Dedicated Server: Admin options for enforcing/filtering client display device type and configuration

[Worrazen]

Hello

Referenced topic:

https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/comments/13l30ah/effect_of_resolution_on_the_apparent_size_of/

While everyone seems to be talking about the dots and the dot mod, you know you can always turn an equation around and find solution somewhere else to solve the same problem differently. At least in the meantime, but these options I'm proposing can exist separately and general can be useful for other kinds of reasons, replicating equal experience and fairness in general, not just spotting.

For example a server admin could add and combine (with exceptions) several rules such as these:

• - Require / Prohibit -> All Desktop VR
• - Require / Prohibit -> VR Varjo
• - Require / Prohibit -> VR Valve Index
• - Require / Prohibit -> VR HTC Vive Pro 2
• - Require / Prohibit -> All Flat Desktop Monitor / TV
• - Require / Prohibit -> Monitor Screen Size 32''
• - Require / Prohibit -> Multi-Monitor
• - Require / Prohibit -> Output Render Resolution 1440p
• - Require / Prohibit -> Output Aspect Ratio 16:10

Ofcourse the server configurator would not allow to combine filters that prohibit everything.

On the client size the server browser would also be updated to show display configuration requirements in appropriate columns without having to connect to the server, and attempting to join would display appropriate error messages.

This would allow servers to efficiently ensure a level playing field when it comes to spotting/LODs, and that whatever solution they come up with the dot scaling system would work the same for all clients.

And briefly, this could be supplemented by the ability for server admins to register/serve a custom dot/spotting mod which would instead of simply testing for IC on client-side, be automatically downloaded and enforced for each client, rendering any user custom dot mods irrelevant and disabled for the duration of their session on such a server.

Edited May 19, 2023 by Worrazen

[SharpeXB]

A ridiculous suggestion

And there aren’t enough people playing online to make sorting players like this feasible. 

[Maverick87Shaka]

To be honest, as server admin, it's something that sound not good at all. Even if there will be this option in the future, I will never going to set-up a gate like this for my servers. All setups are welcome to join, this should be the spirit of online multiplayer game.

As an example, It's like racing game: you can play it xbox controller or cheap wheel set or even the keyboard, while other people can invest thousand of dollars just for the the direct base drive ( without the wheel! ) where they can feel every small bump of the track or feel the loosing of grip in the same instant that is going to happens.
What we can do for multiplayer session? NOTHING! No one put a gate that only one specif device can join!

So, to me sound really useless feature, and honestly I don't want that ED spend even 1 hour of work on that, while there are tons of other stuff to do

[Worrazen]

I understand, but this is just mathematics, there isn't much of any other factors in this equation to my knowledge so far (and if they are they have their own downsides, and they wouldn't make this idea any less valid or at least detrimental, server adming could ignore it completely), that thread makes it clear (if those people there are actually corrcect, idk) that there's a big difference between flat monitor screen and VR spotting (mod's effect), so the logical solution is to separate them and get them their own spotting rules/mods/fine-tuning.

The total amount of players and servers is just what it is, it's unfortunate if it makes this solution less practical, but it can't make it invalid. That's another problem.

[Worrazen]

51 minutes ago, Maverick87Shaka said:

To be honest, as server admin, it's something that sound not good at all. Even if there will be this option in the future, I will never going to set-up a gate like this for my servers. All setups are welcome to join, this should be the spirit of online multiplayer game.

As an example, It's like racing game: you can play it xbox controller or cheap wheel set or even the keyboard, while other people can invest thousand of dollars just for the the direct base drive ( without the wheel! ) where they can feel every small bump of the track or feel the loosing of grip in the same instant that is going to happens.
What we can do for multiplayer session? NOTHING! No one put a gate that only one specif device can join!

So, to me sound really useless feature, and honestly I don't want that ED spend even 1 hour of work on that, while there are tons of other stuff to do

Ofcourse for the various types of servers it's not the best solution, but that should depend on the type of server and eventually down to the owner's and server's community philosophy and opinion (taste), which is no offense subjective.

Which is what I was going to mention as I saw it coming. This philosophy of trying to combine everything including things that are clearly incompatible is extremely prevalent across many fields and this is partially adding to the severity of this problem, and if this flat monitor vs VR is the biggest reason for this recent controversy then I'm even more in disagreement with the exaggerated reaction to the IC enforcements of the complainers. VR and flat monitors shouldn't be piled together for many many other reasons and in general in the first place, at all. It should be regarded as mere digital convenience to allow both together, no doubt stuff like this is going to happen because of the technicalities of these systems themselfs and that becomes less of a DCS fault the more you drill into it.

The IC enforcement for the dot system was absolutely the correct thing to do, even if a replacement solution hasn't been provided yet. Let's remember that this isn't just a spotting matter, it's totally a cheating matter first and foremost. The cheating/fairness aspect should always have the precedence, over what in this case is selective realism.

In this case every DCS online player is important because of the limited size of  the MP community, therefore this is all understanding, but it can't be this feature's fault. And yes, I was about to mention console games and their controllers. I never agreed that actually, PC+console cross over was something I never agreed with. The fact that you mentioned consoles and xbox at all as an argument, the mainstream gaming, also shows we come from different background and have different ideas how things should be, so we have incompatible philosophy. This is also yet one more example how players coming from technically-kindergarden from mainstream console gaming want to take their bad habits (promoted by pureply profit oriented organizations) and shove it into DCS.

Ofcourse my philosophy here is going to be different, I never owned any Xbox, any Playstation and I never played any FPS multiplayer game online on a console, with the exception of Metroid Prime 2 Echoes local split-screen multiplayer, but even that was considered as a FPA* not FPS if we're super technical (* First-Person Adventure). On the other hand I happened to moderate and co-administrate a Call of Duty 2 custom server for a few years where I was the main modder after older generations moved on, coincidentially (and really appropriate for this discussion) the server happened to have a strict rule of rifles-only, it was a rifle-only server by definition in it's name, that rule never changed in it's 10+ year history, where you could only use single-bolt action rifles with 100% lethality no matter which body part it hit (instagib), no machine guns, no pump-shotguns, no snipers (zoom scopes). This was absolutely nothing unusual at the time, and nothing unusual in the decades of Quake and Unreal Tournament games. We were no less welcoming than any other server. This type of game mode was obviously the one I spent most time on, but I would say this really isn't the reasoning behind my opinion on this topic here today, I almost wouldn't have remembered it.

This should be a good idea for many other types of game modes that perhaps don't even exist yet, highly competitive PvP dog fights might be one of those that would welcome such features, where there might also be a need for input control enforcement, so that both players play with an appropriate aircraft-specific/allowed controls and not some inferior/superior unrealistic control system.

Edited May 19, 2023 by Worrazen

[Maverick87Shaka]

3 minutes ago, Worrazen said:

Ofcourse for the various types of servers it's not the best solution, but that should depend on the type of server and eventually down to the owner's and server's community philosophy and opinion (taste), which is no offense subjective.

Which is what I was going to mention as I saw it coming. This philosophy of trying to combine everything including things that are clearly incompatible is extremely prevalent across many fields and this is partially adding to the severity of this problem, and if this flat monitor vs VR is the biggest reason for this recent controversy then I'm sadly not sharing the complainer's sentiment. The IC enforcement for the dot system was therefore absolutely the correct thing to do, even if a replacement solution hasn't yet been provided. Let's remember that this isn't just a spotting matter, it's totally a cheating matter first and foremost. The cheating/fairness aspect should always have the precedence, over what in this case is selective realism.

In this case every DCS online player is important because of the limited size of  the MP community, therefore this is all understanding, but it can't be this feature's fault. And yes, I was about to mention console games and their controllers. I never agreed that actually, PC+console cross over was something I would never support as a game developer. The fact that you mentioned consoles and xbox at all as an argument, the mainstream gaming, also shows we come from different background and have different ideas how things should be and would obviously have different, incompatible philosophy. I never owned any Xbox, any Playstation and I never played any FPS multiplayer game online on a console, with the exception of Metroid Prime 2 Echoes local split-screen multiplayer, but even that was considered as a FPA* not FPS if we're super technical (* First-Person Adventure).

This should be a good idea for many other types of game modes that perhaps don't even exist yet, highly competitive PvP dog fights might be one of those that would welcome such features, where there might also be a need for input control enforcement, so that both players play with an appropriate aircraft-specific/allowed controls and not some inferior/superior unrealistic control system.

I spoke about using xbox controller, not crossplay that is totally another topic.

The only way that you have to make it "equals" is create a LAN party, everyone with the same setup, that's why the esport born and they make this setup
All the rest is bull<profanity>, you can lock people to play only with the same hardware, nice, probably just 2 people in the world can play face to face in a server with this settings, and on top of that you'll not even put them on the same level, since you have the connection to the server that makes difference, that is not the same for both player. People can even abuse of that. LAG switch on Star Citizen is pretty famous/infamous for example, but is not the only game affected. Also DCS has really some strange behavior in terms of sync/de-sync when latency jumps in.

So again, to be honest, from my point of view, it's useless feature because it will always be there something different that makes two player on different levels when playing on multiplayer online.
If you want pure PVP dogfight compare, the ONLY solution is setup a tournament with two identical setups, with the server hosted locally, nothing else.


 

[Worrazen]

Ah I realized now there's a MP/Server section on the forum I should have posted this in. Anyway I also viewed this as a backup-fallback solution in most cases in practise. This shouldn't be a replacement for the other remedies and solutions for spotting/LODs and rendering.

Again apologize for my habit of editing posts after submitting, there shouldn't be much changes only additional info in my previous post.

 

26 minutes ago, Maverick87Shaka said:

I spoke about using xbox controller, not crossplay that is totally another topic.

I got carried away into the general discussion sorrounding that, it wasn't my intention to mix the two issues together, I admit.

Speaking of controllers, I actually tried using Nintendo GameCube controller for DCS a few times, with proper adapter/mode and I think without any special drivers or extra tweaking, it surprisingly worked better than I expected (after just binding the controls in DCS properly).

Even if 1/6 the servers use this feature it's better than nothing, and yes it's exactly for the niche situations. For example if a streamer invites some 4-6 ex-pilots to some kind of a sponsored show and they get on a locked server, in addition to explaining the rules, the admin might use some of these kind of enforcements as a verification step to remind and make sure it's all right on the client site. The few who would join might have accidentially forgot to set something up correctly, this would verify those setups and settings. I really don't see it necessary for me to twist arms to try to come up with positive examples, this is enoguh, we can all see it's not optimal across the board and highly dependant on case.

Edited May 19, 2023 by Worrazen