So, hacking multiplayer in should be possible.
| Author |
Message |
|
cambiogris
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 10:32 pm
Posts: 830
|
 Re: So, hacking multiplayer in should be possible. has anyone in here ever actually implemented any sort of multiplayer in a game they programmed
|
| Thu Aug 28, 2008 11:44 am |
|
|
|
ProjektODIN
Banned
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 6:09 pm
Posts: 432
|
Re: So, hacking multiplayer in should be possible. cambiogris wrote: has anyone in here ever actually implemented any sort of multiplayer in a game they programmed I'm going to venture a guess with NO.
|
| Thu Aug 28, 2008 3:05 pm |
|
|
|
Tayrtahn
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 1:03 am
Posts: 10
|
Re: So, hacking multiplayer in should be possible. Duh102 wrote: I believe that idea has been stated a couple times already.
But it does open up a slightly new idea. What if each player had no idea what the other player had in his game? To attack the other player's base you would order a dropship full of soldiers and take them down to a predefined location to teleport out, which would spawn them as enemies in the other player's game. The enemies on your screen would be ordered by the other player and "teleported" to your game. You would still have to pay for your attacking force and defending force, and if your brain was killed or you ran out of gold you could send out a lose/win event.
This would require no transfer of game logic, only the names of actors, devices, and the occasional ACrab.
And no, I'm not going to make it. I'm lazy and don't have a need for multiplayer. is the most reasonable idea in this thread. As shown by the IRC Scene, it's quite possible to send a command to another client to spawn a dropship or something. It's not much harder to allow the user to select what units are in that dropship and where it lands. What is a problem is keeping track of every actor, bullet, particle, and lump of terrain. With the nature of the game, that's going to desync in just seconds of play. But if I'm understanding your idea correctly, you would simply be spawning actors into the other player's game and letting their client handle their actions from there (you would not be able to watch them, either). That sounds quite doable. It's similar to the IRC scene except with the spawn commands issued by game events.
|
| Thu Aug 28, 2008 5:36 pm |
|
|
|
Ophanim
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 6:33 am
Posts: 1743
Location: Trapped in UCP. Send help.
|
Re: So, hacking multiplayer in should be possible. ProjektODIN wrote: cambiogris wrote: has anyone in here ever actually implemented any sort of multiplayer in a game they programmed I'm going to venture a guess with NO. Tim has.
|
| Thu Aug 28, 2008 6:23 pm |
|
|
|
Lord Tim
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 4:55 pm
Posts: 1178
Location: America!
|
Re: So, hacking multiplayer in should be possible. Technically, I've sent information over TCP, but I haven't finished the multiplayery bit yet.
The hardest bit is sending all the information that you need.
|
| Thu Aug 28, 2008 6:32 pm |
|
|
|
Dvd
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 8:41 am
Posts: 30
|
Re: So, hacking multiplayer in should be possible. Lord Tim wrote: Technically, I've sent information over TCP, but I haven't finished the multiplayery bit yet.
The hardest bit is sending all the information that you need. Actually, my second idea was different from LAN play + remote desktop. I need to finish testing it though.
|
| Thu Aug 28, 2008 7:24 pm |
|
|
|
ProjektODIN
Banned
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 6:09 pm
Posts: 432
|
Re: So, hacking multiplayer in should be possible. Dvd wrote: Lord Tim wrote: Technically, I've sent information over TCP, but I haven't finished the multiplayery bit yet.
The hardest bit is sending all the information that you need. Actually, my second idea was different from LAN play + remote desktop. I need to finish testing it though. His idea wasn't RDC. It was all in a tcp stack. How real ♥♥♥♥ networkz.
|
| Thu Aug 28, 2008 7:27 pm |
|
|
|
Dvd
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 8:41 am
Posts: 30
|
Re: So, hacking multiplayer in should be possible. ProjektODIN wrote: Dvd wrote: Lord Tim wrote: Technically, I've sent information over TCP, but I haven't finished the multiplayery bit yet.
