Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Online Games - Prospects, Problems, and Payoff -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bret P who wrote (20)	4/18/1998 8:47:00 PM
From: Mike McFarland	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 30

Andy and thread: If anybody can point me to, or just list the online gaming companies which I do not remember, there is dwango, Mpath, battle.net, what else? I have not thought about online gaming for awhile, but then I remembered this thread. You see I bot Activision on friday (kind of a whim/good chart perhaps having tested support around $10)...anyway, I just now realized that my sister in law plays online, I76 (Activision) So what are the companies out there, and where should I go to play 1. StarCraft (hey it runs on my 486, great!) 2. BattleZone (after I buy a PII w/ voodoo) (this game looks killer on my buddies P2-233). if you thot this post was long, have another, it's on me! Message 4115643

To: Bret P who wrote (20)	4/26/1998 6:07:00 PM
From: Andy Riedel	Respond to of 30

Bret, 3D quality has little to do with network latency if the network model and display engine are properly separated. Early games in this arena such as the original Doom used to sync the frame rate with the network receive rate. In essence, the display frame rate was tied to receiving messages from all other players in the game. One slow link to another player would cause your display to slow down until you received the messages for that frame. Most newer games (Quake, Quake II, and others) have separated the display from the network and used a variety of methods to have each person's display interpolate the actual state of the game as best as possible. Once the necessary network messages have been received, the interpolation is corrected by the network messages containing the actual game state. QuakeWorld pioneered this effort and was able to support 32 player games in this manner. MicroProse does have a very good lineup of titles. Magic the Gathering could do extremely well if the "magic" of owning and collecting physical game cards could somehow be reflected in the online version. Perhaps digitally signed, unique, virtual cards!?!? Latency is cause by numerous factors including modem latencies, server hops (i.e. how many servers must you hop through to get to the server running the game), packet delays through various ISP's and their peerings with each other, and bottlenecks at the major Internet gateways (MAE East and West). It is hard to say exactly which factor causes the most latency as it tends to be dynamic. The best solution going forward IMHO is to distribute as much as possible to make the actual location of the game server (in Internet space as opposed to physical space) be the optimal "distance" from all players in the game. "Distance" in these terms equates to latency. For example, if 4 players are playing a game together, the server launching software should determine which physical server provides the best average latency to the 4 players involved and dynamically allocate the server at the location. Mplayer.com uses a variety of mechanisms such as these to achieve optimal gameplay. Andy