Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 23, Issue 1, pp 7–30

An Efficient Synchronization Mechanism for Mirrored Game Architectures

  • Eric Cronin
  • Anthony R. Kurc
  • Burton Filstrup
  • Sugih Jamin
Article

Abstract

Existing online multiplayer games typically use a client-server model, which introduces added latency as well as a single bottleneck and single point of failure to the game. Distributed multiplayer games minimize latency and remove the bottleneck, but require special synchronization mechanisms to provide a consistent game for all players. Current synchronization methods have been borrowed from distributed military simulations and are not optimized for the requirements of fast-paced multiplayer games. In this paper we present a new synchronization mechanism, trailing state synchronization (TSS), which is designed around the requirements of distributed first-person shooter games.

We look at TSS in the environment of a mirrored game architecture, which is a hybrid between traditional centralized architectures and the more scalable peer-to-peer architectures. Mirrored architectures allow for improved performance compared to client-server architectures while at the same time allowing for a greater degree of centralized administration than peer-to-peer architectures.

We evaluate the performance of TSS and other synchronization methods through simulation and examine heuristics for selecting the synchronization delays needed for TSS.

consistency game platforms system architectures 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    G. Armitage, “pkthisto-0.1.2,” 2001, http://opax.swin.edu.au/~garmitage/q3/quake-server-mods.html.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    N. Baughman and B. Levine, “Cheat-proof playout for centralized and distributed online games,” in Proc. Infocom 2001, 2001.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Y. Bernier, “Latency compensating methods in client/server in-game protocol design and optimization,” in Proc. of GDC 2001, 2001.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    E. Cronin, B. Filstrup, and A. Kurc, “A distributed multiplayer game server system,” UM EECS589 Course Project Report, 2001, http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~bfilstru/quakefinal.pdf.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    S. Dykes, K. Robbins, and C. Jeffery, “An empirical evaluation of client-side server selection algorithms,” in Proc. of IEEE Infocom 2000, 2000.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    G. Combs et al., “The ethereal network analyzer,” http://www.ethereal.com/.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    P. Francis, S. Jamin, C. Jin, Y. Jin, D. Raz, Y. Shavitt, and L. Zhang, “IDMaps: A global internet host distance estimation service,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, Vol. 9,No. 5, pp. 525–540, 2001.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    L. Gautier, C. Diot, and J. Kurose, “End-to-end transmission control mechanisms for multiparty interactive applications on the internet,” in Proc. of IEEE Infocom 1999, 1999, Vol. 3.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D.A. Helder and S. Jamin, “End-host multicast communication using switch-tree protocols,” in Proc. of GP2PC, 2002.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    id Software, “Quake,” http://www.idsoftware.com/.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, “tcpdump,” http://ee.lbl.gov/.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    L. Lamport, “Time, clocks, and the ordering of events in a distributed system,” Communications of the ACM, Vol. 21,No. 7, pp. 558–565, 1978.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    P. Lincroft, “The internet sucks: Or, what I learned coding X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter,” in Proc. of Game Developers Conference 1999, 1999.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    M. Mauve, “How to keep a dead man from shooting,” in Proc. of the 7th International Workshop on Interactive Distributed Multimedia Systems, 2000, pp. 199–204.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    M. Mauve, S. Fischer, and J. Widmer, “A generic proxy system for networked computer games,” in Proc. of NetGames 2002, 2002.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    The QuakeForge Project, “QuakeForge,” http://www.quakeforge.net/.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    J.S. Steinman, “Scalable parallel and distributed military simulations using the SPEEDES framework,” in ELECSIM95, 1995.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J.S. Steinman, R. Bagrodia, and D. Jefferson, “Breathing time warp,” in Proc. of the 1993 Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Simulation, 1993, pp. 109–118.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    J.S. Steinman, J.W. Wallace, D. Davani, and D. Elizandro, “Scalable distributed military simulations using the SPEEDES object-oriented simulation framework,” in Proc. of Object-Oriented Simulation Conference (OOS'98), 1998, pp. 3–23.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eric Cronin
    • 1
  • Anthony R. Kurc
    • 1
  • Burton Filstrup
    • 1
  • Sugih Jamin
    • 1
  1. 1.Electrical Engineering and Computer Science DepartmentUniversity of MichiganUSA

Personalised recommendations