Jump to content
BattleNonSense

"Netcode" - Tickrate, Update Rates, Lag Compensation

Recommended Posts

I'd be interested to know what goals the developers have set when it comes to the "netcode".

Tickrate:
A minimum of 60 simulations per second is really a must have on all platforms to ensure a smooth online experience and to ensure that the min. delays between players is low.

Update Rates:
In order to ensure that the minimum delay between players is low (ping is always added on top of that) it is not only important to have a tickrate of 60, but also to have the client send and receive 60 updates per second.

Other games that use a tickrate of 60 have the client send 60 updates per second to the gameserver, but only receive 20 udpates per second from the gameserver. This increases the lag between the player and the gameserver.

Lag Compensation:
Another hot topic is lag compensation or "how far behind cover a low ping player will receive damage" - this is by far one of the most infuriating gameplay experiences fo players who have a low ping.
https://youtu.be/pHi2DfSFFpk?t=11m47s
You can not completely prevent the feeling of receiving damage behind cover as we are all playing online, however the lag compensation must not allow extreme cases to happen.

Disconnect players:
Players with high latency variation or lots of packetloss are known to cause problems for the gameserver and the experience of the other players.
The developers should consider to disconnect players once their network quality is so bad that it causes problems for the (game) service.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crucial part of this game nailing it, especially for competitive possibilities. Unreal Engine 3+ games in my experience have had a tendency to be quite inresponsive in this area unless developers specifically went in and modified/rewrote the netcode properly. Unreal Engine 4 seems to be better at this out of the box, still hope you guys nail it closer to how the IW/COD/Quake engines felt in terms of fast and responsive netcode.

Edited by heady89

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BattleNonSense knows his stuff when it comes to the end user experience of netcode so my hope is the Devs are using his expertise in development. if this is the case, i wouldn't expect him to comment on this area of the game until there's actually a game to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sl3ipner said:

Well if developers have these topics on their agenda, I see no reason why they should not mention it - after all thats what this forum is for. IMHO :)  

if you watch BattleNonSense's vids you should already know his thoughts on what makes a good online experience but we won't know about Bat44 until it's out in the wild.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2.12.2016 at 8:15 PM, mazh said:

got one more subscriber great videos chris.

The R6Siege and Cod4 killed me, what a shame this new games are

CoD is really bad when you compare it to other FPS like Battlefield and Overwatch. I will revisit R6S this week to check if their netcode changes did something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11.12.2016 at 1:14 AM, HelpmeJohnny said:

Was hoping for 120 tickrate... The difference between 60 and 120 is huge. So if you really wanna hit the competitive scene, 120 is a must.

While I fully agree that 120Hz is a must for e-sports/competitive, the difference between 60 and 120 is not "huge" at all.

This CS:Go video shows the difference between 64 and 128 ticks:

 

Most first person shooters these days (CoD, Titanfall 2, ...) do not even run at 60Hz (on all platforms).
Both Battlefield and Overwatch have shown that a 60Hz Tickrate and 60/60 Update Rates are what really make a big difference compared to the games that only run at 60/20 or 100/20.

So I'd say that these 60/60 rates should be the goal for release as that is a solid foundation for a first person shooter. At a later point higher rates could still be provided for a competitive mode or e-sports community that might build around Battalion 1944.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BattleNonSense said:

While I fully agree that 120Hz is a must for e-sports/competitive, the difference between 60 and 120 is not "huge" at all.

So I'd say that these 60/60 rates should be the goal for release as that is a solid foundation for a first person shooter. At a later point higher rates could still be provided for a competitive mode or e-sports community that might build around Battalion 1944.

I understand what you're saying, but there is also a huge difference if it's client or server based. And still have no clue what they're gonna aim for in the end.

I've played dods and cs on a competitive level my whole youth, i can feel instantly if i play on a 60hz or 120hz server. But i guess for matchmaking they can go with 60hz same as csgo. But i would still prefer they put an extra budget on the servers, and pull it up to 120hz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, HelpmeJohnny said:

I understand what you're saying, but there is also a huge difference if it's client or server based. And still have no clue what they're gonna aim for in the end.

