9 ms·

A Look at Game Streaming Tech in the Browser

136 points by chrisd1100 8y ago

blixt 8y ago
(Edit: to clarify the below is about their cloud offering user since I'm on Mac and don't have my own PC to stream from) I've been using Parsec to play games like No Man's Sky and it's really impressive technologically speaking, but the pricing model is a bit obtuse. It's made worse by the fact that the big cost for someone who doesn't game all that often is storage. Basically, you sign up to a VM with an impressive GPU and it runs games really well, and the streaming tech is top notch. But to run it all you need to pay for at least 50 GB of storage and you need to pay for it on a time basis, which means you're left with anxiety of leaving it turned off, as well as sudden deletion of your cloud PC if you're not paying attention. I wish they would come up with some kind of clever storage solution so that the basic Windows image is a shared (read only) storage component and the additional games are additional pluggable hard drives, also shared between users. This would mean you as the end user loses control of modding/patches for some games, but it could save so much storage. The save games etc would go on a tiny hard drive that you ultimately pay for (but I'd say Parsec should eat that cost to reduce anxiety and instead encourage a monthly subscription for any-time access). TL;DR: Parsec is awesome. I want to pay a fixed price and not be exposed to their tech stack costs, so I don't get FOMO when I'm not using it every day.
- xigency 8y ago
  This reminds me of a huge problem with Steam, which is the size and frequency of updates. For the very small number of first party games, like Half-Life or Counter-Strike, updates are cumulative smaller files that contain changes. So if there was an update to a game, it might be 1-2 GB. For the vast majority of titles on Steam, however, an update requires a full download of the latest version. So for most games it is a 25 GB or 50 GB download. Developers want to stay on top of bugs, so for an infrequent gamer playing on a weekly or monthly basis, opening Steam means queuing up 100 GB of downloads and a long wait to actually play games. The fact that this hasn't been solved yet shows that Valve isn't willing to invest in fixing it either through new technology or cooperation with developers, which is really sad. Optimistically, something you're describing for Parsec would be possible, but maybe it isn't realistic.
  - bllguo 8y ago
    This is anecdotal of course, but I can't think of a single game that behaves like this, and my library is pretty sizable. Would be interested in an example. I also cannot see the justification on a technical level for why this behavior would exist. All in all I'm pretty confused by this comment, tbh
    - xigency 8y ago
      I've seen it with one or more of these games: GTA V Mortal Kombat X Metal Gear Solid 5 / GZ Doom The Witcher Final Fantasy
  - xirdstl 8y ago
    I don't think this is correct. I use Steam and have a lot of games installed. When it does updates, they are not the size of the original downloads. Usually, much, much smaller.
    - Schoolmeister 8y ago
      Indeed. I've never needed a full game download just for a patch. Depending on the game and type of patch this is usually ~1GB.
    - kbenson 8y ago
      Same here. I think what's being seen is that some things are easier to diff and update than others. If a game has a large file for map data that's indexed into, and update to any portions of it are delivered the most easily (where easily includes reliably) by updating the whole file. If that file is 2GB, then you have a 2GB download. If a game has lots of relatively little files, you could update multiple maps with a few tens of megabytes of downloads. An actual patch utility that goes in and applies binary diffs would be much more economical in terms of bandwidth, but then that complicates Steam's ability to confirm a game is in a good state with file checksums, and is much more likely to have odd errors as a diff somehow correctly applies to a file with an incorrect starting starting state.
    - xigency 8y ago
- fneves 8y ago
  Parsec is a tech/app, it's not a service as you think it is. They're basically making a bridge between cloud renting and their app, like an integration, you can't really say that parsec is expensive, they don't rent computing power at all :) Parsec as tech/app is indeed awesome! Together with Steam Link app, they're the best we currently have.
  - blixt 8y ago
    I’m not saying it’s expensive, but that the service they’re offering is obtuse and anxiety inducing because you’re economically “punished” as soon as you stop playing. And they offer this service under their own brand and never leaving their site, so I don’t agree with your dismissal that this is just an integration. It’s a service they offer and they are taking my money for it. Money I gladly paid, I just wish the service I got was simplified.
    - fneves 8y ago
      Anyway, you see in their app Amazon and Paperspace, the prices are not decided by them. I'm not saying it's cheap, but paperspace it's the cheapest I've seen for cloud gaming. Anyway, my use of parsec is my home computer, so I don't really have the difficulties you're facing.
- jon-wood 8y ago
  If you’re using Steam most games support Steam Cloud for your save games, and with the server being on a gigabit link in a data centre (possibly the same one as Steam’s mirrors) it doesn’t take long to install. Given that you don’t have to worry too much about keeping storage you’re not using, just make sure to dump your non-cloud save games in Dropbox or something now and again.
  - blixt 8y ago
    Sure but now we are talking even more time and effort to spin up/down a computer whenever I want to game for a little while. Installing a Windows VM from scratch and then No Man’s Sky is still probably 20-30 minutes from start to gameplay. And specifically in the case of NMS it’s terribly slow at first launch (not sure if it’s just compiling shaders or what).
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
- evilturnip 8y ago
  I'd use Shadow for game streaming. Cheaper, unlimited stream time for a fixed monthly fee and the service is actually faster. https://shadow.tech/usen/ https://shadow.tech/usen/
  - Schoolmeister 8y ago
    Do you have any idea about their latency? According to [1] Parsec only adds about 7ms, which is quite impressive. [1] https://blog.parsecgaming.com/testing-game-streaming-input-latency-on-parsec-with-diy-instructions-49ae838f45a7 https://blog.parsecgaming.com/testing-game-streaming-input-l...
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - evilturnip 8y ago
      Depends on your connection to their datacenter. They have a West Coast and an East Coast. I live near NYC so I connect to their NJ datacenter. With my fiber optic, I get about 4-6ms.
andrewmd5 8y ago
Hey cool stuff, Chris! Good to finally see you taking the browser seriously. We started to do the same at Rainway over a year ago https://blog.rainway.io/play-overwatch-and-anything-else-in-your-browser-with-rainway-86798744bddb https://blog.rainway.io/play-overwatch-and-anything-else-in-... We are big fans of web-based real-time streaming so if you want to read more: https://blog.rainway.io/the-art-of-pivoting-how-we-built-rainway-fd741a3e41c4 https://blog.rainway.io/the-art-of-pivoting-how-we-built-rai... Excited to see how you develop this! EDIT: A quick correction for your blog -- the MSE low delay rendering was not added for Project Stream, it has been there since 2015 and is triggered via heuristics.
- sigfubar 8y ago
  Your comment reads like an incredibly passive-aggressive cease & desist letter. Yes, you're filing a patent, and yes, you started doing this over a year ago. Good for you! This marking of territory is an immature look you really don't want to put on in a public forum.
  - Raphmedia 8y ago
    Was their post edited since you posted this? I'm not seeing any of what you are describing.
    - shehryarrr 8y ago
      It was, they said they were filing a provisional patent
- shehryarrr 8y ago
  So you're filing a patent based on other's open source tech?
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - andrewmd5 8y ago
EgyptianMusk 8y ago
Looks great. Can't wait to try it out.
fneves 8y ago
Parsec mucho love <3
laythea 8y ago
Great! Youtube style image compression here we come! :)
ilovecaching 8y ago
I've been playing odyssey in project stream all weekend and it's blown away my expectations. We're about two to three years away from seeing consoles move to the cloud. It runs flawlessly at 1080p and I've only experienced three or four five second lag spikes in my six hours of play. The game feels just as responsive and looks just as good on my 1080 GTX running at home.
- soared 8y ago
  My project stream was perfect for 2 hours, then was completely unplayable for the 10 minutes until I quit. I'm not sure what happened, but I've gone back once or twice and have horrible input lag. I'm using ethernet and get 350MB/s, but google says the issue is packet loss. I don't know how to remedy it, but I know that game streaming is and seemingly always will be just around the corner from perfect. Edit - it was absolutely stunning to see my accepted email, login to google and ubisoft, and be playing within 5 minutes. Zero download time, zero load time, just instant gaming.
  - awakeasleep 8y ago
    It doesn't have to be perfect- it just has to be profitable. And the increased control a streaming service will have over users guarantees that game streaming with be outrageously profitable. Think of all the basic ways we already see services make money- from the subscription, to metered access, to congestion pricing, early access fees- and those are only the basics. This is an industry that figured out the loot crate, after all. On a different note, once the profitability is figured out, publishers can give direction to developers that games need to be designed around the latency, or whatever issue appears. Games can also be designed around the assumption that they'll be streamed, allowing things to be a lot more cross platform.
