DUTOIT's Forum Posts

  • Hi Guys

    It wasn't easy for me to make a game even when i use engine that not request a programing ((C2)). maybe because it was my first time or try. But what about those who success and made their games ? So I just have this questions in my mind. Did you get some money from making games by using C2 ? how did you sell it ? do you still thinking or planning to making new games ?

    It has nothing to do with the software. It has everything to do with the type of game, the audience, and how well it was marketed, how the game generates income (ads/in app purchases etc) and of course a reasonable amount of luck.

    The difference between making money or not has nothing to do with anything other than YOU!

    I know lots of people making loads of money, and they don't even make the game, they get someone else to make it... But they sure can sell it/market it etc.

    So really what you are asking isn't can you make money using C2(You can make a game extremely profitable game using notepad), what you really should be asking is can YOU make money from your game... and don't take this the wrong way... But Probably No.... because you need a lot more than a game to make money. The game is about 30% of the formula.

    I do NDA games and make a fair share, but they make so much more from those games ...they have the other 70% of the formula

  • > Yes, but the stat crunching and data manipulation aren't for the feint of heart.

    >

    What do you mean?

    Behind every game is data, and data is usually placed into array. And array and data and all the calculations etc that is game development isn't paint by numbers. It isn't have a game in a couple hours. Expect to spend a considerable amount of time building your game. Expect many many smash your head against the wall sessions

  • Save it

    0 => "Word 1" , "value1", "value2", "value3", "value4", "value5", "value6" 6 values

    1 => "Word 2" , "value1", "value2", "value3", "value4", "empty", "empty" 4 values

    etc

    and write a function to fetch

    word and then its values.

  • [quote:3hlt05ml]could we agree that a single update could be at least 3.5kb and if it is by default sent 30times a second... then can we agree we are going to have a upload bottleneck on a 1mb/s line?

    Absolutely, I will agree that 3-4kbytes updates, 30 times a second, will saturate a home-user 1mbit line !

    Though 3-4kbytes is quite a lot to describe the actions, status and updates of one single peer. That's ~2000 int16 or float16, and since the peer won't be running any critical gameplay logic for security reasons, there's usually not much more to send than just player input and actions, and a few miscellaneous useful bits of data.

    There are already lots of perfectly viable multiplayer games working with this limitation, including massively multiplayer ones.

    What I don't understand is why you consider the number of peers a relevant factor when analysing the upload bandwidth on the peer side ; it's very possible I got your point wrong, in all the confusion about room, sizes, sessions, etc.

    Agreed, and the number is just a number. He was talking 1,4,10 I still have no idea what that is -lol

    1 game that is divided by location. Players in the north are connected via host1 and players in the south via host2 etc...

    I was just putting a number. It could be 30, 50 depending on number in the area itself.

    I think Duckfaceninja said somewhere he managed to get users to switch hosts with little or no issues. So dividing a large map (for ships, I think the OP was talking about) might be the way to go.

    Agree 3.5kb is pretty big, but again it depends on the game...

    I've been experimenting with a slightly different take on things, and I have had files as big is 35kb+ go out... obviously not every tick but it all depends on so many things.

    webtrc isn't limited to multiplayer only

    It might be packaged as such in C2, but it is capable of so much more...

    I'm am thrilled everyone is wrestling this beast.... will shortcut dev time considerably.

  • "peers can only handle 15 other peers connected because host collects info from peers and broadcasts to peers and peers broadcast to peers via host..."

    I believe this is inaccurate ; we've run the numbers already - but while bandwidth requirements is exponential on the host/server, quadratic O(n^2), it's only linear on the peers O(n).

    Since peers don't connect to other peers directly and only send/receive data to/via the host, peers only send data about themselves and only receive 1 update about other peers.

    Session with N peers - n bytes of data per peer to store their status. Size of the data to describe the entire "world" = N*n bytes

    Peer : sends n bytes to the host ; receives N*n bytes of world update

    Host : sends N*N*n bytes (broadcast the world update to all the peers) ; receives N*n bytes (peer updates)

    If peer download bandwidth is the limitating factor, I think there are bigger issues to sort at the architecture level than room sizes !

    I was trying to highlight the upload speed, not the download speed. And even if it is just 1 update to the host at 30 times a second. You will have issues on a 1mb/s line which can only upload at 100kb/s and 15 peers would put it about 105kb/s upload which is 5bytes more than the line can handle

    Of course the numbers are not set in stone. And the upload size is dependent on so many things. But could we agree that a single update could be at least 3.5kb and if it is by default sent 30times a second... then can we agree we are going to have a upload bottleneck on a 1mb/s line???

