I want to play that Qbasic Gorillas game with someone that lives in Florida.
Here's the flash version online
Gorillas
This link is to someone's post about the remake he programmed - there is a link to the game above in there and also his source code for it
playerio.com
If possible, how can I modify the code so that I can play against them over the innernet?
Should the game be public, private, or some combination of both?
It would also be cool if you could replay tosses or entire rounds with their respective angle/velocity inputs.
Take a look at sockets. Sockets are how you can connect two computers over the internet. In most implementations of sockets, you have a server socket and a client socket. The server socket listens for connections, and the client socket tries to connect to a server socket. In your case with just you and your friend, it doesn't matter much which of you is the server or client, but you will have to program for both. You also have to choose a protocol to use. The two protocols for online gaming are TCP and UDP. TCP is the most common and it is a reliable "guaranteed" connection (TCP would send data that is important). UDP is a connectionless protocol where the client just sends data with no guarantee that the data will actually get there. UDP is mostly used for very frequent updates in online games (UDP would most likely be used to send positional data in a first person shooter for example). So with your protocol in mind, I would start by adding a simple chat feature to the game. That way, you can see something working and start to understand what is happening better.
Just to suggest an alternative approach, if you want to play a game that is local multiplayer, you could set up DosBox or a Virtual Machine and then install a VNC server that both of you can log into. This would give you both KVM control.
Since it is a take-your-turn game. you could even use a chat application that has the ability to share keyboard and mouse input.
Related
I am trying to learn network socket programming basics and I can't understand some things. I have assignment to create working MMORPG server-client application where even up to 1000 clients can be connected at same time to server using SFML library. I started with some simple stuff like testing packets, sockets and making simple applications like chat in console and multiplayer tic-tac-toe for other assignment. I heard that using UDP sockets is way to go for real-time applications like games so I am trying to understand how does it work. In TCP Socket I am simply listening to connections, once client connects I can assign him to certain socket and keep listening for connections while I send data and identify him.
I don't know how to identify clients using UDP socket. I am not even sure if my approach is right.
I thought that it should work like this:
1.I create UDP socket binding it to certain port.
2.I am making sure that client got permission to receive data from server.
3.In loop I am receiving and sending packets from/to every client.
4.If client get disconnected, we close connection for him/delete him from vector of clients.
So how I do this with UDP sockets? Are they necessary for this kind of architecture ? Also I would appreciate any good article about making working client-server application with good protection and performance. Thanks in advance :)
Okay so I found actually two good articles about using UDP sockets and overall network in game:
SFML Game Development by Example: https://www.packtpub.com/game-development/sfml-game-development-example
Author is writing 3 SFML games in C++ and explains everything as he goes, using UDP sockets and taking care of packet reliability included.
Gaffer on Games article: http://gafferongames.com/networking-for-game-programmers/
Big amount of informations about game networking.
I hope that it helps for someone looking for clues about UDP sockets and examples of using it in network game development.
I wanted to know if anyone has any idea of how I can handle this scenario:
I want to have two terminals open. In one of them I want to run an NS-3 script file which generates packets and sends it through a socket to the other terminal.
The other terminal (which is only running a simple C socket program) receives the packet through the socket (and ideally displays the payload or even simpler increases a packet counter).
Any ideas appreciated...
Yes, you can make ns-3 interact with the real world.
Please read this tutorial :
http://www.nsnam.org/wiki/HOWTO_make_ns-3_interact_with_the_real_world
Especially Tap bridge. The Tap Bridge is designed to integrate “real” internet hosts (or more precisely, hosts that support Tun/Tap devices) into ns-3 simulations
http://www.nsnam.org/docs/release/3.18/models/html/tap.html
I have a system where I want to listen to a socket and wait to client connect and then pass the connection to another application that I'll start as soon as the connection is established.
I do not have control on this other application and can only set the port where it will listen, but I want to have one process for each new client.
This is what I'm trying to do:
I've been searching for a solution, but I thing I don't have the right terminology, but I managed to find on Richard Stevens' "Unix Network Programming" something about the AF_ROUTE family of sockets that may be combined with a SOCK_RAW to route a connection to another IP and port. But there's too little documentation about how to use this flag and seems to require superuser privileges (that I want to avoid).
Maybe there's an easier solution but I'm probably using the wrong terms. Is it clear what I want to do?
I don't think you'll be able to just "pass" the socket like you want to, especially if you can't change and recompile "APP". Sockets include various administrative overhead (resource management, etc) that are linked to the process they are owned by. In addition, if you can't recompile APP, there is no way to make it bypass the steps involved with accepting a connection and simple have an already open connected "handed" to it by your router.
However, have you considered simply using router as a pass-through? Basically, have your "Router" process connect via sockets to the each "APP" process it spawns, and simply echo whatever it recieves from the appropriate client to the appropriate APP, and visa versa for APP to client?
