• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Doom 3 multiplayer

L

Lonyo

Lifer
GS: Will there eventually be a way for more than just four players to engage in a Doom 3 multiplayer game?

TH: That's just an artificial limit that we set. You are going to have to have a powerful server to have more than just four people playing on it. People's network connections are going to matter. Doom 3 is basically a broadband-only game. When you start adding clients, you're going to start adding traffic, and you're going to add latency and performance hits on the server. I have no doubt that one of the first mods for Doom 3 to come out will be eight-player Doom 3. But it's my guess that eight-player Doom 3 will be most effectively played on LAN servers.
Click to expand...

Here
 
Start to add up the kind of bandwidth they are talking about, and it gets kinda rediculous. 8 players requires a lan??? That's nuts! Just about every game I've setup a server for requires between 3kbps and 5kbps per user.

Obviously people on home Comcast 256k upload connections shouldn't be setting up servers for more than 4 or so users, but what about the servers being run on major fiber connections? They are stuck with 4 or maybe 8 users as well, and still eating up all their bandwidth?!

I dunno, I guess the 4 person limit has just been bothering me lately...
 
Can someone give me an understandable explanation as to why Doom 3 requires so much bandwidth per-player when other games can handle 32 player servers without a LAN at all?

I don't see why great graphics require large bandwidth in multiplayer...
 
Originally posted by: ArmchairAthlete
Can someone give me an understandable explanation as to why Doom 3 requires so much bandwidth per-player when other games can handle 32 player servers without a LAN at all?

I don't see why great graphics require large bandwidth in multiplayer...
Click to expand...

GS: In regards to the multiplayer, why did you guys switch to a client-server model from the peer-to-peer architecture that you guys talked about at Quakecon 2002?

TW: There are a lot of things you do in Doom 3's multiplayer that are pretty cool. We have dynamic lights, we have physics objects. You can push barrels around and blow them up. We have many more entities. Just the nature of the dynamic world just creates much larger network traffic, and we found it was a lot more stable with a server-client model.

Apparently, the D3 world is much more dynamic than other games and this greatly increases the network traffic. It's still using the same client-server model as other games, so I don't think the network limitations are the result of the great graphics.
 
Originally posted by: BlueWeasel
Originally posted by: ArmchairAthlete
Can someone give me an understandable explanation as to why Doom 3 requires so much bandwidth per-player when other games can handle 32 player servers without a LAN at all?

I don't see why great graphics require large bandwidth in multiplayer...
Click to expand...

GS: In regards to the multiplayer, why did you guys switch to a client-server model from the peer-to-peer architecture that you guys talked about at Quakecon 2002?

TW: There are a lot of things you do in Doom 3's multiplayer that are pretty cool. We have dynamic lights, we have physics objects. You can push barrels around and blow them up. We have many more entities. Just the nature of the dynamic world just creates much larger network traffic, and we found it was a lot more stable with a server-client model.

Apparently, the D3 world is much more dynamic than other games and this greatly increases the network traffic. It's still using the same client-server model as other games, so I don't think the network limitations are the result of the great graphics.
Click to expand...

It's almost nothing to do with graphics, more to do with engine.
Sure, the graphics are great, bigger textures, more shaders etc, but the WORLD is better, better physics/lighting etc, player affected things.
The graphics don't "update" much when a player does something (except maybe with decals), but the physics and lighting need to be updated when something happens (like a player pushes a barrel), and THIS needs to be updated for everyone.
They're saying the volume of information (physics, lighting, movement etc) is more than before, and this takes up the bandwidth, so needs a better connections, or a limited number of players.
 
yeah
I think we'll have to wait till we have fiber optic connections before we see 32 player doom3 engine games.
 
Ok.... I guess that makes sense.

But you think they could cut some of that stuff out in multiplayer if it meant allowing you to play with more than 4 people. Or at least tweak it more.
 
if all new big budget FPS are going to have physics/lighting as complicated as D3... then what is going to happen to multiplayer?

