[HN Gopher] Show HN: Hacker League - Open-Source Rocket League o...
___________________________________________________________________
Show HN: Hacker League - Open-Source Rocket League on Linux
Author : molli
Score : 167 points
Date : 2024-09-05 13:24 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| indigodaddy wrote:
| Not that similar except for the retro graphical style, but I
| immediately thought of bzflag after I clicked the video
| squarefoot wrote:
| Same here, maps like bzmatchball or passtheflag came to mind.
| Whoever makes a more modern, still free, simple and equally
| fun, version of bzflag will probably win a good number of
| players among people from under 20 to over 50. Not that bz
| isn't fun as it is today, but I miss the much bigger community
| it had many years ago.
| molli wrote:
| But I don't use textures :P
| tomtom1337 wrote:
| Oh my god! Thank you for reminding me of bzflag! Those are
| great memories!
| klaussilveira wrote:
| Curious: why Eigen for math? Isn't it oriented towards academic
| purposes? Wouldn't something like Terathon be faster?
|
| https://github.com/EricLengyel/Terathon-Math-Library
| shortrounddev2 wrote:
| I see glm more commonly
| molli wrote:
| Because I use it only for the physics. For Vulkan I used glm.
| Ideally, we should only use one library.
| LorenDB wrote:
| SuperTuxKart also has a soccer mode available.
| marcodiego wrote:
| And it is very funny. I used to play it sometimes and then I
| told a friend about it, he then introduced me to rocket league
| which I didn't knew at the time.
| Toorkit wrote:
| Sick, when is HLCS?
| molli wrote:
| :D
| nazgulsenpai wrote:
| Looks just like Rocket League! Seriously though, this is awesome
| and the single source file makes it much easier to poke around
| the source without cloning. Thanks for sharing!
| molli wrote:
| You're welcome. The binary is only ~100kb and no game engine
| etc. is used.
| polyvisual wrote:
| I've been playing different styles and genres of video games ever
| since Wolfenstein 3D and I consider myself pretty adept at
| playing them.
|
| However, Rocket League is one game that I just can't master. I've
| tried, really really tried, but I just can't play it with any
| amount of skill.
|
| It's a shame, as it looks really fun and I hear my son and his
| mates having a ball when they play.
| richrichardsson wrote:
| I basically suck at Rocket League (can't get beyond Plat.III in
| any mode), but I still enjoy playing it daily.
|
| Turn off _ALL_ chat except tactical team quick chats, otherwise
| it 's a toxic quagmire.
| amenhotep wrote:
| What a save! What a save! What a save! What a save!
| bigstrat2003 wrote:
| Calculated.
| vonunov wrote:
| Centering! Take the shot! Take the shot! Take the shot!
| Wow! Wow! Nice shot! Thanks! vote to
| forfeit 1/2
| harryvederci wrote:
| Thanks! Thanks! Thanks! Thanks! Thanks!
|
| This is rocket league!
| mh- wrote:
| It's very weird seeing RL discussed on HN - worlds are
| colliding! But, yes, this is good advice. Also consider
| playing 1v1. I'm Diamond I-II there. It's a lot of fun, and
| probably the only mode where turning off the chat doesn't put
| you at a disadvantage.
| splwjs wrote:
| I think online matchmaking has absolutely destroyed people's
| ability to feel like they're good at any game.
|
| Like you'll never be a big fish in a small pond. If you
| played as much as you currently do but could only play with
| people local to you, you'd be the best person you know at
| this thing. And that's a really good feeling. But you'll
| never get that feeling, because you should really be grinding
| past whatever plat 3 is in order to not suck.
| ThatPlayer wrote:
| Conversely you'll never be a small fish in a big pond. If
| you could only play with people local to you and they all
| played much more than you, you'd be the worse person you
| know at this thing. And that's a really bad feeling. That
| gets people to quit games.
|
| The big fish eat all the small fish until the big fish are
| the only ones left.
