Using OpenGL for a network based game, I would like to make the Display.sync class start at a specific time. For instance, if the game is started at 5:30 PM at 49.5635 seconds, I would like the program to wait until it is 5:30 at 50 seconds until starting the update loop. This way I can send a ping every second on the second. Is this possible? if so how?
You question is quite vague - but, to answer generally: trying to synchronize games based on wall-clock time is not possible in practice (see a relevant discussion of approximation techniques in this question -https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/32118/how-to-synchronize-clocks-in-multiplayer-game).
Related
I am trying to have a 24 hour countdown on my user interface in a QML/Qt project. The time should update every second like 23:59:59 then 23:59:58. Additionally, I need the time to continue going down even when the application is not open. So if the time is 23:59:59 when I close the app, if I open it two hours later it should continue counting down from 21:59:59. If the timer had timed out when the app isn't running, it needs to reset to 24 and continue. Does anyone know how I could do this, either QML or connected c++? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
You need to store somewhere timer's end time according to system clock or equivalent information. So at each moment you can tell timer's value by taking difference between system clock's now() and timer's end.
Just use std::this_thread::sleep_until to wait to the exact moment you need to update the time for the next second. Don't use sleep_for(1s) as this way you'll accumulate inaccuracies.
Note: system clock has an issue that it can be adjusted. I don't fully know of a way around it - say your application turned off then how to tell how much time passed if system clock was adjusted? You can deal with clock adjustment during application run by using sleep_until with steady_clock. In C++ 20 they introduce utc_clock perhaps you can access that somehow which should solve the issue with daylight saving time adjustments. I don't think that it is theoretical possible to deal with all types of clock adjustments unless you have access to GPS clock.
I have written a simulation module. For measuring latency, I am using this:
simTime().dbl() - tempLinkLayerFrame->getCreationTime().dbl();
Is this the proper way ? If not then please suggest me or a sample code would be very helpful.
Also, is the simTime() latency is the actual latency in terms of micro
seconds which I can write in my research paper? or do I need to
scale it up?
Also, I found that the channel data rate and channel delay has no impact on the link latency instead if I vary the trigger duration the latency varies. For example
timer = new cMessage("SelfTimer");
scheduleAt(simTime() + 0.000000000249, timer);
If this is not the proper way to trigger simple module recursively then please suggest one.
Assuming both simTime and getCreationTime use the OMNeT++ class for representing time, you can operate on them directly, because that class overloads the relevant operators. Going with what the manual says, I'd recommend using a signal for the measurements (e.g., emit(latencySignal, simTime() - tempLinkLayerFrame->getCreationTime());).
simTime() is in seconds, not microseconds.
Regarding your last question, this code will have problems if you use it for all nodes, and you start all those nodes at the same time in the simulation. In that case you'll have perfect synchronization of all nodes, meaning you'll only see collisions in the first transmission. Therefore, it's probably a good idea to add a random jitter to every newly scheduled message at the start of your simulation.
So I'm pretty new with programming from scratch, have mainly used unity for a few years up untill now so my general programming knowledge is pretty good. Started studying game development at a university after summer though where we began programming from scratch and as a task we have to make a simple game in a 2D engine we made together in class.
So the game I decided to make was a copy of bomberman and I've gotten as far as where I'm now making the bombs functional.
The problem I'm having is that I don't know how to propperly add in a timer that counts down the time to where the bomb exlpode so the player can avoid it.
I've tried SDL_Delay and _sleep which both just pause the entire program so that doesn't work and I've searched around for more options but not really understood how things work. If I could get some expamples and links to pages that explains how to properly make something like this work (something easy and small hopfully :P) then that would be highly appreciated!
Note that we are using SDL in the engine.
Thanks!
Typically, a game uses a loop, in which you read user input (you are probably using SDL_PollEvent for that), advance the game state for a short time period and draw the screen. This loop is typically called the game loop, render loop or main loop.
