Sign in to follow this  

Game client architecture - the implementation balance

Recommended Posts

Hi There, Being slightly unsure about the topic name I have given this thread, this is more of a rant which seems to relate to the nature of questions i have read over within game development forums over time. To provide a point and something concrete to actually discuss, i'm really interested in a chat about experiences from anyone who has "broken the rules" or "gone against the grain" when implenting any specific module, or more specifically what requirements on the client made/allowed them implement a certain feature or bit-of-functionality in their game client, differently from what would be considered the "recommended" way. Hopefully, I have brought up an interesting point for discussion. I havent seen this point in the form of a basis for discussion as fequently as you would tend to find this point echoed as a response to certain postings about a more specific part of the game client implementation. Ok, since its fair, i'll throw you guys a bone and start off with the following theory (this is something i picked up somewhere, i cant recall exactly where so pardon the lack of reference). "the server done most of the processing, and the client was rather dumb. we could for example, batch geometry more efficiently by performing more transforms on the cpu and sending more of that geometry in lesser frequency to the gpu" - unknown Much appreciated- Kraik. [Edited by - Kraiklyn on March 26, 2006 8:37:06 AM]

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this