| aliasxneo wrote:
| I'm decent at Rocket League and sit between Plat III and
| Diamond I. It seems our metrics are slightly different :)
| I've found these ranks are the natural breaking point between
| what I could classify as "sweaty" players and "casuals." I've
| never been interested in going much further.
| bil7 wrote:
| plat 3 is really not that bad - how many hours have you
| played the game for?
| Retr0id wrote:
| > can't get beyond Plat.III
|
| I have a triple-digit-hour play time and I could barely get
| out of Bronze. I can't really explain why, but my brain just
| doesn't mesh with it, skill-wise. It's still a lot of fun
| though (otherwise I wouldn't have spent so long playing it!).
| In fact, being so bad at it somehow made it more enjoyable -
| it's not often I allow myself to be bad at something.
|
| I'd rank myself as "unusually good" at Mario Kart, which is
| obviously a very different game, but it surprises me that I
| have such a wide skill gap between the two games.
| walr000s wrote:
| I heard Comm, a pro, once say that he wished he had his 14 year
| old fingers back...think he was 17 at a time. To me, a 40 year
| old playing with KBM, I feel like I just can't bend my brain
| around all of the 3d possibilities. I just don't have any
| intuition for rolling my car while it accelerates towards the
| front...and then you add in the complexity of the camera and,
| yeah, I suck.
| mh- wrote:
| I've only just started trying to do aerials, really, and I
| find myself getting vertigo from it haha. I'm also 40. It's
| so disorienting. None of the camera settings feel "right".
| vonunov wrote:
| It takes some playing around with and is highly subjective.
| Best method I found was to just try camera configs used by
| pros or recommended by others and see what feels good. My
| current: Shake: off FOV: 110
| Distance: 280 Height: 110 Angle: -3.00
| Stiffness: 0.75
|
| The rest aren't relevant for me because swivel speed is
| about looking with the right stick and transition speed is
| about switching to/from ball cam, and I leave ball cam on.
|
| Of these, I believe the most important (by which I mean
| tangibly relevant to control quality/feel) are distance,
| stiffness, and, to some degree, height+angle. Shake and FOV
| are also important, but those are the only good values for
| those settings.
|
| I used to play with max distance because it felt better for
| visibility, but I found some people saying 270/280 works
| much better for them for precise ball control and accurate
| strikes, and that does seem to be the case. Stiffness is
| the other setting that will make the most difference in
| feel: Lower values let the camera's distance from your car
| rubber-band further in relation to your speed. It might
| seem as if maxing this out would be ideal, because why
| wouldn't you want the camera to follow your movement as
| closely as possible, and why would you want the camera to
| lag behind you when you go faster and disorient you when
| you're trying to aerial? But I'm not so sure. I've tried
| stiffness at 1 (max) and I don't remember why, but
| apparently it didn't work for me, because I lowered it to
| 0.75, which I guess I found acceptable enough not to have
| changed it. I've just come across some people saying a
| stiffness of around 0.35 is counterintuitively great as it
| turns out that moving the car without instantly moving the
| camera helps a lot with car control for some reason, so I'm
| about to test run that value myself and see about it.
| walr000s wrote:
| I highly recommend turning ball cam off once you get close
| to the ball.
| vonunov wrote:
| Part of the problem is rolling vs. yawing. Most players have
| something along the lines of LB mapped to powerslide + air
| roll. So when flying, they have to think (actively or
| otherwise) about when to roll vs. when to release LB so that
| the left stick X axis will yaw instead. This is, in my
| experience, very difficult to actually do.
|
| There's a control config I tried and greatly enjoyed that
| addresses this. I want to get back into it but I haven't yet
| felt like dealing with the adjustment period again. This
| works best if you have a controller with mappable paddles.
| Left stick X: Ground steer and air steer (yaw) Left
| stick Y: Pitch Right stick X: Air roll Right
| stick Y: Ground throttle
|
| And then jump/boost/powerslide go on triggers/bumpers/paddles
| as desired.