A simple, accurate and typical way to delay an event (such as a timed explosion), is to store the future time into a queue. Then, each time the game state advances, check the first and therefore the oldest timestamp in the queue and if the current time is higher than the stored one, then we know that the the thing should now happen and you can call the function that executes the event without delay. Then remove the timestamp from the queue and check the next one until only future events remain or the queue is empty.
If the event delay can vary, then you'll need to use a priority queue to always get the event that should fire next.
skypjack points out in the comments that this is a problematic approach if you need to implement pausing the game. That can be solved by not measuring wall clock, but instead use a separate simulation time that drifts from the wall clock when the game is paused. They also propose a simpler solution:
store a timeToEvent (to be elapsed) and decrement it, so that you detach the game time from the real one. Once it's <= 0, it's its time.
That approach is simpler, but has more overhead for checking the expiration of deadlines.
How exactly are you meant to implement an IReferenceClock that can be set via IMediaFilter::SetSyncSource?
I have a system that implements GetTime and AdviseTime, UnadviseTime. When a stream starts playing it sets a base time via AdviseTime and then increases Stream Time for each subsequent advise.
However how am I supposed to know when a new graph has run? I need to set a zero point for a given reference clock. Otherwise if I create a reference clock and then, 10 seconds later, I start the graph I am now in the position that I don't know whether I should be 10 seconds down the playback or whether I should be starting from 0. Obviously the base time will say that I am starting from 0 but have I just stalled for 10 seconds and do I need to drop a bunch of frames?
I really can't seem to figure out how to write a proper IReferenceClock so any hints or ideas would be hugely appreciated.
Edit: One example of a problem I am having is that I have 2 graphs and 2 videos. The audio from both videos is going to a null renderer. The Video to a standard CLSID_VideoRenderer. Now If i set the same reference clock to both and then Run graph 1 all seems to be fine. However if 10 seconds down the line I run graph 2 then it will run as though the SetSyncSource is NULL for the first 10 seconds or so until it has caught up with the other video.
Obviously if the graphs called GetTime to get their "base time" this would solve the problem but this is not what I'm seeing happening. Both videos end up with a base time of 0 because thats the point I run them from.
Its worth noting that if I set no clock at all (or call SetDefaultSyncSource) then both graphs run as fast as they can. I assume this is due to the lack of an Audio Renderer ...
However how am I supposed to know when a new graph has run?
The clock runs on its own, it is the graph that aligns its operation against the clock and not otherwise. The graph receives outer Run call, then it checks current clock time and assigns base time, which is distributed among filters, as "current clock time + some time for the things to take off". The clock itself doesn't have to have a faintest idea about all this and its task is to keep running and keep incrementing time.
In particular, clock time does not have to reset to zero at any time.
From documentation:
The clock's baseline—the time from which it starts counting—depends on the implementation, so the value returned by GetTime is not inherently meaningful. What matters is the delta from when the graph started running.
When an application calls IMediaControl::Run to run the filter graph, the Filter Graph Manager calls IMediaFilter::Run on each filter. To compensate for the slight amount of time it takes for the filters to start running, the Filter Graph Manager specifies a start time slightly in the future.
BaseClasses offer CBaseReferenceClock class, which you can use as reference implementation (in refclock.*).
Comment to your edit:
You obviously not describing the case in full and you are omitting important details. There is a simple test: you can instantiate standard clock (CLSID_SystemClock) and use it on two regular graphs - they WILL run fine, even with time-separated Run times.
I suspect that you are doing some sync'ing or matching between the graphs and you are time stamping the samples, also using the clock. Presumably you are doing something wrong at that point and then you have hard time fixing it through the clock.
I would like to achieve determinism in my game engine, in order to be able to save and replay input sequences and to make networking easier.
My engine currently uses a variable timestep: every frame I calculate the time it took to update/draw the last one and pass it to my entities' update method. This makes 1000FPS games seem as fast ad 30FPS games, but introduces undeterministic behavior.
