| 00:15.38 | *** join/#bzflag-chat alpha1-2 (~nb_j@host127.190-138-19.telecom.net.ar) |
| 00:24.44 | alpha1-2 | why sometimes the ibot doesn't save the whole day messages? |
| 00:25.06 | alpha1-2 | like this Saturday 3? |
| 00:29.25 | allejo | ibot doesn't post logs until the day after |
| 00:29.44 | allejo | and if there aren't any logs ibot most have been pinged out or riker's server went down |
| 00:30.21 | alpha1-2 | yes, the day after would be now (UTC 0) :) |
| 00:30.26 | blast007 | yeah, the bot isn't 100% reliable.. |
| 00:31.06 | allejo | blast007, isn't even 10% reliable |
| 00:31.12 | allejo | blast007 isn't* |
| 00:31.18 | blast007 | well, it's more than that |
| 00:31.24 | blast007 | at least 15% |
| 00:31.28 | allejo | hehe |
| 00:31.34 | alpha1-2 | I saw in ##ducleague channel a whole week with this problem... then I did a chat message and it worka again :) |
| 00:31.46 | alpha1-2 | works* |
| 00:31.57 | blast007 | did you ever think that maby nobody said anything in the channel for a week? P |
| 00:32.00 | blast007 | :P* |
| 00:32.05 | allejo | that ^ |
| 00:32.09 | blast007 | it really doesn't see hardly any activity... |
| 00:32.23 | blast007 | I'm there all the time, and it rarely shows up on my activity bar |
| 00:32.29 | alpha1-2 | well, but you can't be sure if you don't have the logs ;) |
| 00:32.41 | blast007 | run a client 24/7 then |
| 00:32.45 | blast007 | log yourself |
| 00:33.15 | alpha1-2 | I checked the logs sizes and yes I found many without chat messages, but others with a lot... so, it is something more or less randomly ;) |
| 00:33.59 | alpha1-2 | don't become angry :) |
| 00:34.14 | alpha1-2 | I just comment, maybe it will be fixed, last before :) |
| 00:34.23 | alpha1-2 | as before* |
| 00:34.48 | blast007 | I don't think it's broken... |
| 00:35.01 | alpha1-2 | and they are useful for whom, as me, aren't 24/7 connected :) |
| 00:35.01 | blast007 | you may just have incorrect expectations |
| 00:35.24 | alpha1-2 | oh the case of the same Tim, he isn't 24/7 connected |
| 00:35.28 | alpha1-2 | or* |
| 00:35.52 | alpha1-2 | I have the other logs uploaded already |
| 00:36.06 | alpha1-2 | because it is already UTC 0 |
| 00:37.15 | alpha1-2 | does Freenode save all the logs publically maybe? |
| 00:38.26 | blast007 | no |
| 00:38.34 | alpha1-2 | ok |
| 00:39.13 | blast007 | that would really serve no benefit and could instead have legal and/or privacy issues |
| 00:39.38 | alpha1-2 | I don't talk of private logs though |
| 00:39.39 | allejo | Why is "Y" part of the topic? |
| 00:39.49 | blast007 | heh |
| 00:39.51 | allejo | some channels are private, alpha1-2 |
| 00:39.53 | blast007 | probably was too long |
| 00:40.04 | allejo | oh |
| 00:40.05 | blast007 | should have been "You all suck!" at the end, probably |
| 00:40.09 | allejo | lol |
| 00:41.19 | alpha1-2 | allejo: well, it's ok, but they shouldn't be logged publically then. I talk of the public ones, like these. BTW, I saw some IRC services that doing it. |
| 00:41.34 | blast007 | should have been "Yes the channel name changed." |
| 00:42.12 | blast007 | probably from when we changed it from #bzchat to #bzflag-chat |
| 00:42.23 | *** mode/#bzflag-chat [+o blast007] by ChanServ |
| 00:43.38 | alpha1-2 | wow, there are a lot of channels logged by Tim's ibot :) |
| 00:43.46 | alpha1-2 | http://ibot.rikers.org/ |
| 00:44.10 | *** topic/#bzflag-chat by blast007 -> Welcome to BZChat; the place to talk about your favorite tank game BZFlag || http://bzflag.org || http://forums.bzflag.org || http://wiki.bzflag.org/MapMaking || http://wiki.bzflag.org/GettingHelp || http://bzflag.org/download || non bzflag chat yields to bzflag chat yields to bzflag help. be kind and civil. this channel is logged at http://ibot.rikers.org/%23bzflag-chat/ |