|
| Being able to simultaneously yaw and roll feels quite nice
| once you get used to it and allows for some surprisingly
| intuitive recoveries, wall jumps, etc. "Tornado spinning" is
| now as simple as pushing the sticks in opposite directions.
| Other interesting results can be had from the various other
| combinations of stick directions.
|
| This does require you to no longer use the button pad for
| anything, so if you use ballcam toggle while playing, or need
| to peek at the scoreboard a lot, or need a thumb free for
| real-time quickchats, or whatever, then I hope you have a lot
| of extra paddles
| walr000s wrote:
| Another reason to envy controller players. I just can't get
| used to it.
| molli wrote:
| Maybe you will be good at Hacker League:)
| ProteanLabsJohn wrote:
| Do a flip reset :)
| deberon wrote:
| I just ran a test and I was able to do just as many flip resets
| in Hacker League as I was in Rocket League.
| JasonSage wrote:
| I seriously, seriously think that in the future (possibly far
| future) various eSports will all be derived from a few open-
| source base games.
|
| The ability of game developers to leverage licensing, contracts
| with orgs, etc. to lock down a competitive ecosystem with
| exclusivity results in inability for a "free market" to develop
| around running events and broadcasts. Rocket League and League of
| Legends come to mind here, where the competitive scene is almost
| exclusively eSports content produced by the developer itself and
| doing all sorts of tricks to establish lock-in.
|
| If we look at how traditional sports work, it's much more
| organic. Leagues have the ability to negotiate their own game
| rules, TV rights, oversight, and more. Leagues compete with each
| other for viewership, because viewers naturally want to watch the
| best games (or their local games) and viewership drives revenue
| via sponsorships and TV licensing. Game developer lock-in
| prevents this economy from developing, prevents the competitive
| nature of leagues from working on improving the game from a
| viewership perspective, and the closed-source nature of the game
| prevents the game from being able to "move on" from bad rules,
| bad communities, bad design, etc.
|
| Many (most? all?) of these online competitive games have toxic
| online communities and in-game interactions. The game developers
| don't have the money to develop exhaustive anti-abuse mechanisms,
| or to pay a large support staff to sift through reports, so lots
| of times the best you get is a simple heuristic. And these
| companies are not financially incentivized to ban bad actors. In
| fact, they're incentivized to ban _as few as possible_ without
| damaging the player base. Players will quit over toxic
| interactions and cheaters, but cheaters and toxic players can
| also be the most reliable spenders in a game, so there's to
| reason to ban any more of them than absolutely necessary.
|
| But with an open-source game, communities can self-organize and
| self-moderate. If I play on a local soccer team and they're all
| racist or homophobic, I'll find a new team or a new league. But
| at present there's no "find a new Rocket League".
|
| So I think open-source games will have a big impact on the
| competitive online game industry. I think the resulting ecosystem
| has a lot more sustainability and player stickiness than current
| games do in light of the aforementioned toxicity and anti-
| competitive patterns, so there is much more money to be made than
| game developers are making currently.
| shard972 wrote:
| when esports mostly exists as a loss leader to sell video games
| I don't quite see this vision anytime soon.
| mh- wrote:
| I get your point, but I'm not sure _loss leader_ is quite the
| way to describe it. I think of it as a marketing /promo
| expense like any other. Are user conferences loss leaders?
|
| Also, RL is free-to-play nowadays. They're banking on in-app
| purchases, not sales of video games.
| tylerflick wrote:
| > The game developers don't have the money to develop
| exhaustive anti-abuse mechanisms, or to pay a large support
| staff to sift through reports, so lots of times the best you
| get is a simple heuristic. And these companies are not
| financially incentivized to ban bad actors. In fact, they're
| incentivized to ban _as few as possible_ without damaging the
| player base.
|
| I can promise you this is not true. Major publishers absolutely
| try to curb toxic behavior and are heavily invested in doing
| so.