A solution could be fixing the game to 60FPS, but it would make input more delayed and wouldn't get the benefits of higher framerates.
So I've tried using a thread (which constantly calls update(1) then sleeps for 16ms) and draw as fast as possible in the game loop. It kind of works, but it crashes often and my games become unplayable.
Is there a way to implement threading in my game loop to achieve determinism without having to rewrite all games that depend on the engine?
You should separate game frames from graphical frames. The graphical frames should only display the graphics, nothing else. For the replay it won't matter how many graphical frames your computer was able to execute, be it 30 per second or 1000 per second, the replaying computer will likely replay it with a different graphical frame rate.
But you should indeed fix the gameframes. E.g. to 100 gameframes per second. In the gameframe the game logic is executed: stuff that is relevant for your game (and the replay).
Your gameloop should execute graphical frames whenever there is no game frame necessary, so if you fix your game to 100 gameframes per second that's 0.01 seconds per gameframe. If your computer only needed 0.001 to execute that logic in the gameframe, the other 0.009 seconds are left for repeating graphical frames.
This is a small but incomplete and not 100% accurate example:
uint16_t const GAME_FRAMERATE = 100;
uint16_t const SKIP_TICKS = 1000 / GAME_FRAMERATE;
uint16_t next_game_tick;
Timer sinceLoopStarted = Timer(); // Millisecond timer starting at 0
unsigned long next_game_tick = sinceLoopStarted.getMilliseconds();
while (gameIsRunning)
{
//! Game Frames
while (sinceLoopStarted.getMilliseconds() > next_game_tick)
{
executeGamelogic();
next_game_tick += SKIP_TICKS;
}
//! Graphical Frames
render();
}
The following link contains very good and complete information about creating an accurate gameloop:
http://www.koonsolo.com/news/dewitters-gameloop/
To be deterministic across a network, you need a single point of truth, commonly called "the server". There is a saying in the game community that goes "the client is in the hands of the enemy". That's true. You cannot trust anything that is calculated on the client for a fair game.
If for example your game gets easier if for some reasons your thread only updates 59 times a second instead of 60, people will find out. Maybe at the start they won't even be malicious. They just had their machines under full load at the time and your process didn't get to 60 times a second.
Once you have a server (maybe even in-process as a thread in single player) that does not care for graphics or update cycles and runs at it's own speed, it's deterministic enough to at least get the same results for all players. It might still not be 100% deterministic based on the fact that the computer is not real time. Even if you tell it to update every $frequence, it might not, due to other processes on the computer taking too much load.
The server and clients need to communicate, so the server needs to send a copy of it's state (for performance maybe a delta from the last copy) to each client. The client can draw this copy at the best speed available.
If your game is crashing with the thread, maybe it's an option to actually put "the server" out of process and communicate via network, this way you will find out pretty fast, which variables would have needed locks because if you just move them to another project, your client will no longer compile.
Separate game logic and graphics into different threads . The game logic thread should run at a constant speed (say, it updates 60 times per second, or even higher if your logic isn't too complicated, to achieve smoother game play ). Then, your graphics thread should always draw the latest info provided by the logic thread as fast as possible to achieve high framerates.
In order to prevent partial data from being drawn, you should probably use some sort of double buffering, where the logic thread writes to one buffer, and the graphics thread reads from the other. Then switch the buffers every time the logic thread has done one update.
This should make sure you're always using the computer's graphics hardware to its fullest. Of course, this does mean you're putting constraints on the minimum cpu speed.
I don't know if this will help but, if I remember correctly, Doom stored your input sequences and used them to generate the AI behaviour and some other things. A demo lump in Doom would be a series of numbers representing not the state of the game, but your input. From that input the game would be able to reconstruct what happened and, thus, achieve some kind of determinism ... Though I remember it going out of sync sometimes.