| 00:44.19 | *** part/#bzflag-chat blast007 (~blast007@bzflag/developer/Blast) |
| 00:44.19 | *** join/#bzflag-chat blast007 (~blast007@bzflag/developer/Blast) |
| 00:44.28 | alpha1-2 | I will try to read all those each day!! he he he |
| 00:44.37 | blast007 | fixed up the URLs while I was at it ;) |
| 00:47.44 | allejo | why the part instead of the /deop? |
| 00:47.44 | alpha1-2 | blast007: what do you mean with not 100% reliable? when I install something that works, it will continue working, let's say, forever |
| 00:48.07 | allejo | alpha1-2, IRC connections ping out |
| 00:48.38 | alpha1-2 | by which reasons? |
| 00:49.36 | blast007 | irc bot crashes, server goes down, network goes down, etc |
| 00:50.38 | alpha1-2 | ok, but I understand, according to any network application, it should at least be able to reconnect itself :) |
| 00:51.12 | blast007 | I didn't say it doesn't come back |
| 00:51.28 | blast007 | but if there's a network issue for an hour, it would be gone for an hour |
| 00:51.35 | alpha1-2 | not if it crashed ofc, but I would think that ibot and the original bot are well made |
| 00:51.59 | blast007 | heh |
| 00:52.04 | blast007 | why would you think that? |
| 00:52.27 | alpha1-2 | well, I think that they are quite old? |
| 00:52.38 | blast007 | what does being old have to do with being well made? |
| 00:52.48 | blast007 | BZFlag is old, and it's not well made |
| 00:52.56 | alpha1-2 | in general, a lot |
| 00:53.06 | blast007 | no, nothing. :) |
| 00:53.06 | allejo | Windows ME is old and it's not well made |
| 00:53.16 | blast007 | *vomits* |
| 00:53.24 | allejo | :P |
| 00:53.41 | alpha1-2 | because it is propietary soft, and it isn't being developed anymore from long time ago |
| 00:53.58 | alpha1-2 | but it isn't these cases |
| 00:54.19 | alpha1-2 | ME XS |
| 00:54.35 | alpha1-2 | the worst ever version! |
| 00:54.53 | blast007 | at least Windows Me has a usable interface though |
| 00:55.19 | alpha1-2 | well, it can be :) |
| 00:55.21 | blast007 | you can get more work done between BSoDs in Me than you can in 8 ;) |
| 00:55.30 | allejo | hehe |
| 00:55.44 | allejo | Windows ME doesn't require you to google how to set the clock |
| 00:55.49 | blast007 | :P |
| 00:57.36 | alpha1-2 | <blast007> BZFlag is old, and it's not well made <-- I don't want to start a discussion here, but I don't agree, I think that it is one of the best ever FLOSS games made :) |
| 00:58.53 | blast007 | I'm talking about the code |
| 00:59.05 | blast007 | and the interface |
| 00:59.13 | blast007 | and lots of other parts |
| 00:59.18 | blast007 | the gameplay is fun |
| 00:59.26 | allejo | 90s style LAN game hacked to be played over the interwebs |
| 00:59.33 | blast007 | hellz yeah! |
| 01:00.27 | blast007 | IPv6-what?! |
| 01:00.29 | blast007 | uint8_t Address::getIPVersion() const { |
| 01:00.29 | blast007 | <PROTECTED> |
| 01:00.29 | blast007 | } |
| 01:00.32 | blast007 | ;) |
| 01:00.45 | allejo | LOL |
| 01:00.53 | alpha1-2 | yes, the gameplay, but I have knowledge in general about games and the interface is nice, and the code I don't understand really still what are the big problems, apart, you can see the code results in the gametime too, and it's great |
| 01:01.01 | allejo | blast007, is that actually in the code? |
| 01:01.04 | blast007 | yes |
| 01:01.12 | blast007 | src/net/Address.cxx |
| 01:01.19 | allejo | bahahahahaha |
| 01:01.34 | blast007 | alpha1-2: the interface is nice? we have a mouse cursor in the menu, but you can't click on anything |
| 01:01.48 | blast007 | we have unnecessarily complicated options menus |
| 01:02.09 | blast007 | we have options that don't get used in certain situations (like the Team selection on the Join Game menu) |
| 01:02.13 | alpha1-2 | ok, but that doesn't mean that is bad |