| JasonSage wrote:
| I'm interested in learning more about this. Obviously this is
| something I care about and want to be well-read in when
| presenting a case. I do know in League of Legends that
| there's a lot more care and attention put into it, and
| frankly I suspect that it's because they have the money to do
| so and because they care deeply about the game still being
| relevant in 1 & 2 decades from now. The same can be said of
| Fortnite, possibly because of their closer integration with
| app stores as well and the sensitivity of having a younger
| audience.
|
| Anecdotally, I think it can't be said of Rocket League at
| all. It seems strongly to be profit-driven and moderation-
| light, and I think most games that size and smaller are
| operating the same way.
|
| I'd love to hear where/why I'm wrong and what public
| information there is on the subject.
| SkiFire13 wrote:
| Rocket League has been declining since Epic Games bought
| them.
| fwip wrote:
| I don't think "open-source" means much of anything here. You
| can freely copy game design and make your own knockoffs. That's
| why half of the video gaming market is Doom-derived.
|
| Anybody can make a football league, and anyone can make a MOBA.
| But to make the next League of Legends or the NFL, you need a
| ton of marketing money, and you need to pay to attract the top
| player talent. The actual money you pay the developers is not
| the lion's share of the spend. By the reports I can find,
| Overwatch cost about $50M to make, but they spent over $900M on
| advertising/marketing/tournaments/etc.
| JasonSage wrote:
| Open source means everything here.
|
| Let's say that you want to be a tournament organizer and do
| tournament streams of an esport. You are going to use
| sponsorships and ad revenue to drive your profit, and you
| have a sponsor providing the prize pool.
|
| You won't be able to feature current league teams that are
| contractually obligated to participate in developer-endorsed
| events only, because the developer has all the leverage in
| being able to provide a larger prize pool for their official
| championship league (that is marketing budget for their game,
| funded by the game itself), so esports organizations are
| going to be locked-in to that contract.
|
| The barrier to entry for you as an organizer is now to either
| pay a licensing fee to the developer for the privilege of
| being endorsed and allowing their contracted organizations to
| participate, which has a huge impact on your profitability...
| or to make your own fucking video game.
|
| The open source aspect gives you:
|
| - an existing player base
|
| - ability to provide your own game rules
|
| - ability to use exclusive visuals/assets
|
| - ability to avoid licensing fees destroying your
| profitability
|
| And if your organization goes under, the game lives on. If
| another organization goes under, you have opportunities to
| capture more of your market. You have the ability to improve
| your viewership by funding improvement of the game.
|
| And, by the way, if you suck, somebody who can do it better
| will come along and take your money, which is actually good
| for the viewer and the player, which is much better than the
| way current games/leagues deteriorate.
| busterarm wrote:
| Hard disagree. With the exception of 1v1 fighting games,
| centralized/official servers are _required_ for esports to even
| work. Peer-to-peer communication models and self-hosted client-
| server games both are filled with cheaters. How would players
| ever feel comfortable competing on community/self-hosted
| server?
|
| "Esports" games require absolutely massive communities (e.g.,
| marketing) and no open-source game has even come close to the
| scale required to sustain an esport.
| JasonSage wrote:
| I think you're conflating unrelated things
|
| Servers can be community-run and centralized per
| league/community. See TF2 (more decentralized) and FaceIt
| (Counter-Strike) for examples of self-moderating communities
| than can exist outside of the developer-centralized model.
|
| At no point do I assume P2P to be a requirement or even
| beneficial in this scenario.
| busterarm wrote:
| TF2 is overrun with bots right now to the point that the
| game is unplayable and the surviving community has been
| screaming at Valve about this for years.
|
| As for FaceIt, that came about from the existing CS
| community. After 15+ years of the game being out. You can't
| just build something like that in a vacuum.
|
| The whole point is that "esports" depends on centralized
| servers and somebody footing the bill for that. Even in
| fighting games that are P2P, there's still the matchmaking
| lobbies.
|
| And you could say "well, there's FightCade!"...but a)
| that's illegal and b) I've never seen more than 150 people
| in a FightCade lobby and it's usually around 10-30. Esports
| games have > 10^4 concurrent players.
| JasonSage wrote:
| I'm optimistic that as the opportunities come along,
| players will take them.