    I believe this is accurate... those are the numbers right there.... Unless I am missing something? Which is very possible

  • Lol I'm just as confused as you are. I can't quite relate the situation with the 1,4,10 room thing.

    I have no idea what that is about either - lol

  • [quote:1ejnci41]The number of player in each room depends on the host connection

    Sorry, I must be missing something - I am probably just confused but I thought from previous discussions you didn't want a player to be the host ("I don't want to use a player as the host"). So why would it depend on anything else than the infrastructure and bandwidth you provide

    Server is host, player(s) are peers, but server can handle 100+ peers connected. BUT, peers can only handle 15 other peers connected because host collects info from peers and broadcasts to peers and peers broadcast to peers via host...

    Just as example for simplicity.

    if peer is running a 1mb/s line his upload is 100kb/s and download is 1mb/s

    He has to send data to host and recieve data from host and peers how much data can he send/receive?

    [quote:1ejnci41]How many players can join the same game?

    The limit on how many players can join a game is likely to be the upload bandwidth on the host. The engine itself imposes no limit, but there is definite practical limit that will be encoutnered.

    The problem is the host has to send a message with data for N players, to each of the N players. For example, if the host needs to send 16 bytes of data for each player, then each message will have a size around N * 16, and then that message will have to be sent N times. This creates an N-squared bandwidth requirement. For example:

    10 players = 16 x 10 x 10 = 1600 bytes per update

    20 players = 16 x 20 x 20 = 6400 bytes per update

    30 players = 16 x 30 x 30 = 14400 bytes per update

    ...

    100 players = 16 x 100 x 100 = 160000 bytes per update

    Even though the player count increases linearly, the bandwidth requirement increases proportional to the square. This means even with a significantly more powerful server or less data needed per-player, it won't get you many extra players.

    By default updates are sent 30 times a second, so the last example with 100 players would actually require an upload rate of about 5 megabytes/sec (or 40 megabit/sec). This is pretty high for a home connection, but not necessarily a dedicated server.

    On top of that the host needs to be able to run the game for a large number of players as well, performing tasks like lag-compensated collision tests, which can be CPU-intensive. Then it may need to be rendering the game for the host if they are a participant as well. Generally the overall amount of work increases quickly with the number of players, and although it depends on the specific game and connection, it's rare to get close to 100 players in one game.

    Note: updates sent 30 times per second.

    So 100 players would require an upload rate of 5mb/s when a 1mb/s line only has upload of 100kb/s. OOPS!

    Sorry I got posted over....

    But host(server) can host multiple game sessions with 15 peers in each lobby. Because the bottleneck won't be the host, it will be the peers restrictions.

  • > Then who should answer for his plugin?

    >

    Well, you can ask the same question in our community or in the Github where you can download our plugin. If you are so convinced that it belongs exclusively to us even if we insist on we have it on Github because we want to foment contribution, then ask directly to us. We are not a huge company, so we can't attend all the messages on this Forum. The community and Github are the direct channels for contacting us, and we will receive the notifications.

    Agree, you can't be everywhere. That is a nightmare for you...

    I will be more than glad to forward all future issues to the proper channels of contacting you.

    Edit: agree with Aphrodite who posted above... a link in your sig would help a lot of your users.

  • >

    > > Bump

    > >

    >

    > This is why it was depreciated...

    > Only thing you can do is to get hold of cocoonjs and get them to fix it... They have made more posts since being depreciated, they they have all year... so maybe they will get a fix out.

    >

    Well I do not expect Ludei to answer to all problems over here in the Scirra forum, I think thats too much to ask.

    Then who should answer for his plugin?

  • DUTOIT I actually like the idea of an illegal version full of ads and all that, as not only you make profit from the stealer, but you also make themir version slightly worse than yours (I would recommand having also a link like "play without ads on the official website Here" thingy, as most of those websites will I think just steal a lot with only a little testing).

    Oh, you refering to the comments I made in the tutorial...

    They are going to steal, so you might as well get something out of it - lol.

    Good idea - "play without ads on offical website" and link to website.

  • Bump

    This is why it was depreciated...

    Only thing you can do is to get hold of cocoonjs and get them to fix it... They have made more posts since being depreciated, they they have all year... so maybe they will get a fix out.

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • Yes, html can be stolen easily. That is why you want to put something like this into html games. So if stolen, it disables game. Tells gamer it is stolen, or points back to your website.