    - soared 8y ago
      I think the problem is the product is poor due to technical issues so no one will adopt it. If I can only play a few hours before getting game-breaking input lag, I'm not going to come back to the service. I have a decent computer and hard wired gigabit internet, if game streaming can't work there it won't work for the 99% of americans who have worse internet than me.
anontechworker 8y ago
It would be amazing to see something like this on the switch. Play any game portably? I’m in.
- misterprime 8y ago
  Maybe it could work while you're sitting underneath a 5G tower.
- ClassyJacket 8y ago
  Resident Evil 7 and Assassin's Creed Odyssey are already streamed on the Switch.
albertgoeswoof 8y ago
> The current implementation only works in Chrome. Before you assume we’re kool aid drinking Google evangelists, or simply just lazy, there is good reason for this — likely due in part to Google’s work on Project Stream, they have introduced “low delay” mode for MSE that sets up a push model for video frames rather than the traditional buffered pull model. This is also good for any kind of low latency video stream, not just game streaming. When in low delay mode, Chrome begins to break the rules of MSE and no longer requires buffered playback. It also starts to ignore certain timing information and keyframe requirements. > ... > This is not to say that one couldn’t get a decent working implementation in Firefox, but Chrome’s low delay mode works in the ideal way without having to complicate the implementation or diverge too heavily from the way Parsec’s native applications behave. And while we love Firefox, the harsh reality is that 82% of Parsec users are using Chrome, with only 5% using Firefox, which made us more comfortable starting with a Chrome only implementation. For Firefox users, you can always use the Parsec native applications, which will probably perform better anyway . I think this is quite sad to see. It’s not really game streaming tech in a web browser, it’s game streaming tech in Google Chrome. What happens if Google decides they don’t want to play with other streaming services? They’re only a quick auto update of locking Parsec services out.
- lawrenceyan 8y ago
  You can always just use their native application...
- formalsystem 8y ago
  Although if this becomes popular enough I can see the parsec team investing resources into their own browser.
  - oliveshell 8y ago
    Other than escaping the bloodthirsty data-slurping of the Google ecosystem, I don’t see that solution being much better. If they have to make their own proprietary browser, the situation will just be streaming “with a client you need to download” rather than “in the browser” generally. (Disregard this if I’m misunderstanding and by “their own browser” you meant an existing project like Firefox.)
IMayoDixper 8y ago
Google has properly opened the path for games streaming to the web browser. Being into the Cloud Gaming industry since 2012 we found this path was getting good enough and decided to start building a cooperative game streaming platform at Dixper. We have now it up and running at https://dixper.gg https://dixper.gg and we are seriously building not only streaming tech but great comunity and optimizing how games use your hardware resources to enable smooth gaming. Great news for all the industry!
z3t4 8y ago
With 9 employees and a seemingly free service, what is the business model !? The tech seem really awesome.
fooker 8y ago
I am a beta tester for project stream, and it amazes me how well it works if you have a reliable internet connection. I would absolutely pay for this service, for the convenience of being able to play AAA games from portable devices without strong GPUs. I suspect that a new generation of game development tools will make future games cheaper to deploy as well.
- Ajedi32 8y ago
  It could work for some games, but in my experience the latency has been pretty noticeable; and Assassin's Creed isn't a very latency-sensitive game. I think any kind of shooter, platformer, or fighter game would be nearly unplayable, at least on my internet connection. For RPG-type games like Assassin's Creed though it does have potential.
  - fooker 8y ago
    For shooters, etc, you just have to ensure the server is running on the same data center as the streamer.
    - Ajedi32 8y ago
      There's a big difference between network latency and input lag. Taking 100 ms for the server to register a hit on an opponent is annoying, but acceptable. Taking 100ms for the game to notice me moving my mouse to the left and shift my view is not.
      - fooker 8y ago
        Ok, so input lag will be 2*your ping. An input lag <40ms is barely perceivable and 40-80 is playable. So, you'll need a ~20 ping, which is reasonable for a fast connection.
        Ajedi32 8y ago
        Input lag is actually equal to your ping. Ping measures round-trip time. I don't know what my input lag was during gameplay, but it was certainly enough to be noticeable.

