4 ms·
No, most games don't do it this way now. When I created this type of networking in 1994 it was to solve the particular problem of lots of units and low bandwid
by MarkTerrano 8y ago
No, most games don't do it this way now. When I created this type of networking in 1994 it was to solve the particular problem of lots of units and low bandwidth. Now where bandwidth is much less consideration games typically use an authoritative server (even if that server is a 'headless' process that runs on a machine with a client). All clients send turns to the server and it sends out the authoritative results to all the clients. Unreal and Unity both have some documentation I believe on how their networking works at the high level - they are really adequate for most cases.
- severine 8y agoSome links: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2084276 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2084276 Unreal Networking Architecture: http://unreal.epicgames.com/Network.htm http://unreal.epicgames.com/Network.htm 88 points by jbrennan on Jan 8, 2011 | 12 comments -- Creating a simple multiplayer example: https://unity3d.com/es/learn/tutorials/s/multiplayer-networking https://unity3d.com/es/learn/tutorials/s/multiplayer-network...
- charlchi 8y agoI need to start saving HN goldmine threads like that as well. Thanks
- golergka 8y agoThere are still limitations to this architecture and instances when you have to run something else. If I would be doing an RTS with thousands of units, I'd still prefer the lock-step version described above, for example. Or, for a more concrete example, right now I'm revamping multiplayer architecture for a game with a huge open world — and the only way to get it to work without paying for dedicated server farm is to run a distributed authority key-value storage.