Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

Update 01.129 - Server Side Character Control & Client Side Prediction

Discussion in 'Change Log' started by Drui, Apr 7, 2016.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. LFCavalcanti Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,378
    If the server were maxing out on resources you can bet the provider would notify the server's renters. It's good for their business you know...

    You do understand the major backlash today is being caused by the change in the simulation? Right?

    The issue is in the communication between server and client, not processing, as KSH already pointed out here earlier, if the resources of the server were under max load, the sim speed would drop dramatically.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. Chryseus Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    10
    I'm just giving feedback on what I see, I know game development is hard and often problems result without even the developer realising it, I hope this gets sorted out soon so we can all continue to enjoy Space Engineers as the great game it is.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Commander Rotal Master Engineer

    Messages:
    4,975
    wait what? Who gave you that idea? Am not, never have been part of any testing group. Wish i was.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  4. Kham Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    477
    I've sent you a PM with a copy of our DS world which has been crippled by this and the last couple of patches. I hope this may help.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  5. Foxinov Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    8
    If you're unhappy with the new patch, just take a deep breath - roll back to .127 and enjoy your (slightly) older version of Space Engineers. Keen will fix it, and the new system of movement will benefit everyone in the end. Until then, it's not like you can't still play the game via the aforementioned method.
     
  6. Kham Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    477
    Sadly, the 'rollback' branch is the one which introduced huge drop in performance for dedicated servers. So it wouldn't help any rolling back to it.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  7. Muwoka™ Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    10
    @joeblack616 Hi, thanks for the updates and the response on the forum.

    Most of us are aware this is still an alpha and adding new stuff can be heavy and risky but please
    avoid updating behaviors that ruins gameplay for everyone.

    Since the last week update became so unstable I can't even play more than 30mn without need to reload the game ( inv pb, crash, freeze ... )
    I love the game but i can't play it anymore in this conditions.

    Good evening ;)
     
  8. Foxinov Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    8
    Not true. It is the final version that contains both DX11 and DX9 support. Has worked for me, running it on my server w/ planets right now. It's not perfect - but it beats the alternative.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. Balmung Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,947
    @Malware and @Phoenix84: thanks for the "Fixes". :)

    Nice update and the weapon on the end looks pretty good. ^^
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  10. Kham Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    477
    I actually edited my post, obviously whilst you were replying, as I realised it did have DX11 support. However, the former point stands. 01.127 was the patch which first crippled our DS world and the successive patches since have only made it worse.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. Commander Rotal Master Engineer

    Messages:
    4,975
    Everyone's sad about DS MP performance and here i am solemnly waving a single white flag for a completely broken 0.07 SimSpeed Offline-SP-as-fuck world. Loading up SadFace.exe. ExecuttingSingleTear.jpg.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  12. Shanjaq Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    45
    126 was actually playable. 127 was so bad I quit playing.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  13. Scorpion00021 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,411
    Dusan,
    I'm glad you guys are making these changes, the server really needs to have a bit more authority over player/object presence and positioning. Networking code can get tough and convoluted, but I am confident that you guys will make this work. Unfortunately, high latencies and brief timeouts create a "Schrodinger's cat" type scenario for both the client and the server. Masking this effect is the next step to making the whole thing seamless.

    Good luck!
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 2
  14. Manticore Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    189
    Lucky you!

    Thanks KSH.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  15. DS_Marine Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    494
    I think that anyone in the CTG wouldn't be able to confirm his/her status, because yo know NDA and stuff....
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  16. joeblack616 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    225
    Actually problem is that at our site testing is quite limited, we can use emulators for lags, and sim speed, but it still be just simulation. Tommorow for example I can connect to any server with debug build of app and actually see what is happening and try to fix it. We can always test only to some extend, I know it looks like lame excuse but I'm tryin to be honest with you. And also showing you how and why we decided to go this way in multiplayer. One could say we need to optimize so there will be 1.0 sim speed. but that takes huge amount of time and there is always plus one problem.
    We will make game running with 100 red ships and players will build 101. I personally believe there will allways be servers with lower sim speed than client. And we need to deal with that somehow.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 6
    • Like Like x 3
    • Agree Agree x 2
  17. TheDuke540 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    201
    Sure am glad SP wasn't affected by this update... ???
     
