Our Properties: Gamasutra GameCareerGuide IndieGames Indie Royale GDC IGF Game Developer Magazine GAO
My Message close
Contents
The Internet Sucks: Or, What I Learned Coding X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter
 
 
Printer-Friendly VersionPrinter-Friendly Version
 
Latest News
spacer View All spacer
 
February 10, 2012
 
Road to the IGF: Lucky Frame's Pugs Luv Beats
 
Analyst questions validity of unusual January NPD results [4]
 
DICE 2012: Blizzard's Pearce on World Of Warcraft's launch hangover
spacer
Latest Jobs
spacer View All     Post a Job     RSS spacer
 
February 10, 2012
 
Beachhead / Activision
Senior Operations Engineer
 
Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC
Manager Quality Assurance
 
Beachhead / Activision
Senior Front End Web Engineer
 
Beachhead / Activision
Senior Back End Web Engineer
 
Beachhead / Activision
User Experience Lead
 
Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC
Senior Software Engineer
spacer
Latest Features
spacer View All spacer
 
February 10, 2012
 
arrow Principles of an Indie Game Bottom Feeder [19]
 
arrow Postmortem: CyberConnect 2's Solatorobo: Red the Hunter [1]
 
arrow Jerked Around by the Magic Circle - Clearing the Air Ten Years Later [39]
 
arrow Building the World of Reckoning [4]
 
arrow SPONSORED FEATURE: TwitchTV - How to Build Community Around Your Game in 2012 [13]
 
arrow Happy Action, Happy Developer: Tim Schafer on Reimagining Double Fine [9]
 
arrow Building an iOS Hit: Phase 1 [11]
 
arrow Postmortem: Appy Entertainment's SpellCraft School of Magic [5]
spacer
Latest Blogs
spacer View All     Post     RSS spacer
 
February 10, 2012
 
Audio Passes: Success Through Layering
 
What the current RPG can learn from Diablo 1
 
Double Fine's Kickstarter Windfall: Will Patronage Supplant Traditional Game Publishing? [5]
 
The Principles of Game Monetization
 
Did DoubleFine Just break the publishing model for good? [14]
spacer
About
spacer Editor-In-Chief/News Director:
Kris Graft
Features Director:
Christian Nutt
Senior Contributing Editor:
Brandon Sheffield
News Editors:
Frank Cifaldi, Tom Curtis, Mike Rose, Eric Caoili, Kris Graft
Editors-At-Large:
Leigh Alexander, Chris Morris
Advertising:
Jennifer Sulik
Recruitment:
Gina Gross
 
Feature Submissions
 
Comment Guidelines
Sponsor
Features
  The Internet Sucks: Or, What I Learned Coding X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter
by Peter Lincroft [Game Design, Postmortem, Programming, GDC 2001]
Post A Comment Share on Twitter Share on Facebook RSS
 
 
September 3, 1999 Article Start Page 1 of 6 Next
 

Editor's note: This paper was originally published in the 1999 Game Developer's Conference proceedings.

When we started the X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter project, our goal was to create the first multi-player space combat simulator to be playable over the Internet. There were several major problems that we had to be overcome to accomplish this goal, not the least of which was the Internet itself. I will review the problems we faced, the approach we took, and the results we achieved. I hope the lessons I learned will prove to be valuable to those who read this paper.


The Problems We Knew About

X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter is the third game in the Star Wars space combat simulator series. The Internet was definitely not one of the things that we were thinking about when we created the engine for the original X-Wing game. This was the first problem we faced. Adding Internet capability to an existing engine is significantly more difficult when the engine was not designed with the Internet in mind.

Our second problem was the complexity of the game design. We had always felt that one of the strongest features of our engine was its ability to simulate fairly complex missions. We were proud to have fairly large numbers of craft in each mission, which had reasonably complex behaviors. Our goal in creating X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter was to create a multi-payer game that had this same level of complexity. We wanted to give gamers a multi-player experience that was more complex than "deathmatch." This requirement dramatically increases the amount of data that the players need to have in order to play the game.

X-Wind vs. TIE Fighter box Third on our list of problems was that we would not have a dedicated server available; we would have to use a peer-to-peer network model. The expense of providing servers with sufficient processing power and bandwidth for our expected audience size was considered unreasonably high. And because of the nature of the license we were working with, allowing gamers to set up their own servers was not a viable alternative. A peer-to-peer system avoids the problem, but it poses a significantly more challenging engineering problem, because each player must communicate with several other players, instead of with a single server. Because the Internet does not have a viable multi-casting capability, sending the same message to three destinations requires three times as much bandwidth as sending it to a single destination.

The fourth problem, of course, was the Internet itself. When we started the project we assumed that we would need to handle latency that varied from 200ms to a full second. We also knew that we would be limited to the bandwidth available from a 28K modem. These two constraints were our primary focus when we designed our network model, but they would turn out to be among the easiest problems to solve.

 
Article Start Page 1 of 6 Next
 
Comments


none
 
Comment:
 




UBM Techweb
Game Network
Game Developers Conference | GDC Europe | GDC Online | GDC China | Gamasutra | Game Developer Magazine | Game Advertising Online
Game Career Guide | Independent Games Festival | Indie Royale | IndieGames

Other UBM TechWeb Networks
Business Technology | Business Technology Events | Telecommunications & Communications Providers

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Contact Us | Copyright © UBM TechWeb, All Rights Reserved.