49 reputation
8
bio website paralaxer.com
location
age 34
visits member for 2 years
seen Oct 20 '12 at 18:21

Author of a Cocos2d-X book and an iPhone RPG engine.


Mar
16
awarded  Popular Question
Oct
17
awarded  Teacher
Oct
14
awarded  Tag Editor
Oct
14
revised cocos2d-x wiki description
Fixed grammar, improved formatting and added the Mac port.
Oct
14
revised cocos2d-x wiki excerpt
Fixed grammar, improved formatting and added the Mac port.
Oct
14
answered tunnel effect cocos2d
Oct
14
suggested suggested edit on cocos2d-x tag wiki
Oct
14
suggested suggested edit on cocos2d-x tag wiki excerpt
Oct
14
answered How to setup Cocos2D-X (Android) under Mac OS X?
Apr
26
awarded  Supporter
Apr
21
awarded  Commentator
Apr
21
comment Elegant way to handle packet loss in a lockstep P2P RTS?
Here's the follow-up article: gamasutra.com/view/news/125983/…
Apr
21
comment Elegant way to handle packet loss in a lockstep P2P RTS?
@Blau: To clarify, we are already talking about a deterministic approach that uses hashes of the complete game state to determine if a desync has occured. gamasutra.com/view/news/35929
Apr
21
comment Elegant way to handle packet loss in a lockstep P2P RTS?
@NicoBolas: Thanks for your clarifications here on lockstep. It seems a lot of people are confused about how this model works. Your answer has really given me some inspiration. I see now that this method does not require any reliability layer over UDP. All messages can be sent with regular-old unreliable UDP. Packaging the ACKs into the controller data is sweet. It's a real paradigm shift for me. Thanks again.
Apr
21
accepted Elegant way to handle packet loss in a lockstep P2P RTS?
Apr
21
comment Elegant way to handle packet loss in a lockstep P2P RTS?
Yeah, good articles. I've read the Age of Empires article and the one you linked to (which is also available from the author's blog). Is there a different one about Supreme Commander 2?
Apr
21
comment Elegant way to handle packet loss in a lockstep P2P RTS?
@RoyT: You could theoretically re-sync by sending a list of all past player input (a game replay, if you will) from the "trusted" peer (maybe the current host of the game) and then fast-forward replay it to arrive at the correct game state.
Apr
21
comment Elegant way to handle packet loss in a lockstep P2P RTS?
Couldn't you validate that with occasional hashes of the game state?
Apr
21
comment Elegant way to handle packet loss in a lockstep P2P RTS?
So if player 1 gets to tick 1004 without acknowledgement of his 1004 controller data (I'm thinking of a click or tap at a certain location), what then? Is the data discarded? Rolled over to the next 4 ticks? Or is this where the peers must pause to re-stablish the connection?
Apr
21
comment Elegant way to handle packet loss in a lockstep P2P RTS?
Question about #4: why does every player have to validate the action? Can't the action just be checked for sanity and then accepted or rejected deterministically by all peers?