2020: /* 5 */

2006-10-07T21:22:50Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:22, 7 October 2006
Line 353:		Line 353:

	=== 5 ===		=== 5 ===

			the player ahead could receive an image on the screen then the player has just turned to the side
			as opposed to being nearly 1.6m in a lateral direction

			is this correct?

			shit this event horizon shit is damned tricky to think about...

			why isn't there any discussion around here about this kind of crap?

			i suppose it just involves engineers
			people don't really want to be sitting about thinking about the theory
			they just build the models and see what happens
			who the fuck knows how the mind is interacting with the stuff at this level...

			i think i am just the state 2 person
			close my eyes
			and hope for the best
			hhehehe
			and some of the best times i remember feeling
			is when i do something that i don't even understand myself
			and there is no way i could have seen it...
			it was almost random
			and perhaps it was
			hehehheahhehah

2020 at 21:16, 7 October 2006

2006-10-07T21:16:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:16, 7 October 2006
Line 4:		Line 4:
	whatever blaaah		whatever blaaah

			=== 1 ===
	without a central server		without a central server
	how do you determine the outcome of an event		how do you determine the outcome of an event
Line 91:		Line 91:
	and correct their simulation		and correct their simulation

			=== 2 ===
	here's another angle		here's another angle
	in the same way a player flicks through a key-combination		in the same way a player flicks through a key-combination
Line 195:		Line 196:

	like an event horizon		like an event horizon
			=== 3 ===
	if they enter into that event horizon		if they enter into that event horizon
	effectively		effectively
Line 260:		Line 261:
	more thought required for that...		more thought required for that...

			=== 4 ===
	two players		two players
	enemies		enemies
Line 301:		Line 303:
	whether the player was connected to the machine directly or on an internet connection		whether the player was connected to the machine directly or on an internet connection

			=== 5 ===

	nah		nah
Line 349:		Line 351:
	beats me		beats me
	my brain is mash....		my brain is mash....

			=== 5 ===

2020 at 21:11, 7 October 2006

2006-10-07T21:11:17Z

New page

just a temporary file
since my post was too long for the forum
but i need to think this through
whatever blaaah

without a central server
how do you determine the outcome of an event
eg player A took a turn to avoid death
but on player B's computer because of lag
it simulated that A didn't turn and he died
so we have the contention:
Player A's version where he is alive
and player B's where he is dead
and hence the traditional assumption to establish a centralised arbiter
the central server where the simulation is run

however
if there is contention
what happens if the computers between themselves
resolved this?

if the speed of information one way
matches the fps of the simulation
then the player is none the wiser

on a machine running 25fps
that's 40ms
one way

another way of thinking about it
for me at least
it doesn't really matter
whether my computer is receiving that message from my wireless keyboard
or from a keyboard elsewhere
attached to another computer
in another country

it doesn't matter
as long as it is fast enough for me not to have to wait

the problem arises
when machines are so far apart
that the ping/2
is slower than the fps rate of 25
there will be a delay
hence the contention

which machine has the authority?

but machine B would obviously accede to the authenticity of machine B's calculation
it is not a contention of argument
but merely lack of information
surely machine B would correct itself
hence the use of rubber
which enables the machine to delay its determination of death
of player A
and if player A didn't turn fast enough
then sure enough there is a death
if player A did turn and avoid death
then player B's vision will be altered
a lag jump
the trick is
what are the timings here
for it to be noticeable?

if a bike is going at 30m/s
that's 1m in 33ms

with a regular server
with a high ping of say 200
that's 100 one way, lets say
60ms too slow for a perfect 25fps simulation
that's a jump of 2m

that's nothing

ok
it is obvious that if p2p could work
it would be faster
the problem is
can altercations be resolved?

the point is
the ping is shared between the players
in p2p

with the speed of calculations of our computers
i think they can receive out of date information
and correct their simulation

here's another angle
in the same way a player flicks through a key-combination
and dies
and declares
'lies! i managed that'
in the same way
the computer could not respond fast enough
so
a move can not be received
if the computer knows that it is going to take too long to send to the other computer
that is
computer A doesn't send the information to computer B and just declares the player as dead
hehehe

even though the player could avoid the wall with his 80ms response time

why am i going on about this?
what am i exploring?

i am exploring the possibility that we do not take full advantage of the fact this is virtual
and instead of attempting to create a model of reality
that is a centralised server with its authority
we develop a system
that is completely devolved

along the lines of bending time and space
mentioned by z-man

how would it feel
if i am heading for a wall
i flick a button to avoid it
and bang
i hit it?

