• ProgrammingSocks
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    That’s why I already proposed tolerance for ~200ms with trajectory projections

    • huginn@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      So you’re going to take all the places a character could be in the next 200ms, do Ray casting on all of them and send that data to the server to check every 17ms?

      While the server also does that for 15 other players at the same time.

      Do you know what algorithmic complexity is? Big O notation? If so - that’s a n³ * 15m³ problem space that you’re expanding out across 200ms every 17ms, where n is player locations possible in x/y/z and m is the other players locations. Physics collisions are usually the biggest drain on a computer’s cycles in game and in the worst case that’s n² complexity.

      You’re talking insanely taxing here.

      • ProgrammingSocks
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        It’s mainly client side not server side. I’m not typing out an essay for you about a random ass idea I had one day on a forum.

        • huginn@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          I’m just baffled by the idea. No need to defend it though, this is all arbitrary anyways. It’s not like anyone is going to do this.

          • ProgrammingSocks
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            True, I’m of the belief that gaming companies aren’t too fussed about cheaters if they’re bringing money in some way.