Gamplay - is it server side or client side? Ideas to improve latency issues?

[Strider1048]

I can't seem to find an exact answer on this - however, it seems most say it is held client side.
This seems to have led to some really bad matchups where players' gamplay suffers due to latency issues between the clients mostly resulting in a game of 'slow-mo' or 'stutter-step'.

Would server side gameplay solve this problem?
If not in casual games, then in ranked play at least?



Finally, if games are to be kept at client side, would having a minimum latency per 1-5 connection status be a decent solution?

For example - based on connection status level the client must report back to the server at a variable between every 0.5 and 2 seconds to see if someone is having connection issues - if their latency is over the average ping for the connection status, the server disconnects that client from the game.

• If it's a casual game, the remaining player gets the win.
  
  
• If it's a ranked game, the remaining player gets the win and a small amount of LP added to their record.
  The disconnected player has LP subtracted from their record.
  
  
• If a player disconnects from matches continuously over a period of time, then the usual ban should be issued as well as a major loss of LP.
  For players who disconnect all the time, then the ban timer can be extended indefinately.

Any constructive feedback?

[Brandon]

GGPO is the netcode out there for fighters and it's peer to peer. It's a great experience without using a server for each match.

[Dracula Strikes]

Wifi PS4 players man..... Hit me up, Ill own u at Alpha 2 or 3 in Fightcade

[SunTzu81]

It's P2P (client side), only a good filtering system handled by Capcom's servers will fix this problem. Max latency for a good match is 100-125ms so everymatch need to be less than that to not have constant rollback or stutter. This limits matches to around 500 miles, which means less matches to play, which means more time waiting.

Forcing a disconnect after a game starts will be abused. Having it take LP will be abusive as lag spikes are not always the clients fault. Checking for stability before a match should be something the server checks and if it finds it is too variable it should warn the user so they know not to go online. This could also be accomplished by showing real time ping before the match starts.

Lots of ways to fix this problem, but CAPCOM has to fix it. Nothing we can do.

[PerfectPlayJ]

im sure many people play online on PC with pc specs of not being able to run at 60fps and/or horrible internet

[Utsuro]

SunTzu81 původně napsal:

It's P2P (client side), only a good filtering system handled by Capcom's servers will fix this problem. Max latency for a good match is 100-125ms so everymatch need to be less than that to not have constant rollback or stutter. This limits matches to around 500 miles, which means less matches to play, which means more time waiting.

Forcing a disconnect after a game starts will be abused. Having it take LP will be abusive as lag spikes are not always the clients fault. Checking for stability before a match should be something the server checks and if it finds it is too variable it should warn the user so they know not to go online. This could also be accomplished by showing real time ping before the match starts.

Lots of ways to fix this problem, but CAPCOM has to fix it. Nothing we can do.

LOL "100-125ms" ! 500 miles ! Total ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ !

I wouldn't bother playing this game above 65ms and I often play guys living 1000 miles or more away from me with 40ms-ish ping.

PeerBlock for country filtering/ip grabbing + https://github.com/42Kmi/LagDrop is the way to go. And still, it doesn't help with wi-fi/hardware peasants. They don't match players according to their ping. The vast majority of the player base has remote ICPM ping disabled in their modem/router interface and thus cannot be pinged. My guess is they match people according to their IP location + traceroute (not as precise as ping and would explain why the matchmaking takes about 5-10 seconds once your opponent's IP connects to you).

[drawknives]

Nothing is ever going to completely remove delay and lag in online games as long as data is transmitted using electricity over metal wires. Physics is the bottleneck. Light may solve the problem in the short to medium term. Quantum entanglement for later on.

As for the structure of SF5's multiplayer, I believe its Client / Server using peer to peer. It's a strange customized implementation where the rollback seems to hit the client side only and not the server side when there are network frames dropped and are re-transmitted / replayed.. hence we hear constant reports of the one-sided rollback. There doesn't seem to be any way for the end user to discern who is the "server" and who is the "client" unless you want to packet sniff and use other tools like tcpdump to snoop the datastream. Rollback and match lag conditions are not recorded as part of match replay data making it impossible to gauge match conditions after the fact.

As for any sort of constructive feedback to improve things... thats above my paygrade.
I've had multiple ideas of mine 'borrowed' before and implemented without even as much as a 'Thankyou'. Thats called a learning experience.

[IITWLLII -ES-]

Region / Distance filtering is the most efficient way to get rid of intercontinental, laggy connections, especially in P2P games. Many of us requested a multi-region/flags filter, especially for batlle lounges since release.

There are routers/firmware, which allow this in any game
https://www.youtube.com/embed/mVuDpwRSOug

Additionally some players used PeerBlock to block specific IPs/ranges to avoid rage quitters / and users with fluctuating connections like unstable WiFi, the downside is, it works only on static IPs. Nativ, in-game blacklist has been part of discussions, but the can also open new ways to exploit rankings + in-game FM economy.

Using server sided matches for fighting games is horrible from experience (much lag / desyncs).
SFV is P2P based and falls back to relay server connections only if there is a very restrictive router/firewall (NAT) in place.

I wouldn't play any matches above ping 90 in shooters, ping 50 is ok, in fighters a lower value is desireable, very good connections are around ping 20-35 ms, if you are lucky you can sometimes play with ping 9-14.

A benchmark-test for online gaming like in SFIV, would be desireable in SFV for obvious reasons too.

[Stationary Traveller]

Vayne původně napsal:

Play GGxrd Rev. Better than this turd.

Don't forget to pay 20 bucks to play the new balance changes tho, LOL

[Utsuro]

Vayne původně napsal:

Play GGxrd Rev. Better than this turd.

I wouldn't call this game a turd but can only agree when it comes to GGxrd Rev. Literally jaw-dropping. Its solo modes are way more enjoyable than SF5's multi.