DatapawWolf's Forum Posts

  • JohnnySheffield That's neat, but my deal-breaker right off the bat is commercial use. The reason I'm considering/requesting Socket.IO is mainly because it's free, otherwise there's a convincing argument for Scirra's multiplayer plugin. Also - and I don't know if I'm just picky (probably picky) or what - why would you invite contributors to work on a project for which you hold all rights to?

    Like I said, not trying to pull apart your efforts. I'm glad to see an extension of C2 that supports the newest Socket.IO functionality. Just a bit skeptical.

  • You can create a first room peer and run it on your dedicated hardware server. Thus your now controlling the authoritative information. This peer

    A. Does not have a playable character or if it does it's out of bounds.

    B. This peer NEVER logs out as it's run on your computer as the authoritive host.

    Ah, ok. Thanks, that clears it up better!

  • >

    > > That could also be running in a browser tab on a dedicated server if you like.

    > > ow reliable is that?

    >

    Very reliable. The ghost shooter multiplayer demo has been running for weeks as host on the multiplayer server without problems.

    ait, what do you mean by that? You mean you've been running a host using the shooter demo?

    or just be assigned to the first peer who happens to join the room.

    hen there is no authority, correct?

    No, there is authority. The host peer is always authoritative on the game state. It's just the multiplayer engine makes the first peer to join the room the host.ut if the first peer becomes a host, who checks that peer? Or am I thinking about this incorrectly?

  • DuckfaceNinja well, bringing Node.js or any other server-sided code back into the mix kind of defeats the whole purpose of having this within C2. :p

    Ah well, I dunno. I'd still love to see the option to use the WebSocket plugin with Socket.IO, however, if it's definitely not going to be an option, I might as well look into creating a custom server with Node.js.

  • And what about database communication? Is that even possible through the browser?

  • That could also be running in a browser tab on a dedicated server if you like.

    ow reliable is that?

    or just be assigned to the first peer who happens to join the room.

    hen there is no authority, correct?

    DuckfaceNinja, I know all that, but it sounds like more of a pain than anything else. [quote:2diu7sdr]On side note, you're trying to make an RPG, so will it involve collision check? If you do, I think that would be the most difficult to do if you intend to do that using the way you wanted in the first post.

    ot really, no. Like I said, grid-based, which means requesting a tile in one of four directions, using a 3D arrays that contain information about the map. Really all it needs to know is the placement of objects, and whether or not there it can go to that square.

  • Try Construct 3

    Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • I probably should have clarified. I want, and need, my own server for the game I am creating, which, DuckfaceNinja, you are spot on for #2. Ashley, I am looking to create an authoritative server rather than using the signalling server, for which Socket.IO fits the bill for ease of use and scalability, which handles a lot of basic Node.js functionality under the hood, and include rooms, auto reconnection, and fallbacks (although I'm not sure how those would be implemented). Here is the post for their version 1.0: http://socket.io/blog/introducing-socket-io-1-0/

    The game I would like to create is a mixture of turn-based RPG and grid movement, so the authoritative part would ensure no players can hack their way over impassable objects. Rooms would be handy for, say, instanced combat.

    Basically, I'm more asking for a Socket.IO because it would be an easier option than Node.js itself.

  • Forum TL;DR: get the non-steam version here on the site.

  • Update: See third page of replies for a much more current discussion

    So I know we already have the mutiplayer plugin, however, I'm not interested in it attempting to create a dedicated server using said plugin.

    In addition, I already demonstrated a while back that it is more than possible to set up a WebSocket server using a library based off of Node.js (see below). This is great! I love it! But I'm hesitant to use most third party Node.js libraries because of little support overall, and on many GitHub repositories one can see that there is little development going on at the backend. I used SockJS at the time, which is the only option that didn't about kill me to figure out how to create a simple server, and seems to be one of few that the Scirra WebSocket plugin can easily communicate with.

    I would like to turn to Socket.IO because of the extensive updates and support it has received by the developers, and currently I have yet to find a way to connect a Scirra game client using the WebSocket plugin to a server running with it besides alternate third-party options.

    Hence, my request: the addition of either Socket.IO-specific protocols to the WebSocket plugin, or a Socket.IO-specific plugin by Scirra so that Construct 2 users have two viable (and supported) options for the creation of multiplayer games (e.g. the Multiplayer plugin and Websocket/Socket.IO plugin I have requested).

    I would love to hear discussion on this particular topic if anyone has any refuting arguments, alternative suggestions, or support. :)

    ------------------

    SockJS + Websocket plugin:

    Sorry for the large image!

  • it was just to earn some marketing visibility

    'll be honest, that's underhanded.

  • *bump* Sounds like a lot of spooky fun! I'll see what I'm doing that weekend.

  • jobel overall quality? What settings are you using, and are you referring in quality to the unedited file created by OBS? There's a lot that goes into recording, and even little things like compression quality vs. speed can make a visible difference.

    The only reason FRAPS has amazing quality is because there is no compression. It's just writing all that huge amount of data straight to the disk.

    OBS can compress on the fly, and I believe does so by default.

    And if I'm remembering correctly, Bandicam can also do compression, but the difference in quality again comes down pretty much to codec, compression, & other software settings, and not the software itself (unless you're using some poorly-coded/obscure freeware). Hence, and solely in my opinion, the best software for recording is free and/or open source software (although if FRAPS was current it could be justified by low price & ease of use).

  • There are a whole ton of alternatives, free ones, like OBS: https://obsproject.com/

  • Not sure how related, but all of a sudden (and within an update or two since it's been a bit since I last tested it) I get a very poor frame rate on the Ghost Shooter WebGL template in Chrome Preview. I'm guessing about half.

  • Yeeeaaaaah, I really don't care what other people say, this looks incredible. I really can't wait to see where they take it.