    Yes they can probably get rid of it, but you can encrypted that section, so it will make life hard for thief.

    Or just do this.

    Recommend...You can get lawyer to write a takedown notice, etc etc etc

  • In the case of C2 built daemons you may be right. In the case of a server daemon written in a systems language and using an appropriate tech stack the situation is not nearly as dire.

    The *only* thing 10 physical servers give you is redundancy and clustering. Its clustered processing power is for the most part equal to or slightly less than a single server of the combined physical specs.

    In terms of multiple software servers (ie, multiple database instances), it's common to have a read only master and readwrite slave setup, and again, can be happily implemented on multiple servers or a single server.

    "thousands" is not a big number, and I'd be weary of whatever hosting it is you use if it is. I run all of my servers on rented rack space.

    And again, depending on technologies used and technologies available, things like broadcasting and caching can be handled by mostly inexpensive third party services.

    I understand C2 users are typically not programmers, so there's a lot of misconceptions and hyperbole.

    To be absolutely clear, I am refuting the notion that "100s of users" would require "10+ servers" especially when the concept of server is so ambiguous.

    Total bandwidth is literally an issue solely of the pipe leading to and from your datacenter and the hardware that handles it.

    Yes, I agree... I'm referring to 100's of thousands of connections. 1000's of games playing, each having a 100 users. each user sending updates ever tick. That is what massively multiplayer is.

    I am drawing a line: Massively multiplayer is X and Multiplayer is Y

    For a few 100 users wanting to play together I agree 100 hundred percent a single server will have no issues.

    I am harping on the "Massively" part

    MP plugin can't handle massively multiplayer, but it can handle some pretty big little multiplayer games. Of course using duckfaceninja's method/ashley's method, you can scale pretty big.

    In the end it is all dependant on what you want to do, and you will use the correct tech that gives best results. The available options for new users/no programmers in tutorial section is php/mysql and some socket, both are not ideal for a massively multiplayer game, smaller scale yes. But large scale no.

    There are lots of ways, which will handle it very easily. But will require... actually I don't even think it is an option for C2.... Bottom line C2 isn't made for massively multiplayer.

    I love multiplayer plugin, but I am not developing for "massively multiplayer"

    I plan to have 2-8 players with about 100+ lobbies. Max 800 concurrent which is still steep, but I am hoping doable with MP plugin... Once I've reached that, I will think about ways to scale.

  • skelooth,

    Yeah, sorry what duckfaceninja said.

    [quote:23r90xgg]I think he meant 10 separate session of chrome (10 tabs) as host, if we're discussing in the context of C2 MP plugin.

    Was thinking one thing, meaning another... We are talking C2 MP plugin, with Hosted Sessions?

    Oh this...

    [quote:23r90xgg]This sounds incredibly unrealistic to me. I run web servers that get thousands and thousands of uniques a day, and they hum along fine on a single mid grade server. If you needed 10 dedicated servers for 100+ players MMOs would not be technically or financially feasible. The some of the higher traffic websites in the world typically operate on fewer than a handful of servers.

    I was refering to "Massively" multiplayer which is 100,000's of thousands. Not that OP was thinking that many... but that is what "Massively" Means. Not all connected together in same room together - lol, but running multiple games of 100+ users.

    Dayz has 30 people per server to give you an idea and they have tons of issues. H1Z1 are talking 1000, I would very much like to see this. COD has between 15 and 30... etc etc.

    I know, I know, don't byte my head off, we talking C2, not some "Massively Multiplayer game" which is what the title said

    But I am also talking 2 things at once...

    1 self developed option (databases, etc)

    2 MP Plugin (multiple hosts)

    1) a 1000 people accessing a database is 1 thing (your websites) it is entirely different having data flow bothways similtaniously. Users are not only retrieving data, but also writing data (big chunks of data) - sometimes every tick, 60 times a second. Sorry, but your shared hosting isn't going to cut that sort of load. So it is very realistic.

    2) You will need to have multiple hosts (10+ tabs) and not put all peers together... as you will hit bottleneck... ashley actually wrote a bandwith chart....

    10 players = 16 x 10 x 10 = 1600 bytes per update

    20 players = 16 x 20 x 20 = 6400 bytes per update

    30 players = 16 x 30 x 30 = 14400 bytes per update

    ...

    100 players = 16 x 100 x 100 = 160000 bytes per update

    Its just a matter of doing the math, to work out what your requirements will be.

  • Lol, I used my last single vote on stop development on IE - just for laughs.

    But voted those above all up.