136 points by chrisd1100 8y ago

(Edit: to clarify the below is about their cloud offering user since I'm on Mac and don't have my own PC to stream from) I've been using Parsec to play games like No Man's Sky and it's really impressive technologically speaking, but the pricing model is a bit obtuse. It's made worse by the fact that the big cost for someone who doesn't game all that often is storage. Basically, you sign up to a VM with an impressive GPU and it runs games really well, and the streaming tech is top notch. But to run it all you need to pay for at least 50 GB of storage and you need to pay for it on a time basis, which means you're left with anxiety of leaving it turned off, as well as sudden deletion of your cloud PC if you're not paying attention. I wish they would come up with some kind of clever storage solution so that the basic Windows image is a shared (read only) storage component and the additional games are additional pluggable hard drives, also shared between users. This would mean you as the end user loses control of modding/patches for some games, but it could save so much storage. The save games etc would go on a tiny hard drive that you ultimately pay for (but I'd say Parsec should eat that cost to reduce anxiety and instead encourage a monthly subscription for any-time access). TL;DR: Parsec is awesome. I want to pay a fixed price and not be exposed to their tech stack costs, so I don't get FOMO when I'm not using it every day.

xigency 8y ago
This reminds me of a huge problem with Steam, which is the size and frequency of updates. For the very small number of first party games, like Half-Life or Counter-Strike, updates are cumulative smaller files that contain changes. So if there was an update to a game, it might be 1-2 GB. For the vast majority of titles on Steam, however, an update requires a full download of the latest version. So for most games it is a 25 GB or 50 GB download. Developers want to stay on top of bugs, so for an infrequent gamer playing on a weekly or monthly basis, opening Steam means queuing up 100 GB of downloads and a long wait to actually play games. The fact that this hasn't been solved yet shows that Valve isn't willing to invest in fixing it either through new technology or cooperation with developers, which is really sad. Optimistically, something you're describing for Parsec would be possible, but maybe it isn't realistic.
- bllguo 8y ago
  This is anecdotal of course, but I can't think of a single game that behaves like this, and my library is pretty sizable. Would be interested in an example. I also cannot see the justification on a technical level for why this behavior would exist. All in all I'm pretty confused by this comment, tbh
  - xigency 8y ago
    I've seen it with one or more of these games: GTA V Mortal Kombat X Metal Gear Solid 5 / GZ Doom The Witcher Final Fantasy
- xirdstl 8y ago
  I don't think this is correct. I use Steam and have a lot of games installed. When it does updates, they are not the size of the original downloads. Usually, much, much smaller.
  - Schoolmeister 8y ago
    Indeed. I've never needed a full game download just for a patch. Depending on the game and type of patch this is usually ~1GB.
  - kbenson 8y ago
    Same here. I think what's being seen is that some things are easier to diff and update than others. If a game has a large file for map data that's indexed into, and update to any portions of it are delivered the most easily (where easily includes reliably) by updating the whole file. If that file is 2GB, then you have a 2GB download. If a game has lots of relatively little files, you could update multiple maps with a few tens of megabytes of downloads. An actual patch utility that goes in and applies binary diffs would be much more economical in terms of bandwidth, but then that complicates Steam's ability to confirm a game is in a good state with file checksums, and is much more likely to have odd errors as a diff somehow correctly applies to a file with an incorrect starting starting state.
  - xigency 8y ago
fneves 8y ago
Parsec is a tech/app, it's not a service as you think it is. They're basically making a bridge between cloud renting and their app, like an integration, you can't really say that parsec is expensive, they don't rent computing power at all :) Parsec as tech/app is indeed awesome! Together with Steam Link app, they're the best we currently have.
- blixt 8y ago
  I’m not saying it’s expensive, but that the service they’re offering is obtuse and anxiety inducing because you’re economically “punished” as soon as you stop playing. And they offer this service under their own brand and never leaving their site, so I don’t agree with your dismissal that this is just an integration. It’s a service they offer and they are taking my money for it. Money I gladly paid, I just wish the service I got was simplified.
  - fneves 8y ago
    Anyway, you see in their app Amazon and Paperspace, the prices are not decided by them. I'm not saying it's cheap, but paperspace it's the cheapest I've seen for cloud gaming. Anyway, my use of parsec is my home computer, so I don't really have the difficulties you're facing.
jon-wood 8y ago
If you’re using Steam most games support Steam Cloud for your save games, and with the server being on a gigabit link in a data centre (possibly the same one as Steam’s mirrors) it doesn’t take long to install. Given that you don’t have to worry too much about keeping storage you’re not using, just make sure to dump your non-cloud save games in Dropbox or something now and again.
- blixt 8y ago
  Sure but now we are talking even more time and effort to spin up/down a computer whenever I want to game for a little while. Installing a Windows VM from scratch and then No Man’s Sky is still probably 20-30 minutes from start to gameplay. And specifically in the case of NMS it’s terribly slow at first launch (not sure if it’s just compiling shaders or what).
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
evilturnip 8y ago
I'd use Shadow for game streaming. Cheaper, unlimited stream time for a fixed monthly fee and the service is actually faster. https://shadow.tech/usen/ https://shadow.tech/usen/
- Schoolmeister 8y ago
  Do you have any idea about their latency? According to [1] Parsec only adds about 7ms, which is quite impressive. [1] https://blog.parsecgaming.com/testing-game-streaming-input-latency-on-parsec-with-diy-instructions-49ae838f45a7 https://blog.parsecgaming.com/testing-game-streaming-input-l...
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - evilturnip 8y ago
    Depends on your connection to their datacenter. They have a West Coast and an East Coast. I live near NYC so I connect to their NJ datacenter. With my fiber optic, I get about 4-6ms.

andrewmd5 8y ago

Hey cool stuff, Chris! Good to finally see you taking the browser seriously. We started to do the same at Rainway over a year ago https://blog.rainway.io/play-overwatch-and-anything-else-in-your-browser-with-rainway-86798744bddb https://blog.rainway.io/play-overwatch-and-anything-else-in-... We are big fans of web-based real-time streaming so if you want to read more: https://blog.rainway.io/the-art-of-pivoting-how-we-built-rainway-fd741a3e41c4 https://blog.rainway.io/the-art-of-pivoting-how-we-built-rai... Excited to see how you develop this! EDIT: A quick correction for your blog -- the MSE low delay rendering was not added for Project Stream, it has been there since 2015 and is triggered via heuristics.

sigfubar 8y ago
Your comment reads like an incredibly passive-aggressive cease & desist letter. Yes, you're filing a patent, and yes, you started doing this over a year ago. Good for you! This marking of territory is an immature look you really don't want to put on in a public forum.
- Raphmedia 8y ago
  Was their post edited since you posted this? I'm not seeing any of what you are describing.
  - shehryarrr 8y ago
    It was, they said they were filing a provisional patent
shehryarrr 8y ago
So you're filing a patent based on other's open source tech?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- andrewmd5 8y ago

EgyptianMusk 8y ago

Looks great. Can't wait to try it out.

fneves 8y ago

Parsec mucho love <3

laythea 8y ago

Great! Youtube style image compression here we come! :)

ilovecaching 8y ago

I've been playing odyssey in project stream all weekend and it's blown away my expectations. We're about two to three years away from seeing consoles move to the cloud. It runs flawlessly at 1080p and I've only experienced three or four five second lag spikes in my six hours of play. The game feels just as responsive and looks just as good on my 1080 GTX running at home.

soared 8y ago
My project stream was perfect for 2 hours, then was completely unplayable for the 10 minutes until I quit. I'm not sure what happened, but I've gone back once or twice and have horrible input lag. I'm using ethernet and get 350MB/s, but google says the issue is packet loss. I don't know how to remedy it, but I know that game streaming is and seemingly always will be just around the corner from perfect. Edit - it was absolutely stunning to see my accepted email, login to google and ubisoft, and be playing within 5 minutes. Zero download time, zero load time, just instant gaming.
- awakeasleep 8y ago
  It doesn't have to be perfect- it just has to be profitable. And the increased control a streaming service will have over users guarantees that game streaming with be outrageously profitable. Think of all the basic ways we already see services make money- from the subscription, to metered access, to congestion pricing, early access fees- and those are only the basics. This is an industry that figured out the loot crate, after all. On a different note, once the profitability is figured out, publishers can give direction to developers that games need to be designed around the latency, or whatever issue appears. Games can also be designed around the assumption that they'll be streamed, allowing things to be a lot more cross platform.
  - soared 8y ago
    I think the problem is the product is poor due to technical issues so no one will adopt it. If I can only play a few hours before getting game-breaking input lag, I'm not going to come back to the service. I have a decent computer and hard wired gigabit internet, if game streaming can't work there it won't work for the 99% of americans who have worse internet than me.

