Page 30 of 37

Re: Development Blah: Comments

Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2014 9:00 am
by karx11erx
It's not yet done. I will finish it today though. D2X-XL is distinguishing between regular and secret level music, and I had a better idea how to organize that this morning when I woke up. :p

Until now, regular and secret level music were shuffled separately when music shuffling was enabled, which creates little variety for the (usually few) secret level songs. With my idea, all level music will be in a big pool, so shuffling can cause a secret level song to be played for a regular level and vice versa.

Re: Development Blah: Comments

Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 2:59 pm
by darklord42
Great news about the networking diedel. I've been missing d2x-xl multi.

Re: Development Blah: Comments

Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 7:51 pm
by Sirius
Still trying to lure people into playing it.

Hopefully soon.

Re: Development Blah: Comments

Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 9:06 pm
by Sirius
Hmm. Took one attempt but it was on .51 - the .52 binaries don't appear to be on the website at present. We noticed some strange behavior (CTF goals reported in co-op) but it seems likely that it was already fixed.

Re: Development Blah: Comments

Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 10:04 pm
by karx11erx
Yeah, it took me longer than expected to finish all the changes and bug fixes up. Upload is almost done now.

Re: Development Blah: Comments

Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 6:45 pm
by pokeman7452
Coop you say? (on FB) I'd be up for that, if you want.

Re: Development Blah: Comments

Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 7:03 pm
by karx11erx
Hey, wb Pokeman. :)

Re: Development Blah: Comments

Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2014 4:40 pm
by Sirius
Yeah, Rebirth never quite nailed the packet loss compensation. The last person to attempt to make a mod based on that to add standard CTF support couldn't finish it due to that - it wasn't guaranteed that flags wouldn't disappear eventually, which would break the game once it happened. I don't think that's directly the fault of the "client-server" logic, just that the resend logic doesn't use any kind of industry-standard algorithm, but instead a quick-and-dirty "send the packet several times and hope at least one of them gets through" approach - from what I last heard. Usually that works, but it's possible that none of them do get through, and once that happens it's all over.

And edit: doing more reading I think I may have been confusing it with D1X... or something like that. Drakona would know better than me, since she's actually seen it. I figure what was actually causing the problem was running out of resends. We occasionally saw people getting dropped from games due to "dropping important packets" too - almost never seen that these days except from people who genuinely did experience an outage.

Re: Development Blah: Comments

Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2014 9:21 pm
by karx11erx
Drakona wrote that Rebirth assigns serial numbers to important packets. Clients also need to confirm their receipt. So Zico's approach to avoiding loss of such packets probably is a bit less trivial than just blindly resending packets. Looks like he didn't figure how to make this P2P; or maybe he thought having the game host control this would be better.

Re: Development Blah: Comments

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 5:09 am
by Sirius
From what I recall of the discussions around the topic, yeah, he wanted control of the game centralized because it made it simpler to keep things consistent ("host-authoritative" was the phrase I heard a lot). The downside is that player-to-player latency is on average worse, which means the game doesn't play as well as it used to.

Trying to get the best of both worlds usually means more complexity, but I never really thought that was something to be shied away from. If you're trying to limit the number of bugs you can introduce by changes, I can somewhat understand it though.

Re: Development Blah: Comments

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 11:32 am
by karx11erx
Trying to increase game world consistency in a P2P model by routing a part of the messages over the game host seems to be complete nonsense to me. You just introduce additional latency and increase the chance of creating inconsistencies due to a greater chance of losing packets on their way to the game host.

My approach strengthens the P2P setup by increasing the chance of successfully transmitting important messages right at their source. That is fully in line with D1's & D2's implementation of the multiplayer event handling and messaging, where the game host has no higher authority regarding game events and these are authored on the client "owning" the objects causing them.

I remember Zico writing that he had problems with processing messages in the proper sequence. For D2X-XL's implementation that is a non issue.

Re: Development Blah: Comments

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2014 8:27 pm
by Pumo
Although I'm not really too much into Multiplayer, and observer mode sounds interesting. :)

I think it would be a very nice implementation, as most online FPS games already has it nowadays, so you can consider it as an almost basic feature.

Re: Development Blah: Comments

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2014 9:39 pm
by Weyrman
An observer mode would be good!

Re: Development Blah: Comments

Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2014 5:39 pm
by steel01
Sorry... :oops: But I did say when I submitted the patch that I couldn't test multiplayer. I believe the rest of the patch has worked fine. But I'm not submitting any other patches or requests until I have more significant time to test on my branch (which I currently make no claims to it's stability). The build system patches are getting plenty of Linux testing through some automated tests I scripted. And if i can get someone to test run a build on osx and give a thumbs up, it should be ready for submission. Also, since it didn't jump out at me in the merge I did today, what was the problem you fixed?

Anywho, I like the sound of the observer mode. Is their a way to join as observer only? I wouldn't mind watching people in online matches to pick up on strategy. As much as I love the game, I'm really not that good at it.

Steel01

Re: Development Blah: Comments

Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2014 7:56 pm
by karx11erx
Some OS X dev support would be great now. darkhorse? The OS X has some problems testing multiplayer, and also doesn't seem to be able to contribute significantly to debugging and bug fixing. Since I don't own a Mac, that sometimes makes it pretty hard to fix OS X specific bugs in D2X-XL.