| 01:02.23 | blast007 | sure it does :) |
| 01:02.37 | alpha1-2 | using keys isn't a sin in the XXI century |
| 01:03.02 | alpha1-2 | it cn be improved, sure |
| 01:03.06 | alpha1-2 | always |
| 01:03.09 | blast007 | how many players do we lose because they think the game is broken because they can't click on the menu? |
| 01:03.19 | alpha1-2 | in free soft, you can improve all, little by little |
| 01:03.27 | alpha1-2 | (in prop too) |
| 01:03.55 | blast007 | I'm sure I recall at least one instance of a user reporting they couldn't click in the menus |
| 01:04.07 | alpha1-2 | broken? well that you can't affirm |
| 01:04.21 | alpha1-2 | it is just an impression |
| 01:05.22 | alpha1-2 | allejo: LAN is a little INternet, or Internet is a big LAN, more or less |
| 01:05.47 | alpha1-2 | and ipv6 is something that ALL soft have to be upgrading, with time |
| 01:06.06 | alpha1-2 | BZ isnt the only one that have ipv4 running |
| 01:06.21 | alpha1-2 | almost all systems (general use) use it |
| 01:06.49 | blast007 | no, internet is not just a "big LAN", since the L stands for Local ;) |
| 01:07.10 | alpha1-2 | yes,I know, but I talk of technology, more or less similars |
| 01:07.21 | blast007 | it's all IP networking, sure |
| 01:07.37 | alpha1-2 | the INTERNET would be WAN |
| 01:07.43 | alpha1-2 | Internet* |
| 01:07.44 | blast007 | but initially, BZFlag did some stuff peer-to-peer |
| 01:08.20 | alpha1-2 | whats the problem? |
| 01:08.38 | alpha1-2 | it uses IPs too |
| 01:08.41 | blast007 | the methods it used may not have worked well over the internet |
| 01:08.59 | blast007 | I dunno what it did exactly.. |
| 01:09.07 | alpha1-2 | ok |
| 01:09.27 | alpha1-2 | peer to peer like the modern torrent tech then :) |
| 01:09.29 | blast007 | but it wasn't designed to work on high latency connections. it was designed for high bandwidth, low latency connections. |
| 01:10.05 | alpha1-2 | what velocity 100 mbps? |
| 01:10.08 | alpha1-2 | speed* |
| 01:10.19 | blast007 | at the time it might have only been 10 |
| 01:10.54 | alpha1-2 | well, yuo can see, there isn't TOO differences with the modern speeds :) |
| 01:11.14 | blast007 | yeah, but latench isn't under 10ms ;) |
| 01:11.17 | blast007 | latency* |
| 01:11.20 | alpha1-2 | widebands, cablemodems, optic fiber |
| 01:11.38 | alpha1-2 | oh ofc |
| 01:12.14 | alpha1-2 | but that problem you both (with Jeff) said me that with the new design, won't be fixed, but will become worse |
| 01:12.42 | alpha1-2 | I don't understand all the design neither, but I think that I have the idea |
| 01:13.13 | alpha1-2 | latency in Kilometers of networks is something unfixable in some point |
| 01:14.20 | alpha1-2 | but is something improvable if the speeds go up |
| 01:15.47 | alpha1-2 | so, tbh, I really like the actual state, I repeat, IN GENERAL, I don't know all the details |
| 01:16.26 | alpha1-2 | and I have played for 1 year very often, and I , as player, am very satisfied tbh :) |
| 01:16.40 | blast007 | how many commercial games do you play? |
| 01:17.18 | alpha1-2 | remember, I don't use windows anymore from years :) |
| 01:17.23 | blast007 | ;) |
| 01:17.28 | alpha1-2 | for personal use I mean |
| 01:17.40 | blast007 | granted, I've seen bad interfaces in commercial games as well |
| 01:17.53 | blast007 | (more so in bad console ports to PC) |
| 01:18.21 | alpha1-2 | but in the past, I calrify, that I have played commercial games, so I have the idea |
| 01:18.29 | alpha1-2 | too |
| 01:18.55 | alpha1-2 | linux here appeared around the 2000 |
| 01:19.18 | alpha1-2 | oh ok |
| 01:20.38 | alpha1-2 | I remember I played some FPS when I was teen, for example: Duke Nuken, Doom a little, Quake, between others :) |
| 01:20.56 | alpha1-2 | *Duke Nuken 3D* |