If you need massive uplaod bandwidth and a supercomputer to handle the load, there goes the vast majority of people running servers on their .edu connect or tossed onto their office server after hours.

Interesting possible pandoras box here....
 
Well were are on the dawn of Fiber optics for broadband. In a few years im sure quite a bit of the country will be wired and ready for it. Verizon is rolling it out as we speak in select areas and with competitive prices to boot. In a few years the bandwidth required to have more people will be just like DSL and cable is now for our current games. I think the interaction with the environment in these games could be quite fun!!! I do wish more than 4 players were possible though. 6 would actually be pretty nice and add atleast a little bit of confusion to the mix 😉
 
Originally posted by: JBT
Well were are on the dawn of Fiber optics for broadband. In a few years im sure quite a bit of the country will be wired and ready for it. Verizon is rolling it out as we speak in select areas and with competitive prices to boot. In a few years the bandwidth required to have more people will be just like DSL and cable is now for our current games. I think the interaction with the environment in these games could be quite fun!!! I do wish more than 4 players were possible though. 6 would actually be pretty nice and add atleast a little bit of confusion to the mix 😉
Click to expand...

Even after "Each and every" home has fiber running to it, it will takes years and years before that fiber is actually usable for offnet traffic. Just becuase you have fiber running to your doorstep from Verizon does not mean that you are going to get 10Gbits on DWDM or anything. Verizon still needs to dump your traffic to the next ISP that hosts the HTTP/game/FTP server you are trying to reach. Thats a lot of traffic exchanging networks and companies often pay for this private/public peering.

Its just not that easy to just get more available bandwidth to your doorstep.

Not to mention you can have all the available bandiwdth in the world, but if the server running the app cant handle the calculations for more than 4-8 players what good is it?
 
Originally posted by: Soviet
I guess this rules out 56kers from playing D3 on multiplayer 🙁
Click to expand...

Yep. The developers have stated that it's a broadband only game. Most games are braodband anymore.
 
Originally posted by: Homerboy
Originally posted by: JBT
Well were are on the dawn of Fiber optics for broadband. In a few years im sure quite a bit of the country will be wired and ready for it. Verizon is rolling it out as we speak in select areas and with competitive prices to boot. In a few years the bandwidth required to have more people will be just like DSL and cable is now for our current games. I think the interaction with the environment in these games could be quite fun!!! I do wish more than 4 players were possible though. 6 would actually be pretty nice and add atleast a little bit of confusion to the mix 😉
Click to expand...

Even after "Each and every" home has fiber running to it, it will takes years and years before that fiber is actually usable for offnet traffic. Just becuase you have fiber running to your doorstep from Verizon does not mean that you are going to get 10Gbits on DWDM or anything. Verizon still needs to dump your traffic to the next ISP that hosts the HTTP/game/FTP server you are trying to reach. Thats a lot of traffic exchanging networks and companies often pay for this private/public peering.

Its just not that easy to just get more available bandwidth to your doorstep.

Not to mention you can have all the available bandiwdth in the world, but if the server running the app cant handle the calculations for more than 4-8 players what good is it?
Click to expand...

This is very true I was just saying its not like we are standing still here. Our computer systems are always getting much faster as are our networks. I agree it will take awhile but there is always a possibility. Thats why I said a few years. Its not going to be over night and its not going to be this year either but it will be sometime in the future.
 
I really don't get his response completely. He seem to indicate that the server CPU would have a hard time processing with 8 players in game, then he doubles back and starts talking about internet bandwidth. So which one is the issue? Or is it both? Doesn't really seem clear from the thread here either.'

Personally, I won't pay $50 for a game that doesnt have both a great singleplayer and a great multiplayer experience.
 
Doom3 licensed engine will obviously support 32or more multiplyaer. RTCW 2 or whatever it's gonna be called most likely won't have all those physic effects or have them very limited to cut down on the bandwidth. But for doom3 they seem to have maxed everything and depending on your paticular graphic card feed it smaller textures.
 
it sounds like it's just very inefficient net code. i mean how much data needs to be sent... your players direction and location and what your firing...
 
