Latency and User Behaviour on a Multiplayer Game Server

  • Tristan Henderson
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2233)


Multiplayer online games represent one of the most popular forms of networked group communication on the Internet today. We have been running a server for a first-person shooter game, Half-Life. In this paper we analyse some of the delay characteristics of different players on the server and present some interim results. We find that whilst network delay has some effect on players’ behaviour, this is outweighed by application-level or exogenous effects. Players seem to be remarkably tolerant of network conditions, and absolute delay bounds appear to be less important than the relative delay between players.


User Behaviour Average Delay High Delay Relative Delay Network Game 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    R. W. Bailey. Human Performance Engineering — Using Human Factors/ Ergonomics to Achieve Computer System Usability. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, second edition, 1989.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. A. Bangun, E. Dutkiewicz, and G. J. Anido. An analysis of multi-player network games traffic. In Proceedings of the 1999 International Workshop on Multimedia Signal Processing, pages 3–8, Copenhagen, Denmark, Sept. 1999.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Y. W. Bernier. Latency compensating methods in client/server in-game protocol design and optimization. In Proceedings of the 15th Games Developers Conference, San Jose, CA, Mar. 2001.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. S. Borella. Source models of network game traffic. Computer Communications, 23(4):403–410, Feb. 15, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    S. 0Cheshire. Latency and the quest for interactivity, Nov. 1996. White paper commissioned by Volpe Welty Asset Management, L.L.C., for the Synchronous Person-to-Person Interactive Computing Environments Meeting.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    L. Gautier and C. Diot. Design and evaluation of MiMaze, a multi-player game on the Internet. In Proceedings of the 1998 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia Computing and Systems, pages 233–236, Austin, TX, June 1998.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    T. Henderson and S. Bhatti. Modelling user behaviour in networked games. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM Multimedia Conference, Ottawa, Canada, Oct. 2001.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers. 1278.2-1995, IEEE Standard for Distributed Interactive Simulation — Communication Services and Profiles. IEEE, New York, NY, Apr. 1996.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    B. E. John and A. H. Vera. A GOMS analysis of a graphic, machine-paced, highly interactive task. In Proceedings of the CHI’92 Conference on Human factors in computing systems, pages 251–258, Monterey, CA, May 1992.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    I. S. MacKenzie and C. Ware. Lag as a determinant of human performance in interactive systems. In Proceedings of the CHI’ 93 Conference on Human factors in computing systems, pages 488–493, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Apr. 1993.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. McCreary and K. Claffy. Trends in wide area IP traffic patterns: A view from Ames Internet Exchange. In Proceedings of the ITC Specialist Seminar on IP Traffic Modeling, Measurement and Management, Monterey, CA, Sept. 2000.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    L. Qiu, V. N. Padmanabhan, and G. M. Voelker. On the placement of web server replicas. In Proceedings of the 20th IEEE Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM), pages 1587–1596, Anchorage, AK, Apr. 2001.Google Scholar
  13. 13.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tristan Henderson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations