[vworld-tech] Some resources for MMOG server development

[Brian Hook]

> Having finally got a chance to read through this, I'm not sure what
> to make of it; it comes across as being a sort of "multplayer
> programming 101: the basic introduction". 

That is its goal.

> Most of the interesting
> stuff is glossed over; the advice is good (e.g. "Just don't bother
> using TCP, TCP + UDP hybrid, etc - use someone else's like ENet"),
> but with almost no explanation of why.

It is practically book sized at this point -- it's over 40 pages long 
in its current "glossed over" format.

> I'm not sure, but I suspect if I read it without knowing much about
> net programming, I wouldn't know whether to trust the author
> because there's too little reasoning. 

Well, a lot of the stuff isn't about reasoning, it just "is".  Yes, 
there is some hand waving about the UDP vs. TCP stuff, but I don't 
think I was that scant on the other, uh, 9500 words or so =)

> NB: I've read enough of
> Carmack's plan updates etc over the years to know that "ex-id" is
> not enough reason to trust someone to know what they're talking
> about; you may or may not get lucky.

And I don't expect anyone to trust my paper just because I'm ex-id 
(and, I might mention, I don't mention any relationship to id at all 
at the site or in that paper, to my knowledge).

If there's something you feel needs clarification, let me know.  It's 
an overview that describes _what_ multiplayer network programming is 
like, but no, I don't get into a series of rationales for every single 
decision, but even so, the only real controversial one is the TCP vs. 
UDP one.

> Perhaps it's possible to do a longer (with some more reasoning,
> explanation of choices) version of this?

Just explain what portions aren't clear or are lacking proper 
reasoning and I'll attempt to address them.  AFAIK, the only major 
complaints I've received are that I gloss over TCP vs. UDP and that I 
don't mention server-side optimizations such as not broadcasting 
entity status for entities out of visual range.  But I felt the latter 
was clearly beyond the scope of the paper, which is designed more to 
deal with protocol level issues.

Brian