Originally posted by: SonicIce
it sounds like it's just very inefficient net code. i mean how much data needs to be sent... your players direction and location and what your firing...
Click to expand...

Chance that you have any idea what you are talking about: 0/10
 
Sure sounds like anal programming. Does a pushed barrel HAVE to be in the same exact orientation and position for every client? Each end client can handle their own physics/lightings/whatever. All you need to transmit to the other players are the positions and orienations of your player and nearby objects. I have done a lot of network programming and you can send a tremendous amount of information over slow connections. If Doom 3 can only handle 4 players, then they must be going overboard on making sure every single little object is synchronized. Accuracy is inversely proportional to performance and it looks like ID went for extreme accuracy and didn't want to compromize any.

It would be nice if the network code would dynamically adjust accuracy/performance to accomodate the number of players - ie if more and more players log in then accuracy goes down but lag stays the same.
 
Originally posted by: Alternex
Sure sounds like anal programming. Does a pushed barrel HAVE to be in the same exact orientation and position for every client?
Click to expand...

LOLOL right, and you've got the magical answer that they haven't thought of? I think i'll give credit to John and the crew, that they've thought about this at least a few times and tried out seveal ideas over the last 4 years before settling on what is the current release.
 
Doom3 isn't a multiplayer game, and never was designed to be a multiplayer game.

Id learned in Quake2 that a nice multiplayer game and a nice single player game are not the same things.

They specificly designed this with the goal with state of the art graphics and make the most impressive single player experiance they could possibly make. That's why the bandwidth usage is so much, they simply sacrificed that and tacked on the 4-player as a afterthought.

If you want the next generation of multiplayer games from ID your going to have to wait till Quake4 comes out. Which is definately in the works.
 
Doom3 is made for flexibility. Given that, Quake1s most common server limit was 8 people. This always worked perfectly on the small quake maps and I never had any complaints. If a mod comes out with maps that don't have any dynamic features and an 8 player limit, you have the perfect deathmatch once again.

Dumbass awards go to:
Alternex, for not realizing that accuracy and performance are just about everything in an fps. Look at half-lifes network code for HOW NOT TO DO THINGS.
And SonicIce, for not being able to read (guess what, more data is being sent than you think it is).
 
Originally posted by: drag
Doom3 isn't a multiplayer game, and never was designed to be a multiplayer game.

Id learned in Quake2 that a nice multiplayer game and a nice single player game are not the same things.

They specificly designed this with the goal with state of the art graphics and make the most impressive single player experiance they could possibly make. That's why the bandwidth usage is so much, they simply sacrificed that and tacked on the 4-player as a afterthought.

If you want the next generation of multiplayer games from ID your going to have to wait till Quake4 comes out. Which is definately in the works.
Click to expand...

Plus, they want a good game, not a sucky one.
They seem to be going for the future with the Doom 3 engine, so they want to have accurate physics/lighting etc, and they're not going to get rid of this for the afterthought of multiplayer. Sure, it may only mean fast, high player number network play in the future, but they seem to be future proofing.
Other devs can do that when they use the Doom 3 tech if they want.

Quake IV is in the works, made by Raven, IIRC, with id overlooking them and checking they are doing it OK.
 
It probably uses monster packets for online. About time too. I am sick of having online games crippled by slowdem users.

Technical Doom3 has done right:

1) Broadband only
2) Windows 2000/XP only
3) Great engine with three paths for three levels of GPUs

All it really needed was to be DVD-only and it would be the kick in the ass the industry needs.
 
This may be a backhanded way of selling the single player game (doom3 ) seperate from the multiplayer game (quake4). Hopefully some smart people will come up with servers where moving objects around doesn't happen so they can host 16+ players.

It don't think moving a barrel is going to affect my gameplay experience very much, if at all... and you better believe CS Source will support more then 4 players out of the box...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top