anontechworker 8y ago

It would be amazing to see something like this on the switch. Play any game portably? I’m in.

misterprime 8y ago
Maybe it could work while you're sitting underneath a 5G tower.
ClassyJacket 8y ago
Resident Evil 7 and Assassin's Creed Odyssey are already streamed on the Switch.

albertgoeswoof 8y ago

> The current implementation only works in Chrome. Before you assume we’re kool aid drinking Google evangelists, or simply just lazy, there is good reason for this — likely due in part to Google’s work on Project Stream, they have introduced “low delay” mode for MSE that sets up a push model for video frames rather than the traditional buffered pull model. This is also good for any kind of low latency video stream, not just game streaming. When in low delay mode, Chrome begins to break the rules of MSE and no longer requires buffered playback. It also starts to ignore certain timing information and keyframe requirements. > ... > This is not to say that one couldn’t get a decent working implementation in Firefox, but Chrome’s low delay mode works in the ideal way without having to complicate the implementation or diverge too heavily from the way Parsec’s native applications behave. And while we love Firefox, the harsh reality is that 82% of Parsec users are using Chrome, with only 5% using Firefox, which made us more comfortable starting with a Chrome only implementation. For Firefox users, you can always use the Parsec native applications, which will probably perform better anyway . I think this is quite sad to see. It’s not really game streaming tech in a web browser, it’s game streaming tech in Google Chrome. What happens if Google decides they don’t want to play with other streaming services? They’re only a quick auto update of locking Parsec services out.

lawrenceyan 8y ago
You can always just use their native application...
formalsystem 8y ago
Although if this becomes popular enough I can see the parsec team investing resources into their own browser.
- oliveshell 8y ago
  Other than escaping the bloodthirsty data-slurping of the Google ecosystem, I don’t see that solution being much better. If they have to make their own proprietary browser, the situation will just be streaming “with a client you need to download” rather than “in the browser” generally. (Disregard this if I’m misunderstanding and by “their own browser” you meant an existing project like Firefox.)

IMayoDixper 8y ago

Google has properly opened the path for games streaming to the web browser. Being into the Cloud Gaming industry since 2012 we found this path was getting good enough and decided to start building a cooperative game streaming platform at Dixper. We have now it up and running at https://dixper.gg https://dixper.gg and we are seriously building not only streaming tech but great comunity and optimizing how games use your hardware resources to enable smooth gaming. Great news for all the industry!

z3t4 8y ago

With 9 employees and a seemingly free service, what is the business model !? The tech seem really awesome.

fooker 8y ago

I am a beta tester for project stream, and it amazes me how well it works if you have a reliable internet connection. I would absolutely pay for this service, for the convenience of being able to play AAA games from portable devices without strong GPUs. I suspect that a new generation of game development tools will make future games cheaper to deploy as well.

Ajedi32 8y ago
It could work for some games, but in my experience the latency has been pretty noticeable; and Assassin's Creed isn't a very latency-sensitive game. I think any kind of shooter, platformer, or fighter game would be nearly unplayable, at least on my internet connection. For RPG-type games like Assassin's Creed though it does have potential.
- fooker 8y ago
  For shooters, etc, you just have to ensure the server is running on the same data center as the streamer.
  - Ajedi32 8y ago
    There's a big difference between network latency and input lag. Taking 100 ms for the server to register a hit on an opponent is annoying, but acceptable. Taking 100ms for the game to notice me moving my mouse to the left and shift my view is not.
    - fooker 8y ago
      Ok, so input lag will be 2*your ping. An input lag <40ms is barely perceivable and 40-80 is playable. So, you'll need a ~20 ping, which is reasonable for a fast connection.
      - Ajedi32 8y ago
        Input lag is actually equal to your ping. Ping measures round-trip time. I don't know what my input lag was during gameplay, but it was certainly enough to be noticeable.