|
| Your argument sounds to me analogous to "everybody will
| just use Twitter/X because why would somebody want to pay
| to host a Mastodon instance with no participants."
|
| The reality is that some (but not all) people do
| genuinely have grief with the centralized platform
| (moderation, censorship, toxicity), do have the ability
| to pay for something better (or freeload off people who
| do care), and are thus willing to make a change with
| there's sufficiently low resistance.
|
| The reason this is possible at all is because people that
| did care in a very small minority made the decentralized
| platform for free while everybody else was oblivious. It
| doesn't get built overnight and usage doesn't convert
| overnight, but when the solution exists it can then be
| viable.
|
| I do think open source games are a fair ways off, but I
| find it impossible to believe that people will work for
| decades for free on open source social media because they
| enjoy it, but the same will never be true of games.
|
| It's an eventuality, and it is one that changes dynamics
| for the end-consumer.
| JasonSage wrote:
| > TF2 is overrun with bots right now to the point that
| the game is unplayable and the surviving community has
| been screaming at Valve about this for years.
|
| Perfect example. With the existence of a sufficiently-
| close open-source base, the community would have self-
| organized TF2 out of existence with a functional
| replacement. This just isn't possible today, but when it
| is possible there will be no turning back.
| molli wrote:
| When a game is not popular anymore some developers just turn
| off their servers destroying the multiplayer. That won't
| happen with decentralized open source servers.
| lupusreal wrote:
| > _" Esports" games require absolutely massive communities
| (e.g., marketing) and no open-source game has even come close
| to the scale required to sustain an esport._
|
| If by "sustain an esport" you mean as a profitable
| enterprise, then probably not. Is that the best metric
| though? Open source games can become popular enough for
| competitive scenes to emerge; Warsow is an example of this.
|
| Popular enough for competitive play but not enough to get
| corporate sponsors seems fine to me. It's probably not
| healthy to be promoting the idea (to kids particularly) that
| playing video games can be a profitable career.
| busterarm wrote:
| No I mean "sustain an esport" the same as I would mean
| "sustain a sport".
|
| For it to be an actual contest it needs an actual sample
| size of players. Sports need spectators and narratives that
| generate interest.
|
| Nobody gives a damn about Warsow the same way nobody gave a
| damn about Ferret-Legging.
|
| It's not a sport if its players are limited to "you and
| your mates from round the way", that's just a game. Sports
| are meant to expose the limits of human potential.
| lupusreal wrote:
| Warsow's popularity fell off but it was there for a
| while. You can't reasonably expect every game to stay
| popular forever, not be the most popular around. It's not
| like every ball sport other than football/soccer is a
| failure just because "nobody cares about it" relative to
| that.
| eikenberry wrote:
| Cheating is a community problem, not a technical issue.
| Esports would have organizations managing things requiring
| players to sign up and be vetted. The community/organization
| would handle cheating.
| bogwog wrote:
| Alternatively, the "sport" in esports is the genre (FPS, Moba,
| Fighting, etc), and the "leagues" are the individual games.
| Yes, the specific rules and mechanics of each game are vastly
| different even within the same genre, and strategies will be
| different, but skills like leadership, reaction time, hand-eye-
| coordination, etc will be used similarly across all games. Even
| with an open source game, it's likely each league will want to
| make changes to the base game anyways.
|
| Maybe an open source game could work for smaller "leagues" that
| don't have the resources to develop an entire game from scratch
| (and assuming there's even a demand for a small league like
| that), but even then forking/building atop an open source game
| is still a lot more work than just using an existing commercial
| game that has more flexible multiplayer options (and so long as
| there aren't licensing issues)
| molli wrote:
| Some very interesting thoughts here. Imo open source software
| is mostly higher quality than proprietary one.
|
| And apparently the industry is not so interested in Linux.
| Proton from Valve is interesting but crashes on my machine all
| the time. So I guess we have to build ourselves and have some
| fun in the process.
