• andros_rex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      The programming described in the article is spectacular too. Imagine working with 68 KB of space. I got to talk to someone who worked on the team once, which was probably the culmination of my life.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        I started programming as a kid way back in the ZX Spectrum days, and that one had even less memory than that.

        You can do a surprising large amount of functionality if you’re hand-coding assembly (I actually made a mine-sweeper clone for the Spectrum like that).

        Even nowadays, there is the whole domain of microcontrollers, some of which are insanelly tiny (for example, the ATTiny202 which has 2KB flash and 128 Bytes of RAM) and you can do a surprising amount of functionality even in C since modern C compilers are extremelly efficient.

        (That said, that 202 is the extreme low end and barelly useful, but I do have an automated plant watering system I designed - complete with low battery detection and signalling - running on an ATTiny45, an older chip with twice as much flash and RAM).

        In my experience, if there is no UI on a screen (graphical elements tend to use quite a bit of memory plus if you’re doing animation you need an in-memory buffer the size of the video memory to get double-buffering for smoothness and just that buffer can add up a lot of memory depending on resolution and bytes per pixel), using a compiled language which can optimize for size (like C) and not dragging in a ton of oversized libraries as dependencies, you can do a ton of functionality in very little memory - there are quite complex functional elements out there (like full TCP/IP stacks) that fit in a few KB of memory.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        Logically, given that we are still getting transmissions from the remote vehicles, either there are no aliens shooting back, the aliens have lousy aim or really bad weapons, or they’ve long destroyed those vehicles and what we’re receiving are fake transmissions from the aliens.

        So it is indeed possible that the aliens are shooting back but we can’t tell from this side.

  • jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    5 days ago

    It’s like playing Age of Empires over dialup. One minute you’re happily building a little army and keeping your farms going. Then some asshole with cable internet comes along and faster than you can blink, your army is destroyed, villagers murdered, and your city burned to the ground.

  • Ronno@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    5 days ago

    EA: hold my beer

    For example: in FC25 you can have 14 ms ping to the server, but still have a laggy experience as if you are playing with 1,400,000 ping.

  • AndyMFK@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    5 days ago

    I gave up sim racing online after a crash and seeing the other players replay of the crash. I didn’t think I was at fault but because of the lag, I totally was.

    My ping from Australia to Europe was just too much in order to ensure others could have a safe race. When everyone else has 20-40 ping and I’m racing with 150+ it’s just too much lag to be safe on the track

    • JordanZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      Somebody I know that does sim racing on a team has a dedicated internet connection just for racing. A few too many times of somebody starting up something like a Netflix stream in the house and it would spike his ping enough that it had dire consequences to his rating. That just seems crazy to me. He justifies it by it costing him like 3-5 races to play catch up after an incident. Doesn’t really help in your case as your ping was consistently poor though.

      Running like the good old days though when modern cell phones didn’t exist and the house only had one computer…you just plug the modem directly into the computer. No router/wifi.

  • Fabian@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    I saw an interesting video about the first drone that flew on Mars. They programmed the flights in advance and it then executed them autonomously. I think that is even more impressive, since it would not have been possible to intervene if something went wrong. At the time the data was received, the drone already landed

  • kamen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    It would be comparable if NASA scientists were racing against someone else controlling another vehicle over there with less ping.

    P.S. I’m not saying it isn’t challenging - it surely is, but it’s like connecting to your home computer over a shitty connection to play a single player game.

    • jjagaimo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      1-40ms - good

      40-70 - less good but playable

      70-100 - can have affects depending on the game

      100-150 - not great

      150+ - unplayable

      • stephan262@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 days ago

        It depends on what type of game you are playing, and how good the game’s lag compensation is. I’ve played games just fine with a ping as high as 200ms.

    • UltraMasculine@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 days ago

      Depends on the game. In fast paced games 100ms ping may negatively affect the gameplay (though normally the game is still playable), but in slower paced games it normally doesn’t matter that much yet.

  • Hegar@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 days ago

    I lived in Western Australia when I played WoW - 400ms was a good day.

  • Mr. WorldWide@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 days ago

    100 ping? you seriously can’t play with a tenth of a second ping time? Sounds like you’re a shitty gamer making excuses

    • scintilla@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 days ago

      In some games it is genuinely unplayable. This is coming from someone with on average 200+ ping with spikes up to 600 sometimes.

      • Mr. WorldWide@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        To human perception a 0.1 seconds isn’t much different than 0.03 seconds

        I forgot if it was you I asked about this or not. But are you sure the one with slightly less ping time isn’t just cheating?

        • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          To human perception a 0.1 seconds isn’t much different than 0.03 seconds

          You are making the mistake of thinking about reaction times. What matters much more in shooters is that our brain adjusts for the ping. That affects:

          • aiming with a lead of a few pixels. And in a fast moving environment, with skilled players, aiming for a lead of 30ms is absolutely a few pixels that can be targeted intentionally
          • the time between triggering a shot (nerve signal to the trigger finger) and the last chance that the target has to dodge / change direction -> in such games, players are rarely running in a straight line, and more often running preemptive zigzag / evasive maneuvers even when not getting shot at. 30ms more ping means that on every shot taken, you lose 30ms from the window in which your target still moves in the direction you thought it was moving. Even if the target only changes direction only once per second, that’s 3% lost from the time window in which you can predict where to shoot. Actually more, because you have reaction time after a direction change, before you can even consider aiming.
          • furthermore, when a player with low ping gets hit by non-instant-kill ammo, they will dodge within their reaction time. Assuming the attacker chain-fires, they lose 30ms of ammo missing the target before they can adjust aim or stop firing
      • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        if a person shooting me has a lower ping and I get upset about it with a 100 ping I need to touch grass.

        back in my day I played Halo with a 1300-2000 ping and still whipped ass.

        • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 days ago

          I don’t believe you. An fps with ping as massive as over 1000 would be straight up unplayable

          That’s over a full second of delay! In an fps I routinely do split second maneuvers and reactions. If someone I was shooting at wouldn’t be able to react to what I was doing for at least a full second, I would easily dominate them every single time

          • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            believe it or not. this was early 2000s, so everyone outside of major cities had shitty internet.

            I had the fastest connection in my small shit town at 1.5mbps.

            • __dev@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 days ago

              I also don’t believe you, and here’s why:

              Halo CE didn’t have lag compensation, so with 2 seconds of latency you would have to lead your target by 2 seconds. Shooting anyone who wasn’t standing still would be a complete guessing game - I think you too would also classify that as unplayable (source).

              Halo 2 seems to not be well documented - it looks like it’s using some form of rudimentary rollback, which can deal with higher latency but you’d need it very stable to avoid opponents teleporting constantly. It’s also unclear if it would handle 2s of latency, as that would increase both CPU and memory utilization of servers. If you’re getting a variance of 700ms as you claimed this most certainly wouldn’t be playable. High ping being stable is also hard to believe, naturally the higher the latency the higher the absolute variance.

              Halo 3 uses synchronous lockstep networking with a ~300ms window (source). If you’re not in that window your actions are rejected, so quite literally unplayable at 2s. I think this is more evidence that bungie would’ve had a <2s maximum latency in their earlier title.

              My best guess is you’ve either misremembered the latency (130-200ms is about what I’d expect from rural internet at that time), or you were playing peer-to-peer with your friends and so internet latency didn’t matter. I myself have played plenty of multiplayer games at over 100 ping and while it can be annoying I’d certainly call it playable, but not 10x that.

              • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 days ago

                thanks for hyper analyzing.

                it was Halo 1 on the original Xbox early 2000s.

                oh wait, halo 1 on original Xbox didn’t have Xbox live, right?

                my friends and I would use a shared internet connection over our local PC with dual nics. software was running that would basically create a flat network VPN that would show us all as-if we on a LAN. think of it like xlink-kai before it was a thing. I can’t remember the software name but we would use it for pc games like diablo, c&c, aoe, unreal, etc.

                it was my idea to use it for Xbox with the network connection sharing on windows.

                latency was a problem, but we still could play and it was enjoyable enough we’d do it weekly.

                • __dev@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  Sounds like great fun! We did the same thing to play battlefield 2 over LAN (If you played on LAN you could bypass the online DRM, as we only had one copy).

                  Yea Halo Combat Evolved (Halo 1) only had internet multiplayer on the PC version, but the Xbox version could do peer-to-peer multiplayer. One person would have zero ping as the host and the rest would go over the vpn. Any kind of latency would have been annoying due to Halo CE’s lack of lag compensation :D

    • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      As an amateur, in a fast paced shooter, vs. an equally skilled player, it went from a fair match with equal pings to one player dominating the other with 100 vs. 70 ping.

      • Mr. WorldWide@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        that little of a difference really matters? Are you sure that the one with a tiny bit less ping isn’t just cheating?

        • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          Yes, that little of a difference absolutely matters, proven by the observation that it went both ways. I could become the clear winner, or my opponent, based on who had the lower ping, whereas in equal ping settings the games were much more balanced. It’s easy to tell when you regularly play against the same people.

          That’s how fast paced shooters work. Don’t think about the crap that people sell as “shooters” nowadays which is adjusted to playstation controllers or similar BS.

          Think quake, unreal tournament, quake arena, openarena.

    • chatokun@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      I think over 100 starts making your off-gcds clip on FFXIV, and stuff like getting 6 hits properly for Wildfire on MCH(probably some other stuff too). It’s not unplayable, but it is frustrating and distracting, so can cause an ADHD person like me significant stress when doing content like Savage raids and Ultimates