This does add overhead, and you will have to manage a small mapping to keep track of which clients go to which apps, but it might work (assuming the APP or client aren't basing any behavior off of the IP address they are connected to, etc). Assuming you can't recompile APP, there might not be too many other options.
The code for this is relatively simple. Your handler for data recieved from APP just looks up the socket for the appropriate app from your mapping, and then does a non blocking send of this data out on it. Likewise the handler for data recieved from client. Depending on how exactly the clients and app behave, you may have to handle a bit of synchronization (if you recieve from both simultaneously).
I have a certain application running on my computer. The same application can run on many computers on a LAN or different places in the world. I want to communicate between them. So I basically want a p2p system. But I will always know which computers(specific IP address) will be peers. I just want peers to have join and leave functionality. The single most important aim will be communication speed and time required. I assume simple UDP multicast (if anything like that exists) between peers will be fastest possible solution. I dont want to retransmit messages even if lost. Should I use an existing p2p library e.g. libjingle,etc. or just create some basic framework from scratch as my needs are pretty basic?
I think you're missing the point of UDP. It's not saving any time in a sense that a message gets faster to the destination, it's just you're posting the message and don't care if it arrives safely to the other side. On WAN - it will probably not arrive on the other side. UDP accross networks is problematic, as it can be thrown out by any router on the way which is tight on bandwidth - there's no guarantee of delivery for it.
I wouldn't suggest using UDP out of the topology under your control.
As to P2P vs directed sockets - the question is what it is that you need to move around. Do you need bi/multidirectional communication between all the peers, or you're talking to a single server from all the nodes?
You mentioned multicast - that would mean that you have some centralized source of data that transmits information and all the rest listen - in this case there's no benefit for P2P, and multicast, as a UDP protocol, may not work well accross multiple networks. But you can use TCP connections to each of the nodes, and "multicast" on your own, and not through IGMP. You can (and should) use threading and non-blocking sockets if you're concerned about sending blocking you, and of course you can use the QoS settings to "ask" routers to rush your sockets through.
You can use zeromq for support all network communication:
zeromq is a simple library encapsulate TCP and UDP for high level communication.
For P2P you can use the different mode of 0mq :
mode PGM/EPGM for discover member of P2P on your LAN (it use multicast)
mode REQ/REP for ask a question to one member
mode PULL/PUSH for duplicate one resource on the net
mode Publish/subscribe for transmission a file to all requester
Warning, zeromq is hard to install on windows...
And for HMI, use green-shoes ?
i think you should succeed using multicast,
unfortunately i do not know any library,
but still in case you have to do it from scratch
take a look at this:
http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Multicast-HOWTO.html
good luck :-)
I am developing TCP server in C++(win32/linux) which cater multiple client.The server is for Video Streaming.Client request video to server and Server get it from Gateway connected with camera.
I am stuck up in the class Design.I found three classes by
Peer
Session and
ConnectionMgr.
So here ConnectionMgr is responsible for managing other Classes.
I wanted your feedback on this.
what info Peer and session need to have;
How Peer and session is related
what information needs to be modeled here.
how to do Session maintainer.
Managing multiple client will require Threads what information thoses may need.
Please give your feedback so that I can upgrade my design.
Looking at the problem space from scratch:
there's some state associated with each client that connects - you seem to split this between Peer and Session and I see no real value in that if they're 1:1 - can omit such trivia from the high-level design stage.
"what info Peer and session need to have": socket descriptor is the only crucial thing, assuming you have only one camera and stream to all clients at the same pace (losing data when socket send() blocks/can't complete due to full buffer), otherwise, a buffer too...
you have a ConnectionMgr, well - yes... it must listen and accept clients on the server socket, possibly launch a new thread per client or monitor the set of current client connections and dispatch events
you'll need to make some decisions about the I/O and concurrency model (e.g. select/poll/non-blocking, async, blocking, single threaded, thread-per-client, thread-pool etc)
this will obviously affect your design: you should decide which - or which choices - you need to support...
To get a feel for this problem space, I suggest you create a very simple client/server program - probably using threads if you're familiar and comfortable with multithreading, otherwise you can hack upon the GCC libc TCP client/server examples for a select() based solution (http://www.gnu.org/s/libc/manual/html_node/Server-Example.html#Server-Example) or try boost::asio or ACE or whatever. To start, just get it working so you can telnet to the server and whatever you type in any connection is echoed out on all the connections. That should give you enough insight to start asking more concrete questions.
As #nabulke and #Jan Hudec stated in their comments, Boost.Asio is very good solution for your problem. Have a look at pretty simple example "Async TCP Echo Server". It uses just 2 classes: server and session. No session_manager. Sessions are managed automatically by smart pointers, very convenient and simple approach.
Using Boost.Asio you can keep the network part simple (and almost optimal by efficiency using asynchronous processing). As a bonus, adding couple of code lines, you receive multithreaded server w/o headache (I would recommend this example: "An HTTP server using a single io_service and a thread pool calling io_service::run().", just ignore HTTP stuff. pay attention to boost::asio::io_service::strand used in connection class)