| ThatPlayer wrote:
| > The game developers don't have the money to develop
| exhaustive anti-abuse mechanisms, or to pay a large support
| staff to sift through reports, so lots of times the best you
| get is a simple heuristic.
|
| And neither do open-source projects. The majority of people
| looking to play video games do not want to be the ones
| moderating. They'll take the path of least resistance and let
| companies do it for them.
|
| > If I play on a local soccer team and they're all racist or
| homophobic, I'll find a new team or a new league. But at
| present there's no "find a new Rocket League".
|
| You don't need to find a new game though, you can find a new
| league. Except for maybe battle royale games, most games still
| allow private matches. Make a private match and invite the
| people you want to play with. Organize a league yourself. It'll
| be easier than building your own game, and you'll run into the
| same problems with an open-source game: how do you convince
| people to play your league rather than the official easy
| matchmaking? Rather than the official huge playerbase game?
| JasonSage wrote:
| For certain there will be de facto community centers in open
| source games, but the fact that a group _can_ self-organize,
| self-fund, and self-moderate means that communities _will_.
|
| Mastodon is I think a good example of this in social media.
|
| A game example is Team Fortress 2, where community-run
| servers coexist with matchmaking servers. Some of these are
| buy-in communities, some of them are freemium ad-ridden
| servers, some are just small friend groups. And they can pose
| an alternative to official matchmaking on merit and exist
| just fine. Oh, and they can remove cheaters and bots
| themselves.
|
| This is a good example to your last point: when the de-facto
| league has cheaters, bots, or lack of moderation, people will
| flock to alternatives en masse, but the alternative has to
| exist for it to work. This isn't a "problem" with the open-
| source game, it's the main feature. It's the bridged gap
| between "building your own game" and "the official huge
| playerbase game" -- they're almost the same out-of-the-box,
| so neither the building nor convincing is insurmountable,
| they're surface-level.
| BimJeam wrote:
| Very very cool. Let's make a real game out of it. No steam no
| gigabyte large assets. Just that cool game. Maybe use some ai to
| generate some assets with stability ai / stable diffusion an
| let's get a lot of people on board. That could be a fantastic
| project.
| molli wrote:
| Yup, let's do it! The binary is ~100kb :D Join the Discord
| server that I posted here!
| a1o wrote:
| I am amazed at how small the code is once you strip all the
| vulkan
| molli wrote:
| Yup, it's tiny (~100kb)
| _fat_santa wrote:
| Though I don't play much anymore, I absolutely adore Rocket
| League. To me it's one of the few truly novel games out there.
| molli wrote:
| I've created a Discord server for Hacker League:
| https://discord.gg/BbNH27st. Everyone is welcome!
|
| I'll also keep building in public on X:
| https://x.com/moritzthuening.
|
| I love you all.
| karaterobot wrote:
| I played so much Rocket League before it went free-to-play.
| Seeing this repo made me watch some youtube videos, and remember
| what a great game it is. It's been tweaked and polished until it
| feels perfect. I think getting an open source version of the game
| to that level would require a lot of work, so I wish you well.
| molli wrote:
| Thanks! I'll keep it way simpler than RL - especially the
| graphics as you can see. But we can make the physics and
| multiplayer great, since we build everything from scratch.
| JohnMakin wrote:
| It's a great game - unfortunately the insane and obnoxious way
| they do ranked ladder means the experience is often miserable
| if you want to play competitively.
| samtheprogram wrote:
| > way they do ranked ladder
|
| Could you elaborate? I play the game, but I don't play much
| of anything else with ranks so I'm curious what ladder means
| here and the alternative examples.
| JohnMakin wrote:
| I could write an essay on this (played since 2015) so I'm
| sorry if this is overly wordy and I hope it makes sense.