  18. WhiteWeasel Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,086
    @Drui @Xocliw In the video description, it says the skybox is mine. It's not. I just got permission from a KSP modder called Rareden to put it on the steam workshop since he's not involved in the SE community anymore, could you fix that? I guess putting his name in the title of the skybox wasn't enough to clue you in that it wasn't mine, and was uploaded with the originals permission. :D
    http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=653653504
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  19. ArmEagle Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    4
    I totally understand your struggles. But isn't a beta channel better suited for testing out big changes like this?
    I really want to play SE and don't mind throwing back some feedback. But mostly I want to play a somewhat stable game. .126 was ok for DS. But now my friends mostly stopped playing again. If that happens too much, all your efforts will be for naught.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  20. Me 10 Jin Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    463
    @joeblack616 when the server's sim speed goes down, have clients simulate that. Most players are familiar with low sim speeds and that makes it a concise way to deliver feedback. A big part of UX is finding the least bad way to deliver bad news.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  21. Sigurd Hansen Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    21
    Not that you don't have any other bugs to worry about; but I just want to say that there's still delay in the data given to us in the MaxOutput and DetailedInfo in the programming block. Around <=5 second delay, making my solar panel alignment script very slow after compensation. I think this issue started around the time you added that compability layer...
     
  22. LFCavalcanti Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,378
    Chill out! I didn't say you were a jerk with him, just asking for things to not escalate. got it?

    One day we should gather the community and drink some mead together.

    [​IMG]
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  23. joeblack616 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    225
    please send me world and will tell tim to look at it
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  24. megapro Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    72
    Are you sure 1 and 4 are bugs? sounds to me like someone forgot to take of his helmet and ran out of suit oxygen ("earth has no oxygen") which leads to suffocation ("randomly taking damage over time").
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  25. DS_Marine Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    494
    I remember when, at some point, the client simspeed was tied to the server simspeed.
    As always, people bitched a lot at this. But then there was an advantange of keeping your local simspeed: you could travel faster to places, becuase client position ruled.
    Now that the server has authoritative player position, is there really any point of letting the client running faster? Whatever the client can do faster will be always rolled back by the server, creating unnecessary rubberbanding.
    I think that back then everybody hated the change because they didn't have a clue about the reasons to why it was done. But with a detailed explanation, maybe that change can be accepted...

    Also since a dev is reading this is my chance to propose stuff! Maybe they already thought of it, but just in case...
    Grids that have 0 movement speed and rotation be flagged to totally skip its physic simulation (i.e. temporary convert to fixed station). Only other non-flagged grid collission, bullet, explosion, or player can unflag it.

    Lastly, how does the server handle players that have lower simspeed than the server??
    Thanks for reading!!
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2016
    • Like Like x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  26. joeblack616 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    225
    You have animations like particles and stuff, and also character animation is more fluid, but really I'm thinking about same thing now. because basically all speeds are tied to server speed. Problem is when relative speed is too high, like 0.1 vs 0.8,
    0.4 vs 0.5 should behave much better. Also because of prediction, when server or client speed is changing rapidly, then its really hard to predict anything.
     
    • Informative Informative x 4
    • Like Like x 1
  27. Raideur Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    12
    This game has a pretty large and loyal group of followers, but they want what any consumer wants, reliability above anything else. Having a solid server core that can handle anything a bunch of players can throw at it (and at least having the option to exclude situations / blocks / number of players) that in any way reduce it's performance is vital.

    I'm no doubt preaching to the choir as you're no doubt better coders than me, but as a fan and customer, taking extra time, a month, three, or however long it takes, to start with a rock solid (as rock solid as online games can be) platform to expand on, would make me happy. Adding modules for other systems that have been introduced can honestly wait. No one will flip their lid if you had a beta that left off parts not directly associated with the core game performance. You'd actually find people crawling over each other to help test such a system.

    If anything, I feel this the strongest: develop a strong server core that hosts can set up so they do not exceed their systems performance and do not hinder the server. This includes limiting numbers of blocks, voxels, players, etc. If it means a smoothly running game, I'll sacrifice any of that.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  28. Aedaeum Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    44
    @joeblack616 Can you give us a direct answer as to the reason you won't provide a beta channel? In my opinion this would completely alleviate all the negative impact your patches are having on the community. Allow those of us that want to test new features, to opt into the "alpha" channel before it goes public. At this point I think it's an absolute necessity.

    Edited for clarity :)
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  29. Salvatus Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    3
    It's not beta yet... This IS the alpha "channel" :)
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  30. Aedaeum Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    44
    @Salvatus I'm not sure how steam does the branching, but whatever it takes to get a "dev" branch and a "stable" branch would be immeasurably valuable to the community right now. I said "beta channel" because I've seen a lot of posts on here talking about it. I just assumed it was the way steam did things.

    Edit
    Alpha branch = "DEV", Beta = "STABLE"
    I'm assuming that's what you were trying to correct in my post :)
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.