| 01:21.14 | alpha1-2 | *teen or young* |
| 01:21.40 | blast007 | http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2003/11/20/bzflag.html see the "An Ever-Evolving Network" section |
| 01:21.58 | blast007 | it had used a hybrid client-server/peer-to-peer system |
| 01:22.03 | alpha1-2 | I loved the games magazines that had a CD with a lot of propietary demos ! |
| 01:23.20 | alpha1-2 | nice link |
| 01:23.34 | alpha1-2 | wow 2003! |
| 01:23.57 | blast007 | interesting article overall |
| 01:24.22 | alpha1-2 | yes ofc |
| 01:25.04 | alpha1-2 | i said 2003 because it is important too, it is just in the middle... when it was rewrtitten to C++? |
| 01:25.37 | blast007 | I think that was before it was open-sourced |
| 01:25.39 | alpha1-2 | (I am writing with my notebook kb, so I don't make typos :) |
| 01:26.01 | blast007 | http://wiki.bzflag.org/Project_History |
| 01:26.15 | alpha1-2 | but what year more or less? |
| 01:26.35 | blast007 | no idea |
| 01:26.38 | alpha1-2 | ok |
| 01:26.55 | blast007 | find out when "SGI's third IndiZone contest" was ;) |
| 01:26.57 | alpha1-2 | well, according to the article, it was before 2003 at least |
| 01:27.29 | alpha1-2 | wait I am reading still the network issue |
| 01:27.44 | blast007 | seems it was around 1994: "battalion was a game written in 1994 on my Silicon Graphics Indy in GL for the IndiZone 3 contest as a way for me to unwind after completing my PhD" |
| 01:28.12 | alpha1-2 | "the client-server model " is good |
| 01:28.18 | blast007 | http://evlweb.eecs.uic.edu/aej/AndyBattalion.html |
| 01:29.00 | alpha1-2 | Interesting: |
| 01:29.02 | alpha1-2 | This split client-server/peer-to-peer model had to be abandoned, because the peer-to-peer data used multicasting, and the present-day Internet doesn't have the infrastructure to support this just yet. "That's a shame," says Schoeneman, "since it greatly reduces the required bandwidth." |
| 01:31.40 | alpha1-2 | Schoedeman is the original author right? |
| 01:31.56 | alpha1-2 | Schoeneman* |
| 01:32.29 | alpha1-2 | the last thing in net section : |
| 01:32.32 | alpha1-2 | "BZFlag was designed for a trusted LAN environment. Playing over the Internet is quite different and cheating has always plagued the game. Much effort has been spent lately to do server-side cheat protection, and we have made significant headway," says Schoeneman. "We plan to do some larger protocol changes soon that will break the long-standing backwards compatibility. The primary reason for those changes is to reduce cheating." |
| 01:33.01 | blast007 | hehehehe..... |
| 01:33.05 | alpha1-2 | so cheating seems to be the first problem then? |
| 01:33.14 | blast007 | it's still an issue, yes |
| 01:33.35 | alpha1-2 | what was funny? :) |
| 01:33.39 | alpha1-2 | the name mistake? |
| 01:34.32 | blast007 | the "soon" :) |
| 01:34.51 | alpha1-2 | oh |
| 01:35.15 | alpha1-2 | you talk of the 94 but I asked about the migration to C++... |
| 01:35.16 | blast007 | there have been some improvements, but only for the most blatenly obvious stuff |
| 01:35.30 | blast007 | yeah, that's around the time when it was probably migrated to C++ |
| 01:35.33 | alpha1-2 | well, he had good intentions :) |
| 01:36.00 | blast007 | since our wiki page had said it was converted to C++ for the third SGI Indizone contest |
| 01:36.19 | blast007 | and that other guy wrote a program in 1994 for the third SGI IndiZone contest... so.... |
| 01:37.28 | alpha1-2 | oh ok |
| 01:37.37 | alpha1-2 | so , almost from the beggining |
| 01:37.39 | blast007 | and to give you an idea of the kinds of cheats that used to be possible... you could send the server a message and say that someone else fired a bullet |
| 01:37.54 | blast007 | so you cold make someone fire shockwaves on all of their teammates :P |