The hardest bit is sending all the information that you need. Actually, my second idea was different from LAN play + remote desktop. I need to finish testing it though. His idea wasn't RDC. It was all in a tcp stack. How real crap networkz. Lord Tim wrote: That's LAN play. It's nothing different from using remote desktop, except that if you had the server doing it, it might be less laggy. That is what I was responding to.
|
| Thu Aug 28, 2008 7:40 pm |
|
|
|
Zero
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 8:14 pm
Posts: 16
Location: Lurking about the forums.
|
Re: So, hacking multiplayer in should be possible. For the terrain sync issue, why not use some kind of arena made of indestructible terrain to minimize the amount of physics data flying between server and client to just dropships and units?
You could also even get around syncing dropship debris by having some kind of unreachable spot to deliver units to with dropships and then use Lua to transport delivered units to the arena.
|
| Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:03 am |
|
|
|
Geti
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 9:57 am
Posts: 4886
Location: some compy
|
Re: So, hacking multiplayer in should be possible. nah, dont worry about terrain sync, most of its fairly deterministic. especially stuff do do with bounce -> debris. try dropping a grenade from any hight onto terrain that wont slip when the nade hits (ie concrete) and youll notice it lands in exactly the same spot, doing the same bounces to get there. so with ~0 lag (lol) between actions, that wouldnt matter. though bullet trails through ground are variable i thiiiink..  idk wouldnt matter much anyway. the NPC idea would be fine.
|
| Sat Aug 30, 2008 9:58 am |
|
|
|
BlueThen
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:19 pm
Posts: 32
|
Re: So, hacking multiplayer in should be possible. Instead of having both clients calculate everything, you could maybe have it so that there's a host that makes some of the calculations (that involves random), and send it to the clients.
Also, don't forget that Cortex Command already supports up to 4 players.
|
| Mon Sep 01, 2008 6:36 pm |
|
|
|
ProjektODIN
Banned
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 6:09 pm
Posts: 432
|
Re: So, hacking multiplayer in should be possible. BlueThen wrote: Instead of having both clients calculate everything, you could maybe have it so that there's a host that makes some of the calculations (that involves random), and send it to the clients.
Also, don't forget that Cortex Command already supports up to 4 players. Holy crap, this man is a genius! A central server--that does all of the calculations? This is brilliant! I wish the guys who made every other multiplayer-enabled game had thought this ♥♥♥♥ up! Genius!
|
| Mon Sep 01, 2008 6:56 pm |
|
|
|
robolee
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 4:30 pm
Posts: 1040
Location: England
|
Re: So, hacking multiplayer in should be possible. That's not what he's saying. He means have it so that only the host works out the random stuff, but every other player does all the regular calculations. EDIT: actually, no, he might not mean this.
|
| Mon Sep 01, 2008 9:45 pm |
|
|
|
Nova
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 5:44 am
Posts: 30
Location: 1001011101<Here>01101110
|
Re: So, hacking multiplayer in should be possible. A better term would be "Seed Physics" ie: the physics on both systems are work out their calculations using propagating seed value which results in both systems calculating the same values, also using a seed and sudo/tick randoms both systems will generate the same value.
from there on you can maintain sync by sending a sync frame.
This system was used in diablo 1 and 2 for the ai and map layout and items, it worked very well. altho the anti cheat on such a system is not reliable.
|
| Tue Sep 02, 2008 12:59 pm |
|
|
|
ProjektODIN
Banned
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 6:09 pm
Posts: 432
|
Re: So, hacking multiplayer in should be possible. robolee wrote: That's not what he's saying. He means have it so that only the host works out the random stuff, but every other player does all the regular calculations. EDIT: actually, no, he might not mean this. EDIT: Way to miss the sarcasm.
|
| Tue Sep 02, 2008 2:00 pm |
|
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|