They go for dedicated servers hosted by multiplay. This was part of the original kickstarter information IIRC. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/12/2016 at 0:50 PM, BattleNonSense said:

They go for dedicated servers hosted by multiplay. This was part of the original kickstarter information IIRC. :)

Love the vids, keep em coming mate.

And this is awesome news. 3rd party hosted servers, meaning they can be hosted in a much larger variety of locations with proper admin tools is a must. No idea why BF1, for example, downgraded their PC rental programme to the level they have.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17.12.2016 at 11:33 PM, DrunkMonk74 said:

3rd party hosted servers, meaning they can be hosted in a much larger variety of locations with proper admin tools is a must. No idea why BF1, for example, downgraded their PC rental programme to the level they have.

EA hosting servers on their own would be okay if they had a decent RSP ready at release which was on the same level as in previous games.
What we have now just shows us that EA simply does not care about communities and clans. They are fully focused on the quick match players who want a vanilla experience. I would not be surprised to see the next BF title to have no RSP at all.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, BattleNonSense said:

EA hosting servers on their own would be okay if they had a decent RSP ready at release which was on the same level as in previous games.
What we have now just shows us that EA simply does not care about communities and clans. They are fully focused on the quick match players who want a vanilla experience. I would not be surprised to see the next BF title to have no RSP at all.

Not to de-rail this thread and turn it into a EA bashing thread, but for me EA have shown that their priority, (with the BF series anyway), now lies with consoles. Various examples ranging from bringing updates in line across all platforms, server rental, aim assist on PC, etc. Now there is nothing wrong with consoles, and nothing wrong with PC. But one shouldn't have a negative impact on the other. If you cannot provide an adequate experience on multiple platforms, don't release on multiple platforms. Nothing will upset people more than taking their money and then not providing adequate support.

To bring this back on track to Batt44, learn from other peoples mistakes :-) (sure you have it all in hand anyway lads!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, DrunkMonk74 said:

Various examples ranging from bringing updates in line across all platforms, server rental, aim assist on PC, etc.

Actually RSP is worse on console too now. It was already bad in BF4 but in BF1 DICE/EA managed to make it even worse for consoles.
Also BF1 only runs at 30Hz on console while BF4 at least supports 45Hz - and on PC the default tickrate of BF1 is 60Hz.

So it's not like console is the golden platform where EA/DICE gets it done right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i've stopped playing BF1 on PS4 until they put the tickrate up to 60hz. you can really feel the latency in games with a high player count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Farq-S said:

i've stopped playing BF1 on PS4 until they put the tickrate up to 60hz. you can really feel the latency in games with a high player count.

Issue with higher playercount is also that the Server Tick Time (how long the server needs to finish a tick) increases.
At 30Hz (current console tickrate) the server has 33ms to finish a tick, at 60Hz it has 16ms to finish a tick. The longer it needs to finish it the later the clients will get an answer from the server. And when it fails to finish a tick inside that timeframe then you will face massive gameplay issues. Rubberbanding, delays hitreg, exploding vehicles freezing in mid air, etc.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sl3ipner said:

@BattleNonSense: As I understand it higher framerates on your system will be able to take advantage of higher tickrates (#Hz) on the server. To be specific, the PS4 Pro should be able to get "better gaming" (whatever that is) on say a 45Hz server, than on a 30Hz. All things being equal :) 

I have had limited succes on BF4s 45Hz servers versus 30Hz with my old PS4, but definitvily feel improvement with new PS4 Pro. True or false? 

 

Your Frame Rate should at least match the tickrate of the game. There is little point in playing on a 128 Tick CSGO or 120 Tick BF4 server when your PC can't maintain at least 128 / 120 FPS. Which is why BF4 will show you a warning icon when you don't.