|
| A long time ago they had a pretty basic MMR/matchmaking
| system that was being gamed pretty badly by smurfs. So, in
| an attempt to deal with smurfs, Epic made a really opaque
| blackbox "internal" MMR, that determines what kind of
| teammates you get. The reason this exists is because
| everyone tends to get lumped into "chokepoint" ranks -
| Diamond 3/low champ, C3/GC, and from there I think there's
| another one closer to SSL but I've only been a GC1 before
| so I can't comment on that experience. The reason for this
| is you can have a 60+% winrate in diamond and never leave
| diamond. That results in tons of players being in a rank
| they clearly do not belong in - very ironically creating an
| unintentional smurf problem they were trying to addresss in
| the first place - and this is exacerbated by a draconian
| rank decay/reset every season which only lasts a quarter.
| So, it's not entirely uncommon to see players with a GC
| tournament tag from the previous season (means they won a
| GC tournament, which means they almost certainly are SSL
| players) in low champ or even diamond. This is made even
| WORSE by the way that placement games work every season -
| pros have worked out it's almost always better to just sit
| out the first few weeks of a season before doing your
| placements, because you may accidentally get a really high
| "internal" mmr (the only purpose of these placements) by
| beating other smurfs in a low rank ladder.
|
| As a result, epic has tried to balance this idiotic mess by
| pairing these types of players with lower "true" ranks. So,
| often when I am in high diamond/low champ I will have a
| literal carried platinum player with me every single time
| against another team with a guy who also has a higher
| "true" MMR and whatever "low" MMR player the matchmaking
| has decided he also gets paired with. I solo queue though,
| so this effect is basically a miserable experience trying
| to climb, as it's _much_ more difficult for me to climb out
| of a low rank than other players closer to their "true"
| rank. And I have to repeat this process _every 12 fucking
| weeks._
|
| when I play casual, within 10 games the matchmaking
| immediately puts me in high champ lobbies. So, they know
| how to match make fairly, clearly - there's simply no
| mechanism in ranked to quickly rank someone up who very
| obviously should not be in the rank. It should not be
| possible to win 15 games in a row and stay in the same rank
| - every other game addresses this by quickly ranking up
| people on win streaks. For whatever reason, epic does not,
| and for this reason and all of what I listed above, the
| experience is absolutely miserable.
| batch12 wrote:
| If it helps anyone else- The term 'smurf' is used in
| gaming to describe a player in an online game that
| creates a new account to play against lower-ranked
| players, however, it can be used as an all-around term
| for describing a player who uses an alternate account or
| multiple accounts.
|
| Matchmaking Rating (MMR)
| JohnMakin wrote:
| yea, sorry, these are common terms in that community I
| didn't explain, thank you. When I'm using it here it
| mostly means "someone who is intentionally playing in a
| rank they don't belong in"
| stackghost wrote:
| Pretty sure that "Smurf" originated with the Tribes
| series, as you could create alias nicknames/accounts that
| showed up as blue in the player list.
|
| Or at least, that's the first time I encountered the
| term.
| Cpoll wrote:
| The etymology I've heard is that it comes from Warcraft
| 2, where some top players made Smurf-themed alt-accounts
| after everyone started dodging them. That may be
| apocryphal.
| thoughtpalette wrote:
| I remember a guy on Tribes literally named Smurf IIRC.
| +]-[+ SmuRF or something.
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| Very well said, it's so frustrating.
|
| One thing that has always bugged me, and that I've never
| seen discussed, is that when I play solo they'll pair me
| up with two other solo players and then match us up
| against a 3 player clan!
|
| Even if we all have the same rank, they're not at all
| considering the advantage of 3 players who play well as a
| team, and in the clan case... probably practice and play
| together a lot. Especially at the lower ranks, but
| sometimes in the mid-high ranks, a well organized team
| can demolish a random group of slightly higher ranked
| players who haven't established a playbook.
|
| At times when the servers are saturated with players, I
| think they should only match parties with other parties
| of the same size. For example, parties of two would only
| be matched against other parties of two and then each
| party would get solo player(s) to reach the team size of
| a given match. Parties of three would only play against
| other parties of three, etc. I understand there are times
| of low liquidity and such matchmaking would be
| impossible, and that's fine... I'd rather play than not,
| but when liquidity is high then I'd rather wait an extra
| 15-30 seconds for teams and parties to be more balanced.