| 01:38.18 | alpha1-2 | he he |
| 01:38.24 | alpha1-2 | cool :) |
| 01:38.43 | alpha1-2 | ok, so the clients have the power to say what happen in the fileds |
| 01:38.51 | alpha1-2 | fields* |
| 01:38.56 | blast007 | they had more power at the time, yes |
| 01:39.06 | blast007 | but it's still a very client-focused system |
| 01:39.23 | alpha1-2 | I don't disagree at all though |
| 01:39.40 | alpha1-2 | i believe in delegation of taks |
| 01:39.47 | alpha1-2 | tasks |
| 01:40.52 | alpha1-2 | I have learned about server-client model and they told me that the most common usage is delegating task, not dumb clients |
| 01:41.17 | alpha1-2 | not in file servers or in database server though |
| 01:41.23 | alpha1-2 | ofc |
| 01:42.14 | alpha1-2 | well, I think that cheater problem is mostly controlled nowadays by the admins/cops and by the other players |
| 01:42.19 | blast007 | we currently have a dumb server |
| 01:43.03 | alpha1-2 | dumb server I didn't heard ever :).... what I see here are smart clients, that is the important thing, delegating tasks |
| 01:43.17 | alpha1-2 | hear it* |
| 01:43.43 | alpha1-2 | and the server is few loaded that is good |
| 01:43.56 | blast007 | loaded? |
| 01:44.07 | alpha1-2 | as "overloaded"? |
| 01:44.15 | blast007 | why would it be overloaded? |
| 01:44.16 | alpha1-2 | the opposite |
| 01:44.35 | blast007 | you do realize that on the client, most of the processing time is spent doing graphics, right? |
| 01:44.41 | alpha1-2 | how do u say, less loaded |
| 01:44.42 | alpha1-2 | ? |
| 01:44.49 | alpha1-2 | or few loaded |
| 01:45.04 | alpha1-2 | in opposition to a high loaded |
| 01:45.43 | blast007 | people seem to always think that if we had a smart server (a.k.a. authoritative server) that it would suddenly need a lot of resources |
| 01:45.47 | blast007 | but that's just not true |
| 01:52.06 | alpha1-2 | I remember talking with you both about this issue time ago, and you said that you could use a calculation system for make the graphics (part in server and part in client) right? |
| 01:53.44 | alpha1-2 | te people think that because you can to project yourself... today you can have 10 clients, but tomorrow you can have 100 or 1000 |
| 01:53.56 | alpha1-2 | *you have to project* |
| 01:54.37 | alpha1-2 | then the easier way to see it is with delegation of tasks, not 1 brain that does all the job |
| 01:54.52 | blast007 | I've had 30 players on a server at once |
| 01:55.05 | blast007 | I've had a server with maybe 20 players and 60 observers |
| 01:55.16 | blast007 | the list went off the screen |
| 01:55.37 | alpha1-2 | ok, but the screen issue is *other* problem |
| 01:55.40 | blast007 | ;) |
| 01:55.49 | alpha1-2 | you can do an scroll feature and done |
| 01:55.51 | blast007 | just saying, even with all that, the CPU load wasn't all that much |
| 01:55.56 | blast007 | on the server end, I mean |
| 01:56.07 | blast007 | the CPU is the least of the concern right now |
| 01:56.20 | alpha1-2 | we are saying the same |
| 01:56.30 | blast007 | so my point is that we have a lot of headroom to work with to make the server smarter |
| 01:56.48 | alpha1-2 | I asked you abobut the word, I think that is "lowloaded" in opposite to "highloaded" or "overloaded" |
| 01:56.58 | blast007 | the server could do all the gameplay logic checks that the clients do |
| 01:57.32 | alpha1-2 | and if you put all the work in the server (or majority of it) then the server can be overloaded in some time |
| 01:57.42 | alpha1-2 | imagine this |
| 01:58.04 | alpha1-2 | I remember that Jeff said me at Internet, but i say now in a LAN |
| 01:58.25 | blast007 | I don't see it getting overloaded... |
| 01:58.26 | alpha1-2 | I install a server (not very powoerful) |
| 01:58.42 | alpha1-2 | and I have a LAN with 100 pcs |
