[e2e] 150ms - tolerable latency for quakeIII
gja at ureach.com
Thu May 24 13:16:00 PDT 2001
Manuel Oliveira wrote:
> Your results are interesting but I wonder if you mind a few comments of my
> own. My pardons to members of the list that know this already.
No worries. Interesting input.
> Why am I pointing this out? Because, packet generation is not once per
> frame, but every once in a while. Also notice that the server does
> significant amounts of filtering and smoothing. What matters is people enjoy
> the experience, not that it is 100% accurate.
> Now another thing that needs to be considered in the equation is the user.
> The human being can adapt very well within certain limits. It is true that
> ideally the latency should be below 150ms. However, many users manage to
> play at higher levels because of their skill. In fact, they enjoy the
True. My supposition, though, is that most players will (if given
the choice) prefer servers with lower ping times. Certainly,
players in parts of the Internet that have a low density of local
servers will learn to tolerate (err... enjoy the challenge of :)
the latency to popular (but topologically more distant) servers.
> I assume you do not correlate the network data with the skill of the users.
No. Haven't had the time yet to correlate end-of-game ping times
with end-of-game frag counts.
> Do you check what percentage of players drop out of the game after a few
> minutes because their ping times are superior than the other users? How does
> the latency vary along the duration of the game?
At this stage, unknown.
Grenville Armitage http://members.home.net/garmitage/
More information about the end2end-interest