41–50 of 136 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And Fortnite is allegedly 30 ticks per second.
Apex Legends is at 20 IIRC (My memory is from 2-3 years back on this one tho) CSGO was at 64 for the standard servers and 128 for Faceit (IIRC CS2 is doing some dynamic tick schenanigans unless they changed back on that) Overwatch is I think at 60
I wonder if any game servers are implemented in Erlang?
The other reason is that the client and the server have to be written in the same language.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OSRS plays on 0.6 TPS... or 100 ticks per minute kind of funny how different that is.
OSRS players hate when they have to actually play the game. They just want to click the screen every 10 minutes while playing something else.
I wonder if any game servers are implemented in Erlang?
Network connection, lobby, matchmaking, leaderboards or even chats, yes. But the actual simulation, probably not for fast paced twitchy shooter. Also not just for performance reasons, I wouldn’t call BeamVM hard realtime, but also for code. Your game server would usually be the client but headless (without rendering). Helps with reuse and architecture.
Erlang actually has good enough performance for many types of multiplayer games. Though you are correct that it may not cut it for fast paced twitch shooters. Well...I'm not exactly sure about that. You can offload lots of expensive physics computations to NIF's. In my game the most expensive computation is AI path-finding. Though this never occurs on the main simulation tick. Other processes run this on their own time.
This deep dive article is very nice. At any given time, ~50 of those games are going to be in the buy phase. Players will be purchasing equipment safely behind their spawn barriers and no shots can hurt them. We realized we don’t even need to do any server-side animation during the buy phase, we could just turn it off. That explains the current trend of "online" video game that is so annoying: For 10 minutes of play,…
This is not equivalent to "lobby time or end game animations" in other games. In Valorant (similar to Counter Strike), at the start of the game you have 60 seconds to buy your weapons and abilities for the round. Valorant/CS is typically a best-of-13, and before each round is a 60 second "buy" period.
It's a deceptive way to sell people less game.
If you just make a list of “performance tweaks” you might learn about in, say, a game dev blog post on the internet, and execute them without considering your application’s specific needs and considerations, you might hurt performance more than you help it.
nice.
128 ticks per second servers. (And lo, suddenly the article's thesis is inherently clear.) A "tick", or an update, is a single step forward in the game's state. UPS (as I'll call it from here) or tick rate is the frequency of those. So, 128 ticks/s == 128 updates per sec. That's a high number. For comparison, Factorio is 60 UPS, and Minecraft is 20 UPS. At first I imagined an FPS's state would be considerably smaller…
OSRS plays on 0.6 TPS... or 100 ticks per minute kind of funny how different that is.
Take notes, Valve.
This is from 2020. Valve wanted to be smart and invented a new "subtick" system in 2023 which isn't as good as 128 tick. To make things worse, CS is a paid game, not free like Valorant, and makes probably much more money. They seemingly just don't care enough about the problem to solve it correctly. That or there is more work to be done on subtick to make it work better than 128.
(Veering offtopic here) Remember that Valve invented the free-to-play business model when they made TF2 free. As Gabe Newell said in some interview long ago, they made more money from TF2 after it went F2P ("sell more hats!")
Point being, being a paid vs free game is largely irrelevant to the profitability & engineering budget.
That said, I'm not sure why you say CS is a paid game. It is also free-to-play. Is some playable content locked behind a paywall?