Reducing the negative effects of inconsistencies in networked games

ABSTRACT

Networking is a key component of digital games, with many featuring multiplayer modes and online components. The time required to transmit data over a network can lead to usability problems such as inconsistency between players' views of a virtual world, and race conditions when resolving players' actions. Implementing a good consistency maintenance scheme is therefore critical to gameplay. Sadly, problems with consistency remain a regular occurrence in multiplayer games, causing player game states to diverge. There is little guidance available on how these inconsistencies impact player experience, nor on how best to repair them when they arise. We investigate the effectiveness of different strategies for repairing inconsistencies, and show that the three most important factors affecting the detection of corrections are the player's locus of attention, the smoothness of the correction and the duration of the correction.

References

1. Aldridge, D. I shot you first! Gameplay networking in Halo: Reach. In Game Developers Conference (2011).
2. Battlefield 4. http://www.battlefield.com/battlefield-4.
3. Beigbeder, T., Coughlan, R., Lusher, C., Plunkett, J., Agu, E., and Claypool, M. The effects of loss and latency on user performance in Unreal Tournament 2003. In NetGames, ACM (2004), 144--151.
4. Bernier, Y. W. Latency compensating methods in client/server in-game protocol design and optimization. In GDC (2001).
5. Cai, W., Lee, F., and Chen, L. An auto-adaptive dead reckoning algorithm for distributed interactive simulation. In PADS '99, IEEE (1999), 82--89.
6. Chandler, A., and Finney, J. On the effects of loose causal consistency in mobile multiplayer games. In NetGames, ACM (2005), 1--11.
7. Dick, M., Wellnitz, O., and Wolf, L. Analysis of factors affecting players' performance and perception in multiplayer games. In NetGames, ACM (2005), 1--7.
8. Fiedler, G. Networked physics. gafferongame.com/game-physics/networked-physics, 2006.
9. Gescheider, G. A. Psychophysics: the fundamentals. Psychology Press, 2013.
10. Grad, K., Graham, T.C.N., and Stewart, J. Effective use of the periphery in game displays. In Future Play, ACM (2007), 69--76.
11. Harms, W. Review of Rainbow Six: Lockdown. http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/ rainbow-six-4-tentative-title/690399p2.html, 2006. Accessed: 1-Apr-2014.
12. IGN. http://ca.ign.com/articles/games/ battlefield-4/xbox-one-161397. Accessed: 9-Apr-2014.
13. Mauve, M., Vogel, J., Hilt, V., and Effelsberg, W. Local-lag and timewarp: Providing consistency in replicated continuous interactive media. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia 6, 1 (2004), 47--57.
14. ITU-T Recommendation P.800. Methods for Subjective Determination of Transmission Quality, 1996.
15. Murphy, C. Believable dead reckoning for networked games. In Game Engine Gems, Volume 2, E. Lengyel, Ed. CRC Press, 2011.
16. Pantel, L., and Wolf, L. C. On the suitability of dead reckoning schemes for games. In NetGames, ACM (2002), 79--84.
17. Pinelle, D., Wong, N., Stach, T., and Gutwin, C. Usability heuristics for networked multiplayer games. In GROUP'09, ACM (2009), 169--178.
18. Reddit. http://www.reddit.com/r/battlefield_4. Accessed: 9-Apr-2014.
19. Savery, C., Graham, T.C.N., Gutwin, C., and Brown, M. The effects of consistency maintenance methods on player experience and performance in networked games. In CSCW, ACM (2014), 1344--1355.
20. Smed, J., and Hakonen, H. Algorithms and Networking for Computer Games. Wiley, 2006. ISBN: 9780470018125.
21. Treisman, A. M., and Gelade, G. A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive psychology 12, 1 (1980), 97--136.
22. Wattimena, A., Kooij, R. E., Van Vugt, J., and Ahmed, O. Predicting the perceived quality of a first person shooter: the Quake IV G-model. In NetGames, ACM (2006), 42.
23. Zander, S., and Armitage, G. Empirically measuring the QoS sensitivity of interactive online game players. In Proc. ATNAC (2004), 511--518.

Index Terms

• Human-centered computing

  • Collaborative and social computing