BF4 and BF1 are also a bit special when it comes to the rate at which the client sends data. Basically it does send data about what you do at the same rate as the tickrate of the server - with the exception of damage. So when you hit someone (BF games use a client side - server authoritative hitreg for infantry combat) then this information is sent at the same rate as your framerate. So when you play at 200FPS on a 60Hz server then your movvement info is sent at 60Hz while damage is sent at 200hz, which helps to reduce that delay by a few milliseconds. But that is far away from granting anyone an advantage.

Btw. I aboslutelly hate the marketing for the PS4pro. It's all about "4k".... 30FPS 4k...... The only reason why this is at the center of the marketing campaign is because the Playstation 4 is from Sony, and they want to sell 4K TV's.

What the Pro should really be about:
- better image quality (higher quality Anti Aliasing, Anisotropic filtering, running all games in native 1080p)
- better responsiveness (60FPS at all times in all games)
- no tunnelvision (Field of View higher than 60! Playing a shooter on the XB1 literally makes me sick after 1 hour)

These things have a very positive impact on the gameplay experience - 4K has not.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Sl3ipner said:

@BattleNonSense: As I understand it higher framerates on your system will be able to take advantage of higher tickrates (#Hz) on the server. To be specific, the PS4 Pro should be able to get "better gaming" (whatever that is) on say a 45Hz server, than on a 30Hz. All things being equal :) 

I have had limited succes on BF4s 45Hz servers versus 30Hz with my old PS4, but definitvily feel improvement with new PS4 Pro. True or false? 

 

Framerate on PS4 Pro is exactly the same as PS4 standard. the only improvement would be the graphical fidelity assuming you have a 4k or HDR tv. unless you have a 4k or HDR capable tv there's absolutely no benefit having a PS4 Pro.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Farq-S said:

Framerate on PS4 Pro is exactly the same as PS4 standard. the only improvement would be the graphical fidelity assuming you have a 4k or HDR tv. unless you have a 4k or HDR capable tv there's absolutely no benefit having a PS4 Pro.. 

What you might notice on the PS4 is a more stable framerate. There are a few games where you can select higher FPS or higher resolution IIRC - however these are all single player games.
Sony does not want 30FPS players to go up against 60FPS players in MP.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Sl3ipner said:

Edith: Didnt see BNS answer before I wrote this..

 

Ok :) I dont have a 4K tv, and isnt interested, playing 1080 hdmi is good enough for me. 

But that the PS4 Pro shouldnt deliver higher framerates on the average, than the standart PS4 I cant understand. Faster cpu and vid card should ensure that?? 

I saw a Tube where 2 players were gaming together on BF1, one with Pro, one with standart PS4. Both with frame counter on screen. There were for some parts a huge difference. I can go dig for the Tube link, but right now I'll get home from work thx ?

don't believe everything you see on YT. unlike PC, PS4 Pro has to go through Playstation Network. there's no way sony would allow PS4 Pro and standard players to play together if the game ran at different framerates in a MP FPS game. they'd make the PS4 standard obsolete overnight and 40m owners would be pissed. sony couldn't handle the backlash. PS4 Pro is 4k/HDR "capable" but they're marketing is bullshit because there are very few games out currently capable of running at 4k/HDR. the devs have to patch/upgrade the game for 4k/HDR. it doesn't magically happen for current games.

Edited by Farq-S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Sl3ipner said:

But that the PS4 Pro shouldnt deliver higher framerates on the average, than the standart PS4 I cant understand. Faster cpu and vid card should ensure that?? 

The higher processing power of the pro will help to keep the frame rate stable, but when a game has been designed for (aka. locked by the developer to) 30FPS, then it will also not run at higher FPS on a pro unless the dev releases a patch to enable higher frame rates when you run the game on the pro. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said. The higher processing power helps to prevent FPS drops. So in a 60FPS title you have a better chance of staying close to those 60 FPS.
But it will not allow you to go past 30FPS in a 30FPS title (for that the developer needs to release a patch for the Pro that removes the 30FPS limit).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×