|
| What do you think about party size aware match making?
| JohnMakin wrote:
| > What do you think about party size aware match making?
|
| I'm heavily in favor of what you said, and yea, back in
| the day when psyonix owned it there was a mode called
| "solo standard" which was 3v3 but you couldn't join with
| a team. It was awesome, people who did well in that mode
| tended to be extremely good teammates - you kinda had to
| to succeed. As a result it was usually much less toxic.
| Epic killed that mode almost immediately and it made me
| super upset.
| JohnMakin wrote:
| > when I play casual, within 10 games the matchmaking
| immediately puts me in high champ lobbies. So, they know
| how to match make fairly, clearly - there's simply no
| mechanism in ranked to quickly rank someone up who very
| obviously should not be in the rank. It should not be
| possible to win 15 games in a row and stay in the same
| rank - every other game addresses this by quickly ranking
| up people on win streaks. For whatever reason, epic does
| not, and for this reason and all of what I listed above,
| the experience is absolutely miserable.
|
| Adding to this note, the blizzard card game Hearthstone
| has had the same notorious problem for as long as I've
| known (havent played in a few years no idea if it
| changed, I doubt it). They started to mess around with
| bonus mechanisms for win streaks, but largely before
| legend ranks (which worked with a much more sane ranking
| system) you would never be put in a higher rank if you
| went 50-0 vs going 200-150 - the game viewed that as
| exactly the same. The result was the same as with rocket
| league - huge rank choke points in which people were
| stuck for weeks playing players far above their own rank.
| Frustrating for both sides, and the only reasoning I can
| put behind it is they want you to spend more time
| grinding, and that's the only way they can think to do
| it.
| extraduder_ire wrote:
| I like the name carball for this genre of game. Good choice.
| molli wrote:
| Thanks!
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| Soccar
| Cieric wrote:
| I find projects like this really fun, but when it comes to being
| a game I am seeing a lot of problems.
|
| - renderer and physics aren't synced in any way, physics
| shouldn't be tied to frame rate, but running as 2 separate
| threads with no synchronization means you might read garbage at
| some points if you render while the physics thread is updating.
|
| - physics using this_thread::sleep_for is not accurate and can
| sleep for longer than the specified time, assuming the period to
| be 1/60 isn't correct. The delta time needs to be measured.
|
| - using VK_PRESENT_MODE_FIFO_KHR or VK_PRESENT_MODE_MAILBOX_KHR
| force vsync, but vsync can be anything. With the physics system
| being locked to 60, you'll notice a stutter on non-mulitiple
| vsyncs like 144hz. There aren't many solutions I know for this,
| but the main ones I know of are interpolation and extrapolation
| of the physics state based on the framerate. I would bump the
| physics update rate to 120hz to match rocket league and then
| experiment from there.
|
| - Using both Eigen and GLM is overkill in this case, both are
| slow, but if sticking with one I would use switch solely glm.
|
| - More of a nitpick, but I would separate out all the code at
| least between rendering and physics to their own independent
| files. The vulkan api on it's own adds a lot of clutter, moving
| that to it's own file should make the project easier to navigate
| and explorer.
|
| There are more things, like how hard coded that shaders are, but
| I assume the vulkan renderer will be improved past just being
| from the vulkan-tutorial, so advice for that can't really be
| given till the renderer has been updated.
|
| P.S. Sorry if any of this sounds harsh, it's not my intention.
| I've just done a lot of work involving games, game engines and
| renderers. And I'm seeing a lot of the problems I made when I
| first started. I wish you the best of luck with your project.
| molli wrote:
| Thanks a lot for the feedback! I built it in ~2 weeks and it's
| really just a prototype at this stage. Some of the points I did
| on purpose to finish a prototype quickly (Eigen + GLM, one
| file, not syncing renderer and physics, hardcoding shaders
| etc.). But some things I didn't know - thanks for that :)
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-09-05 23:01 UTC)