| 01:58.59 | alpha1-2 | what would be the result with both systems? |
| 01:59.05 | blast007 | about the same ;) |
| 01:59.16 | blast007 | maybe 10% instead of 7% usage |
| 01:59.30 | alpha1-2 | in the server? |
| 01:59.33 | blast007 | yeah |
| 01:59.51 | blast007 | a bit part of the CPU time will probably be shuffling the network data around |
| 02:00.04 | alpha1-2 | the server would do the half of the drawing system as Jeff said me? |
| 02:00.20 | blast007 | no |
| 02:00.31 | blast007 | it would not be doing anything with OpenGL |
| 02:00.48 | alpha1-2 | the calculations I mean |
| 02:00.53 | alpha1-2 | the half of them |
| 02:01.00 | blast007 | no, it would do all the calculations |
| 02:01.08 | blast007 | and the client would also do calculations |
| 02:01.09 | alpha1-2 | the other half the clients would do a projection, right? |
| 02:01.36 | blast007 | it's not a half and half situation |
| 02:01.44 | blast007 | they would both do calculations |
| 02:01.57 | blast007 | the client would do calculations to keep the gameplay looking as smooth as possible |
| 02:01.58 | alpha1-2 | but they have to interact in some point too |
| 02:02.15 | blast007 | the server would do calculations about how the game should actually be, and would correct the clients if they differ |
| 02:02.25 | blast007 | deaths would be calculated on the server |
| 02:02.58 | blast007 | people with high lag would have issues |
| 02:03.08 | alpha1-2 | ok, doing an aproximation, today what CPU porcentage uses for gameplay calculation? almost nothing right? |
| 02:03.25 | blast007 | yeah, pretty much nothing for gameplay calculation |
| 02:03.38 | alpha1-2 | in the futur what amount per client? |
| 02:03.45 | alpha1-2 | % |
| 02:03.48 | blast007 | somewhere from X to Y |
| 02:03.49 | blast007 | :P |
| 02:03.57 | blast007 | that's an impossible question to answer |
| 02:04.14 | alpha1-2 | proximation? you said from 7 to 10% |
| 02:04.22 | blast007 | was just throwing numbers around :P |
| 02:04.36 | alpha1-2 | well, 1% per client? |
| 02:04.47 | blast007 | 87% of statistics are made up on the spot (<-- including this) |
| 02:05.01 | blast007 | fromwhere from 0 to 100% per client |
| 02:05.10 | alpha1-2 | let's imagine |
| 02:05.46 | alpha1-2 | because if you have 1% per client, then your server will handle until 100 clients, not more |
| 02:06.11 | blast007 | maybe, maybe not |
| 02:06.11 | alpha1-2 | but we need to project ourselfes |
| 02:06.28 | alpha1-2 | if I would want to have a bigger LAN with 200 or 500? |
| 02:06.31 | blast007 | it's not as clear cut are you're trying to make it |
| 02:07.00 | alpha1-2 | apart of the network pacakges amount, that would be other issue to analizing |
| 02:07.15 | blast007 | threading parts of the code can help as well |
| 02:07.18 | alpha1-2 | yes it is lineal calculation |
| 02:07.22 | blast007 | spread the load across CPU cores |
| 02:07.34 | blast007 | (or just make it so that some stuff isn't waiting on other things) |
| 02:07.39 | alpha1-2 | you dont have thread nowadays |
| 02:07.44 | blast007 | ? |
| 02:08.06 | alpha1-2 | Jeff said that bzfs dont have thread, concurrence |
| 02:08.12 | blast007 | right, currently |
| 02:08.27 | blast007 | so does that mean we never can? no, of course not |
| 02:08.35 | alpha1-2 | ok, sure |
| 02:08.35 | blast007 | so that argument is silly |
| 02:09.02 | alpha1-2 | but all depends *again* of your server capability, not the delegating in 100 clients about the tasks |
| 02:09.46 | alpha1-2 | all what I try to say, it is about logic, about division of the work |
| 02:10.01 | blast007 | but why would this not allow a smarter server? |
| 02:10.04 | alpha1-2 | maybe I am missing something too, idk |
| 02:10.24 | blast007 | like was mentioned, a larger percentage of the time is probably spent on stuff like networking |
| 02:10.43 | blast007 | guess what we can do with a smarter server? optimize networking |
| 02:10.49 | alpha1-2 | but think *first* in a LAN, after in a WAN |
| 02:10.59 | blast007 | we don't need to send updates about a player with ST to someone that can't see that tank |
| 02:11.05 | alpha1-2 | if I have a LAN, then not much latency |
| 02:11.14 | blast007 | we don't need to send as many updates to a player about a player that is far away |
| 02:11.34 | blast007 | no, you should think first in the WAN |
| 02:11.44 | blast007 | thinking first in the LAN is what got us into trouble ;) |
| 02:12.03 | alpha1-2 | think if I want to run the server locally |
| 02:12.14 | alpha1-2 | in a cyber |
| 02:12.22 | blast007 | so? |
| 02:12.29 | alpha1-2 | that is a simple model |
| 02:12.35 | blast007 | if you design it to cope with the WAN, then it should work great in a LAN |
| 02:12.53 | blast007 | if you design it for the LAN, it will have issues with the WAN |
| 02:12.59 | alpha1-2 | no if I dont have a powerful server? |
| 02:13.13 | blast007 | what does that have to do with LAN vs WAN?? |
| 02:13.32 | *** part/#bzflag-chat BulletCatcher (~bc@bzflag/developer/BulletCatcher) |
| 02:13.38 | blast007 | I've run bzfs from a handheld computer |
| 02:13.43 | alpha1-2 | if you scale something, then you have to up each component, can you see it? |
| 02:13.58 | blast007 | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_N800 |
| 02:14.04 | blast007 | ^ that ran bzfs |
| 02:14.16 | alpha1-2 | the server, the routers, the wires, the technology, etc |
| 02:14.29 | blast007 | with ease (the main issue was networking, which could have probably been solved by adjusting power management settings) |
| 02:14.45 | blast007 | no, I don't see it |
| 02:15.04 | blast007 | you realize that the WAN generally has *less* right? ;) |
| 02:15.23 | blast007 | your cheap dedicated server probably has less horsepower than a typical desktop system |
| 02:15.40 | blast007 | your WAN connection probably only has a few mbps whereas your LAN has 100 or 1000 |
| 02:16.04 | blast007 | so why would you design it for something dozens of times faster when you want to run it on the slower technology too? |
| 02:16.53 | alpha1-2 | you have talken of propietar games about the server side kind |
| 02:17.05 | blast007 | what? |
| 02:17.23 | alpha1-2 | and I think that they can have that sstem because they can have powerful servers |
| 02:18.02 | alpha1-2 | the server side kind, you or Jeff said that is the used by Half Life iirc |
| 02:18.30 | blast007 | I guess I'm not sure what you're talking about anymore |
| 02:18.34 | blast007 | goes back to coding |
| 02:23.34 | alpha1-2 | Ok, this is a little long conversation already, maybe we can continue in other moment, but this is what I was talking about |
| 02:23.36 | alpha1-2 | [Mié 03 Jul 2013] [23:26:42] * alpha1-2_away is still unconvinced of new methode... |
| 02:23.37 | alpha1-2 | ... |
| 02:23.39 | alpha1-2 | [Mié 03 Jul 2013] [23:27:09] <JeffM>alpha1-2_away, it isn't new |
| 02:23.40 | alpha1-2 | [Mié 03 Jul 2013] [23:27:16] <JeffM>it's an old concept that games have been using for years |
| 02:23.42 | alpha1-2 | ... |
| 02:23.43 | alpha1-2 | [Mié 03 Jul 2013] [23:27:27] <JeffM>quake and half-life started it |
| 02:23.45 | alpha1-2 | [Mié 03 Jul 2013] [23:27:31] <JeffM>even doom did it |
| 02:23.46 | alpha1-2 | blast007 |
| 02:54.07 | *** join/#bzflag-chat BulletCatcher (~bc@bzflag/developer/BulletCatcher) |
| 20:41.19 | *** join/#bzflag-chat spldart (~James@c-76-30-94-74.hsd1.tx.comcast.net) |
| 20:41.19 | *** join/#bzflag-chat spldart (~James@bzflag/contributor/spldart) |
| 23:26.48 | *** join/#bzflag-chat spldart (~James@bzflag/contributor/spldart) |