Peer to Peer games are just bad.

[Blim }[]{LINUX}[]{]

I am ofc talking about the p2p game netcode with todays internet and the infrastructure we all rely on.

Mostly talking first person shooters here but from what I can understand about networking. Peer to Peer games will always be problematic.

Server side is the only way to get arround Peering link problems without the customer paying 50x what they do now for a connection to have a leased line AND agreed latency over peer links.

Games like

BF3
BF4
PS2
MW2
MW3
BO1
BO2
WOTR

And this is a small % of new games that use the p2p netcode.

p2p gaming is not going to work unless someone is willing to pay for peering links between the big ISP's who compete against each other.


I understand most people dont want to know, I didn't. I just want to play my games like everyone else. But I've gone out of my way to work out what the problem is and its very clear to me now why these games are just really really bad.

[grounded in reality]

pretty much 90% of games are pay2play

[Blim }[]{LINUX}[]{]

Yep, this type of netcode is great if each players ping is around 1-5ms of each other but thats far from the case when talking about the internet in EU or US.

I understand the point of using p2p for games as big as ps2 but it also would have been really nice if the game was full server hosted with some fat new age server. Gaming has always been a big influence on technology, its about time we got the respect we deserve.

[Blim }[]{LINUX}[]{]

Originally posted by Touching Hair:

You would need a small server cluster to manage all the data 2000 players would generate

But would we really?


I can run multiple 64man servers on a phenom2 chip and a 20mb upload with no problems. I'm not sure I believe it can't be done.

I'm going to find this out because its a good point to make.

[Blue ✩]

Battlefield 3 and 4 are bad?
Didn't know that but since you said it, must be a fact.

[Blim }[]{LINUX}[]{]

Originally posted by Paper:

Battlefield 3 and 4 are bad?
Didn't know that but since you said it, must be a fact.

You can believe what you like but I consider a shooting game that doesn't respond to you shooting something, bad.

[Shasow]

Originally posted by bread:

pretty much 90% of games are pay2play
:tdealwithit:

1. Way to not read anything.
2. No, they're not. 99% of games aren't pay to play. 100% of both our statistics are made up, but mine are 100% more accurate.

[Blim }[]{LINUX}[]{]

If I was to tell what I really think about Peer to Peer first person shooters over the WWW it would go something like this.

Back in the late 90's I used to play quake 3 arena and I remember the delay on dial up we used to get. In my experience I would say games like Planetside2 and Battlefiled3-4 more delayed and much more unfair on a fibre (low latency) connection then quake 3 arena ever was.

In fact I've never played or even experienced such out of sync game play in my whole 13 years of online gaming.

Not once did I ever kill a player for them to kill me at the same time q3a with two instant weapons. Yet it happens all the time in p2p games now.

From a competitive prospective, these games are just disgusting.

[Blim }[]{LINUX}[]{]

But as this has been moved to off topic and steam isnt about game's but making money for fat cats with no soul (O_o) no one is going to read it.

So we will always see this type of crap money making games because its cheaper to make.

[grounded in reality]

planetside 2 isn't bad :c

[Blim }[]{LINUX}[]{]

No its horrendous.

Come on, even when you put the lagy netcode to one side, the bugs in the game make it unplayable or at least at the level I try to play it at. I'm always wasting cooldowns and resources due to bugs and the game not working as it should. ALL THE TIME. Thats just a quick reply, you have no idea the amount of bugs in this game if all you do is the same thing evey time.

And what is a first person shooter if the damage is delayed or makes no sound or you get hit when you are in cover.

I tell you now It's a load of unsynchronized bs. If I was 13 this game would be amazing but I'm not and I've been playing games online over 13 years now.

[Soundpulse]

Who's the only one complaining?
You.
You're the only person here who seems to hate it.
Next up, you're going to write a couple of paragraphcs trying to get me on your side. Not going to happen.

[Blim }[]{LINUX}[]{]

most of the people I used to play with back in the day are dead or too old to play. the population increase means you see more younger people.You have to remember that online gaming wasn't played by kids back in the day. They got played mostly by IT professionals at there works network and finaly on dial-up which also wasn't a thing kids had back then.

Simple maths. I just state facts and seek some skilled people to play with. I really do.

[Blue ✩]

Originally posted by ŞŐŮŊĐƤŲŁŞĘ:

Who's the only one complaining?
You.
You're the only person here who seems to hate it.
Next up, you're going to write a couple of paragraphcs trying to get me on your side. Not going to happen.

/rekt

[Ailes]

I hate peer-to-peer. It always causes me trouble in one way or another that I never have when I play on dedicated servers. I don't see the advantages of it. People told me we don't have to depend on the developers setting up servers when their games use peer-to-peer, should they go bankrupt or stop support whatsoever we can still play their games. But we can do that with dedicated servers we set up ourselves too. If people care about a game there will always be someone to host some dedicated server, even after official support has long stopped.

This stupid "matchmaking" I see in many multiplayer games is very annoying too. Where have the days gone where I was provided with a working, fool-proof server browser that allowed me to filter my games properly and that would show me more than just the same ten sessions over and over again? Nowadays some invisible underdeveloped mechanisms throw us together with completeley random people we don't even want to play with.