quote:Original post by Anonymous Poster I don't have to worry about erratic motion because its not an FPS Its a space game (think wing commander) so space ships will be slower and chunkier. Only the yaw, pitch and roll rotations need to be sent.
A Wing Commander-style game would need to send just as much data as an FPS. What makes you think otherwise?
[edited by - doctorsixstring on January 15, 2004 5:58:17 PM]
I would think a space game would need even better dead-reckoning given that there''s not as much gravity or friction. In FPS''s, stuff stops moving occasionally. (?)
Space games tend to be easier than FPS for dead reckoning because you don''t need to correct your predictions as often (or much). There are fewer collisions and generally less interaction between objects.
In an FPS things collide against each other and the world, changing their velocities constantly so dead reckoning cannot predict an object''s motion for more than a fraction of a second into the future. Hence the need for constant updates from a server.
In space an inert body will move predictably until it collides with something. This is great especially for things like asteroids, blaster bolts and other things that move in a straight line. Even for the players (spaceships), as long as they have limited rates of acceleration their movement will be easy to predict (ie. very resistant to network lag). In a hypothetical realistic space game, a spaceship would spend most of its time "coasting" and require no updates from the server until it uses its thrusters again.