i would just say my reactions times were too slow

of course
a computer would give the benefit of the doubt to its player
if it knew that it wouldn't effect the game play player B
that is
if i was just approaching any old crappy wall
and both computers knew where the wall was
doesn't really matter if computer B receives the information a bit late
it just updates it

it only becomes critical
when we approach where player B is

when player A and player B are close by

how close?

well
at 30m/s
with a ping of 200
that's an error of +/-2m radius around each player
or that funny polygon of the lagometer

rather than think there is a contention as in argument
it is almost as if the computers are apologising for the discrepency
like computer A was saying something like
'i am so sorry but my user pressed left 100ms ago
and i know you refreshed your page for your user 40ms ago
so this information will be 60ms too late for your user...
what do you think we should do about it?'
and if it is not relevant
computer B's response will run something like
'don't worry, i will alter it in the background
he won't notice'
if it is critical
it might say
'oh shit
he's really close to my user
well...
he seems to have avoided things and they are moving apart
so
i will alter it and he won't notice it'
or
'oh fucking shit
he's really close to my user
and because of your user's turn
my guy is dust...
if only he had seen your user's key press!
i will be blamed!
i can't accept that
sorry
but you will have to tell your user that he didn't turn.'

knowing this
then
computer A doesn't approach computer B with the keypress in the first place

sounds odd
but why not?

it ends
if i am correct in my thinking
in an impass
if two players approach one another
and the distance between them in virtual distance
is smaller than the time distance between them in terms of connection

like an event horizon

if they enter into that event horizon
effectively
computers just tell their players either of two things
depending on either of two settings the player has running on his system:
either
'i am not going to show you what happens
though you can keep pressing keys
and
if once i communicate with my partner computer
you survive
then i will show you what happens
if you die
well
i will show you a fancy death and a replay of what happened
because it was too fast for the distance between you
'
or
'since you want to see what you are doing
i will simulate what could happen
but only based on the proviso
that it could be corrected in the very near future
and if you survive
then you will be most happy
but if you die
then you will be most unhappy'

in the first setting
the player continues the game
internally
visualising what might happen
to be justified by the catch up or replay

whereas
in the second setting
the player needs to see stuff
even though it is incorrect
since it will not be an accurate simulation of what the other player is doing

wow
this is very zen

it is to do with approaching the moment

the external form of martial art
is to practice moves
until they become behavioural
so that
if a particular blow comes in at a particular speed and approach angle
the body responds to block etc automatically
that is
the body responds like state 2
not actually being sensitive to the current situation
but just going through the process

the internal martial art
is more like state 1
where things are happening so fast
that there is no need to react to an external stimulus
hmm...
this doesn't sound right

hmmm
more thought required for that...

two players
enemies
grinding one anothers walls
going in the same direction...
we often see this in a game

the one behind
accelerating up to say 40m/s
and the one in front at 30m/s
what is the formula to calculate the event horizon?
that is
if the player ahead turns suddenly
what is the distance that the player behind is allowed to turn freely?
well it depends on ping
with 40ms ping/2
the player is blind when 1.6m behind
with 100ms ping/2
the player is blind 4m behind
with 200ms ping/2
the player is 8m and so on

take the first case scenario
if the player in front turns when the bike is less than 1.6m behind
there is no way for the player to respond
since it takes 40ms for the next frame to pop up on the screen anyway

anything within 40ms
plays just a like a lan game really

in 40ms
he will have travelled a further 1.6m and the bike a head 1.2m
so they will match after 160ms
that's four frames in a 25fps simulation
the bike behind having travelled 6.4m and the bike ahead 4.8m
not taking into consideration respective acceleration and deceleration

any point during this approach
if the player ahead turns
the behind player only knows about it by dieing
whether the player was connected to the machine directly or on an internet connection

nah
this is all wrong
because i have been thinking about fps of 25
when with very high speeds
it is useful...
isn't it?

is there a reason for having fps of 100?
does it make the motion smoother?

a higher fps
allows a player to respond as close to the event as possible
because we work not like machines to a fixed framerate
but we respond relative to a change in our environment

in the example above
we may see a player go in the ydirection 1.6m
of if they made the turn
the frame would show them in the xdirection 1.6m
this is a major jump
but if there were two or three frames faster
then we would see immediately when the y-direction changed to the x-direction
and then add the 1.6m every 40ms or whatever our biological response cycle is

...

so
is the player ahead
allowed to turn?
well of course he is
because he is ahead

the initiative
is with the player ahead
even if they are entering the event-horizon

then we have the classic scenario
where the player ahead double-backs
and hits the player behind's wall who has just turned

how is all this determined
in a relativistic physics engine?

beats me
my brain is mash....

Thoughts on ping - Revision history

2020: /* 5 */

2020 at 21:16, 7 October 2006

2020 at 21:11, 7 October 2006