sync and parity). So that's really only about 5600cps.

Ohhh my word the interwebnets were slow when stuffed down those sorts of connections.



#12 Wilhelm van Huyssteen   Members   -  Reputation: 1011

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 31 August 2009 - 12:59 AM

im pretty sure this is the same guy: abgupta4

similar style :P

http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=207043

he seems to have have deleted most of his old OP's though

#13 hplus0603   Moderators   -  Reputation: 5722

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 31 August 2009 - 05:25 AM

Quote:
how fast is a 56k modem? I mean is it really only 56 kilobits/sec max?


I recall they were about 53 kbps down and 36 kbps up. You could never crank them all the way to 56 kbps, because of signal processing issues. Probably related to quantization noise -- US telecom voice is quantized to 7 bits per sample, with 1/2 bit of quantization noise that lands smack at 53 kbit bandwidth, so that would match up.

Quote:
Unskilled and unaware of it


It's actually linked from Answer 0 in the Forum FAQ :-)


#14 Gaffer   Members   -  Reputation: 422

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 03 September 2009 - 11:36 PM

Read on for the new adventures of abaraba - the timestep crusader! :)

http://gafferongames.com/2009/09/04/the-return-of-the-timestep-crusader

#15 Andrew F Marcus   Banned   -  Reputation: 100

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 04 September 2009 - 12:47 PM

Quote:
Original post by Gaffer
Read on for the new adventures of abaraba - the timestep crusader! :)

http://gafferongames.com/2009/09/04/the-return-of-the-timestep-crusader


I'm sorry, but have you not in fact admitted server upload bandwidth is O(n^2) while peer upload/download bandwidth is O(n)? Do you realize how this means the same client bandwidth can allow for twice the number of players with P2P than with client-server?

Second, have you not in fact admitted the mistake in your time-stepping article where you incorrectly integrate free fall physics equation which is supposed to give exact results with uniform acceleration such as gravity? Fianally, if you are wrong about the main two points, what do you still find hilarious and who are we supposed to be laughing at?



Quote:
Original post by hplus0603
Quote:
Unskilled and unaware of it


It's actually linked from Answer 0 in the Forum FAQ :-)


Does the fact that Age of Empires implements P2P on 28.8 modem with perfect synchronization, determinism and fluid animation not make all the objections against P2P invalid, especially if this is intended for console systems and games without dedicated server where the security risks are just the same as with client hosting the game?

Is it not the integrated bandwidth of O(n^2) in P2P still better than having just one client(server) use O(n^2) upload bandwidth? Does that not actually make P2P about two times more practical given the same bandwidth constraints?

Finally, having only two-player game, do you think it would be better if one player hosted the game for both, or would P2P type of direct link turn out as a better solution in this case?

#16 Codeka   Members   -  Reputation: 1157

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 04 September 2009 - 01:18 PM

Andrew F Marcus (if that is your real name) maybe you should think about why you were banned all those other times before you sign up with yet another account and start spouting the same stuff all over again...

#17 Antheus   Members   -  Reputation: 2397

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 04 September 2009 - 01:29 PM

Ugh...

Hey, about we all go read about Schwarzschild Proton, the solution to Grand unification theory that completely changes the understanding of universe as we know it. It even has lots of formulas and numbers.

Doesn't sound this better than all of this boring networking stuff?

#18 Andrew F Marcus   Banned   -  Reputation: 100

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 04 September 2009 - 01:59 PM

Quote:
Original post by Codeka
Andrew F Marcus (if that is your real name) maybe you should think about why you were banned all those other times before you sign up with yet another account and start spouting the same stuff all over again...


Codeka (if that is your real name) maybe you should think about the purpose of this forum and in the spirit of making things clear, for all who come here seeking for help, at least attempt to answer the question or respond in some other meaningful and helpful manner.


Is it true that Halo 3 and GTA IV multiplayer in fact work on P2P architecture?

#19 Nypyren   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 4817

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 04 September 2009 - 02:40 PM

Quote:
Original post by Andrew F Marcus
Is it true that Halo 3 and GTA IV multiplayer in fact work on P2P architecture?


You tell us.

#20 Codeka   Members   -  Reputation: 1157

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 04 September 2009 - 03:03 PM

Quote:
Original post by Andrew F Marcus
Is it true that Halo 3 and GTA IV multiplayer in fact work on P2P architecture?
No, it's not true.




Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS