I'm fairly new to multiplayer design and am struggling to find the information i need to continue in my synchronous (you cannot disconnect and continue at a later time similar to hearthstone), turn-based, pvp "card" game. I'm using AS3 (flash) as my client side and node.js with javascript + mysql for the server-side processing.
In this game, the cards are created by the players themselves. It's importnat to note that these "cards" are assembled from individual building blocks (library swf files); The database keeps track of how these cards are made/assembled. Because there can be hundreds of uniqely made cards per player, i need a good way to load information about these on demand for pvp battles or for modding/deck building purposes.
What i've accomplished so far:
i have successfully sent data to server and sent data back to flash over an XMLSocket.
I have successfully assembled a single "card" from database information.
What questions i really need to answer:
Flash asynchronously loads content so i'm not sure how to approach making multiple data requests for (sometimes simultaneous) battle actions, card information, or card assembly (THere can potentially be a lot of cards and card building blocks so i feel it would be inefficient to load all data with a single request). I can either have the classes responsible make those calls OR create a messenger class to handle all requests/disconnects/reconnects/messages for the entire game.
For the global messenger class approach, I am not sure how to retrieve the fully loaded data from the messenger by upstream code (as3 continues execution even if data isnt there) or how to ensure that the request pertains to the appropriate call
i could use a ID request system to uniquely identify the socket request
i could develop a custom event driven system
I could spawn multiple messenger objects in each class that i need one. <- im leaning towards this option.
On a similar note, perhaps i should handle database requests within card objects or preload all data prior to game start (This would limit me to only query for opponent card and battle data on the fly). With the one call per card object approach I was unsure if #requests per card per player will overwhelm my server or not. Node.js scales very well but i dont have the networking knowledge to understand whether all these simultaneous request on a single port would be too much.
EDIT:
I'm strongly leaning towards using a singleton XMLSocket Wrapper or an extended class of some sort to deal with all networking transactions since that seems intuitive to me. I would highly appreciate your feedback on the best approach to notify my code that the messenger received and parsed the message it asked for (since flash will proceed with execution even if data isnt there i need a good way to do this.). I read that using custom events isnt all that terrific and there are better ways... but this is how i'd approach the problem.
For example i can do (pseudocode).
m:Messenger = new Messenger(); //this is my wrapper
m.addEventListener(new CustomEvent(CustomEvent.EVENTSTRING, parseData));
m.sendData(DataObject); //calls
function parseData(e:CustomEvent) {
xml(e.data);
}
import flash.net.XMLSocket;
import globals.*;
public class Messenger
{
public static var _Socket:XMLSocket;
public var xml:XML;
public function Messenger()
{
_Socket = new XMLSocket(vars._Server, vars._Port);
_Socket.addEventListener(Event.CONNECT, onConnect);
_Socket.addEventListener(IOErrorEvent.IO_ERROR, onError);
}
private function onConnect(evt:Event):void {
trace("Connected");
_Socket.removeEventListener(Event.CONNECT, onConnect);
_Socket.removeEventListener(IOErrorEvent.IO_ERROR, onError);
_Socket.addEventListener(DataEvent.DATA, onDataReceived);
_Socket.addEventListener(Event.CLOSE, onSocketClose);
}
private function onDataReceived(evt:DataEvent):void {
//trigger correct event here based on data identifier w/ dispatchEvent(EVENTSTRING);
}
}
About card assembly - you should store data in database that does not require recalculation, so if a card is built out of several "building blocks", you could, for example, store a sequence of blocks in a single line of database, so that when a card info for the opponent is retrieved, you just select from player_cards where player_id=... and deck_id=... and then assemble the gathered data on AS3 side. You should definitely not put this load on server.
About asynchronous loading - make sure your PVP handshake waits for both sides to successfully process cards for both own side and enemy side. You can load data asynchronously, but you'd better do a full preload while displaying a "Loading bla-bla" screen to the player, then operate with received data. Yes, you can do multiple requests to your server, and yes, you can wait for all of them to success prior to displaying a "Battle start" screen, in the meantime AS3 will wait for the loading to complete. But, about single vs multiple request - I say go with as few as possible, because every added request at the init stage is a potential to add a thousand or so requests to a single server, and a potential to put just too much strain on your server side, resulting in a self-initiated DDoS. Make sure your database structure allows streamlining of data reading operation right into the client side, so that your server is not under a heavy load from preparing the data. But also make sure to double check whatever clients report to the server, as the primary rule of client-server games is "client always lies" assumption.
Since you are planning to make server process player actions mid-battle, you can create either temporary tables on the server (SQL-based) or state objects (process-based) that will contain current game state with links to whatever abilities the cards have and their state (in hand, discarded, in play, destroyed, etc), so that when an action from the player comes, saying "this card changes state from A to B" you can easily verify if that card is in A state, then switch it into B state, performing any actions that result from this state change on both server and client sides. Make sure to clean up this set of data once the battle is over. This requires thorough planning of your server side, so that your game engine will not stall the server while running some action sequence due to excess SQL requests, for example.
About messengers - probably you should use a session approach, together with login/password authentication this way you will have sessions available as keys to determine which battle does this data packet belongs. I think also make AS3 side periodically send pull requests to the server, which should be quickly parsed by the server and the submitted enemy/server actions returned as quickly as possible, this will also ensure that disconnects will be handled and reconnects allowed.
Overall, the question is very broad, and only tips can be given, not even examples.
Related
I'm not after any code in particular but I want to know what is the most efficient way to build a function that will constantly check for updates for things such as messages e.g. Have a chat conversation window and I want live updates such as Facebook.
Currently I have implemented it by putting a while loop in my core code that checks if the view is currently visible run a Task every 5 seconds to get new messages. This works but I don't believe its the most efficient way to do it and I need to consider battery life. *Note I do change visibility when the view goes away e.g. on iOS i do
public override ViewDidDissapper {
Model.SetVisible(false)
}
Has anyone implemented some sort of polling on a cross platform app?
There are many different possible solutions here - which one you prefer depends a lot on your requirements in terms of latency, reliability, efficiency, etc - and it depends on how much you can change server side.
If your server is fixed as a normal http server, then frequent polling may be your best route forwards, although you could choose to modify the 5 seconds occasionally when you think updates aren't likely.
One step up from this is that you could try long polling http requests within your server.
Another step beyond that are using Socket (TCP, UDP or websocket) communications to provide "real time" messaging.
And in parallel to these things, you could also consider using PUSH notifications both within your app and in the background.
Overall, this is a big topic - I'd recommend reading up about PushSharp from #Redth and about SignalR from Microsoft - #gshackles has some blog posts about using this in Xamarin. Also, services like AzureMobileServices, UrbanAirship, Buddy, Parse, etc may help
When using distributed and scalable architecture, eventual consistency is often a requirement.
Graphically, how to deal with this eventual consistency?
Users are used to click save, and see the result instantaneously... with eventual consistency it's not possible.
How to deal with the GUI for such scenarios?
Please note the question applies both for desktop applications and web applications.
PS: I'm working with the Microsoft platform, but I imagine the question applies to any technology...
A Task Based UI fits this model great. You create and execute tasks from the UI. You can also have something like a task status monitor to show the user when a task has executed.
Another option is to use some kind of pooling from the client. You send the command, and pool from the client until the command completed and the new data is available. You will have a delay in some cases from when the user presses save to when he will see the new record, but in most cases it should be almost synchronous.
Another (good?) option is to assume/design commands that don't fail. This is not trivial but you can have a cache on the client and add the data from the command to that cache and display it to the user even before the command has been executed. If the command fails for some unexpected situation, well then just design a good "we are sorry" message for misleading the user for a few seconds.
You can also combine the methods above.
Usually eventual consistency is more of a business/domain problem, and you should have your domain experts handle it.
I think that other answers mix together CQRS in general and eventual consistency in particular. Task-based UI is very suitable for CQRS but it does not resolve the issue with eventually consistent read model.
First, I would like to challenge your statement:
Users are used to click save, and see the result instantaneously... with eventual consistency it's not possible.
What do you by this? Why is it not possible to see the result immediately? I think the issue here is your definition of result.
The result of any action is that that action has been performed. There are numerous of ways to show this! It depends on what kind of action do you want to complete. Examples:
Send an email: if user has entered a correct email address, it is almost guaranteed that the action will complete successfully. To prevent unexpected failures one might use durable queues since this kind of actions do not need to be done synchronously. So you just say "email sent". Typically you see this kind of response when you ask to reset your password.
Update some information in a user profile: after you have validated the new data on the client, most probably the command will succeed too since the only thing that could happen is the database error (if you use database). Again, even this can be mitigated by using durable queues. In this case you just show the updated field in the same form. The good practice for SPA is to have a comprehensive data store on the client side, like Redux does. In this case you can safely update the server by sending a command and also updating the client-side store, which will result in UI to shows the latest data. Disclaimer: some answers refer to this technique as "tricking the user", but I disagree with this definition.
If you have commands that are prone to error, you can use techniques that are already described in other answers like Websockets or Server-side events to communicate errors back. This requires quite a lot of additional work. You can also send a command and wait for reply or execute commands synchronously. Some would say "this is not CQRS" but this would be just another dogma to be challenged. Ensuring the command has completed the execution in combination with the previous point (client-side data store) will be a good solution.
I am not sure if there is any 100% bullet proof technique that allows you to always show non-stale data from the read model. I think it goes against the principles of CQRS. Even with real-time events you will only get events that indicate that you write model has been updated. Still, your projections could have failed and reacting on this is a whole other story.
However, I would not concentrate that much on this issue. The fact is that well-tested projections and almost-guaranteed commands will work very well. For error handling in 90% of situations it is enough to have some manual or half-manual process to recover from those errors. For the last 10% you can combine generic "error" messages pushed from the server saying "sorry, your action XXX has failed to execute" and the top priority actions could have some creative process behind them but in reality those situations would be very very rare.
There are 2 ways:
To trick a user (just to show that things has happened then they
really hasn't happened yet)
Show that system is processing request
and use polling in background (not good) or just timer with value of
your SLA.
I prefer the 1st option.
As someone has already mentioned, task based UI's fit well for this, and what I would do is employ a technique that 'buys you time' for the command to propagate.
For example, imagine we are on a list screen, where the user can perform various actions, one of which being to add a new item to the list. After choosing to add an item you could display a "What would you like to do next?" which could have 'Add another item', 'Do this task', 'Do some other task', 'Go back to list'.
By the time they have clicked on an option, the data would have hopefully been refreshed.
Also, if you're using a task based UI, you can analyse the patterns of task execution and use these "what would you like to do next" screens to streamline the UI. Similar to amazon's "other people also bought these items".
As previously stated, it is fine to tell the user that the request (command) has been acknowledged (successfully issued). In case of some failure, the system should communicate this to the requester, by means of:
email;
SMS;
custom inbox (e.g. like the SO inbox);
whatever.
E.g., mail client / service:
I am sending a mail to a wrong address;
the mail service says: "email sent successfully :)";
after few minutes, I receive a mail from the service: "email could not be delivered".
I believe a great way to inform the user about a recent failure is to present him an error panel while he's navigating through the application. A user gesture might be required in order to dismiss that alert etc.
For example:
I wouldn't go with tricking the user or blocking him from committing some other actions. I would rather go for streaming data toward UI after they are being acknowledged by a read side. Let's consider these two cases:
Users saves data and expects result. Connection is established toward server. After they are being acknowledged by a read side, they are streamed toward UI and UI is being updated.
User saves data and refreshes web page. Upon reload, data are being fetched from data store and connection for streaming is established. If read side didn't update the data store in the meantime, there's still an opened stream and UI should be updated after data reaches the read side.
Why streaming from read side and not directly from write side? Simply, that would be a confirmation that read side has been reached.
From technical aspect, Server-Sent Events could be used.
Disadvantage:
Results will still not be reflected immediately by a read side. But at least, in most cases, user will be able to continue with his work without being blocked by a UI.
There are several ways to handle eventual consistency. All of them are really to occupy the time from the User's action until the backend refresh.
User Reads A given user can only read from the same database node that they write to. Other users read from the replicated nodes. PROS: UI is quick enough, and application stays in sync. CONS: Your service architecture has to track and route Users to specific database nodes.
Disable the UI until the action has completed, and refresh it. Java Server Faces has a classic example of this. One could create a modal with a loading spinner to cover the UI until the refresh was completed. PROS: UI stays in sync with application state. CONS: Most every action creates a blocked UI. Users get very frustrated by the restricted UI, and will complain of application slowness.
Confirmation Immediately thank the user for their submission. Then let them know later (email, SMS, in-app notification) whether or not the action was completed. PROS: It's fast up front. CONS: UI lags behind system until refresh. Even with a notice, the User may get confused that they don't see the updates. It also requires integration of various communication channels. Users won't see their changes right away. If the action fails, they may not know until it's too late.
Fake it Optimistically assume that the action will complete. Show the User the resulting UI (upvote, comment, credit card confirmation, etc) and allow them to continue as if it succeeded. If there were failures, immediately show them as contextual errors: alerts next to the undone upvotes, in-app alert on the post with the failed comment, email for the declined credit card. PROS: UI feels much faster. CONS: UI is temporarily out of sync with application state, and you must resolve that. One case: you might fake creation of content with temp IDs. But after content is created, then the temp IDs will be wrong until the refresh. Second case, you might need to store all state changes on the UI after the action until the refresh. Then you need some Resolver to apply all the local state changes since the action was issued. This is resolution is non-trivial.
Web Sockets Subscribe the UI to an event stream so that when the action is completed on the backend, it is pushed to the front end. Is it one-way or two-way streaming? PROS: UI feels fast, and it's in sync with the application state. CONS: Consistent browser support, need a backend source of streaming events, and socket server scalability.
I have a question about scalability. Let's say I have a multiplayer game, such as Uno, where the server handles everything. (Assume this is a text-only game for simplicity). For example, to get information printed out to the user in the client, the server might send PRINT string, or CHOOSE data (to pick a card to play), etc. In this regard, the client is "dumb" and the server handles the game logic.
A quick example of how this might work on a protocol level:
Server sends: PRINT Choose a card
Server sends: CHOOSE Red 1,Blue 1 (user shown a button or something, and picks Red 1)
Client sends: Red 1
Let's say I have this architecture:
Player Class: stores the cards the user has, maybe some methods (such as tellData(String data) which would send PRINT data, sendPM() which could private message a user)
Server Class: handles authentication, allows users to create new games, shows users a list of games they can join
Game Class: handles users playing a card, handles switching to a new player for his or her turn, calls methods on player class like tellData(), pickCard(), etc
How would I scale this, to run the server on multiple computers? Right now, all of the users connect to one server, and require the Player, Server, and Game class to interact with each other. If someone could provide some suggestions, and/or point me to some good resources/books on this, it would be greatly appreciated (no, this is not a homework assignment or something for a business, this is just a personal project and curiosity of mine). In terms of scalability, I'd like to just be able to add another server, and handle the additional load of players--but the most concurrent connections would be 1000.
Also, would this become significantly more difficult of a scalability challenge if we added in more games?
Furthermore, what is the best way to store game data? In a SQL database, or serializing objects, or what? By this, I mean let's say 3 users are in a game of Uno, and want to return to it later. I don't want to store their cards and information about the game in the Player/Server/Game class (RAM) forever - I want to dump this somewhere, so when the user logs in, the info can be loaded from however this was dumped into RAM, and then the appropriate Player/Game objects.
Finally, how can I make changes to the server without having to kill it, and restart it? Assume the server was written in Java or Python.
If anyone can provide suggestions or some resources it would be greatly appreciated - this includes changing the architecture I originally stated.
Thanks for any and all help!!
EDIT: Are there any good books or talks you all would recommend on the subject?
1.Scalability:
Involves an application architecture there across multiple server instances the session is replicated/shared and load balanced. You can choose to implement a message queue (rabbitmq) / ESB(enterprise service bus) architecture for your app.
2.Ease of scaling:
Depends on deployment and the servers you choose.
3.Pesistance:
Game for a person involves his particular game state at any point of time. If you could represent state information semantically you can have the data in markup savefiles, or store the state information directly into a DB.
Else, you may need to serialize objects and store them on filesystem / as a BLOB in DB in case the state space is humongous.
4.Hot deployment:
JVM mostly always will need a restart to reload class files, hence on java server side you will always need to restart. In Ruby/Rails is certain parts of the application can be hot deployed. If your need 100% hot deployability, perhaps Erlang is the answer.
To improve concurrency you can also use evented server/app architectures: thin/eventmachine for ruby or apache mina, jboss netty for java.
Is there a big difference (in terms of performance, browser implementation availability, server load etc) between HTML5 SSEs and straight up Ajax polling? From the server side, it seems like an EventSource is just hitting the specified page every ~3 seconds or so (though I understand the timing is flexible).
Granted, it's simpler to set up on the client side than setting up a timer and having it $.get every so often, but is there anything else? Does it send fewer headers, or do some other magic I'm missing?
Ajax polling adds a lot of HTTP overhead since it is constantly establishing and tearing down HTTP connections. As HTML5 Rocks puts it "Server-Sent Events on the other hand, have been designed from the ground up to be efficient."
Server-sent events open a single long-lived HTTP connection. The server then unidirectionally sends data when it has it, there is no need for the client to request it or do anything but wait for messages.
One downside to Server-sent events is that since they create a persistent connection to the server you could potentially have many open connections to your server. Some servers handle massive numbers of concurrent connections better than others. That said, you would have similar problems with polling plus the overhead of constantly reestablishing those connections.
Server-sent events are quite well supported in most browsers, the notable exception of course being IE. But there are a couple of polyfills (and a jQuery plugin) that will fix that.
If you are doing something that only needs one-way communication, I would definitely go with Server-sent events. As you mentioned Server-sent events tend to be simpler and cleaner to implement on the client-side. You just need to set up listeners for messages and events and the browser takes care of low-level stuff like reconnecting if disconnected, etc. On the server-side it is also fairly easy to implement since it just uses simple text. If you send JSON encoded objects you can easily turn them into JavaScript objects on the client via JSON.parse().
If you are using PHP on the server you can use json_encode() to turn strings, numbers, arrays and objects into properly encoded JSON. Other back-end languages may also provide similar functions.
I would only add a higher perspective to what's been said, and that is that SSE is publish-subscribe model as opposed to constant polling in case of AJAX.
Generally, both ways (polling and publish-subscribe) are trying to solve the problem how to maintain an up-to-date state on the client.
1) Polling model
It is simple. The client (browser) first gets an initial state (page) and for it to update, it needs to periodically request the state (page or its part) and process the result into the current state (refresh whole page or render it inteligently into its part in case of AJAX).
Naturally, one drawback is that if nothing happens with the server state the resources (CPU, network, ...) are used unnecessarily. Another one is that even if the state changes the clients gets it only at the next poll period, not ASAP. One often needs to evaluate a good period time compromise between the two things.
Another example of polling is a spinwait in threading.
2) Publish-subscribe model
It works as follows:
(client first requests and shows some initial state)
client subscribes to the server (sends one request, possibly with some context like event source)
server marks the reference to the client to some its client reference repository
in case of an update of the state, server sends a notification to the client based on the reference to the client it holds; i.e. it is not a response to a request but a message initiated by the server
good clients unsubscribe when they are no more interested in the notifications
This is SSE, or within threading a waitable event, as another example.
A natural drawback, as stated, is that the server must know about all its subscribed clients which, depending on an implementation, can be an issue.
I'd like to start developing a "simple" game with HTML5 and I'm quite confused by the many resources I found online. I have a solid background in development, but in completely different environments (ironically, I started programming because I wanted to become a game developer, and it's the only thing I've never done in 13 years...).
The confusion derives from the fact that, although I know JavaScript very well and I have some knowledge of HTML5, I can't figure out how to mix what I know with all this new stuff. For example, here's what I was thinking of:
The game would be an implementation of chess. I have some simple "ready made" AI algorithm that I can reuse for single player; the purpose here is to learn HTML5 game development, so this part is not very important at the moment.
I'd like build a website around the game. For this I'd use a "regular" CMS, as I know many of them already and it would be faster to put it up.
Then I'd have the game itself, which, in its "offline" version, has nothing to do with the website, as, as far as I understand, it would live in a page by itself. This is the first question: how to make the Game aware of User's session? The login would be handled by the CMS (it should be much easier this way, as User Managememt is already implemented).
As a further step, I'd like to move the AI to the server. This is the second question: how do I make the game send player's actions to the Server, and how do I get the answer back?
Later on, I'd like to bring a PVP element to the game, i.e. one-against-one multiplayer (like the good old chess). This is the third question: how to send information from a client to another, and keep the conversation going on. For this, people recommended me to have a look at Node.js, but it's one more element that I can't figure out how to "glue" to the rest.
Here's an example of a single action in a PVP session, which already gives me a headache: Player 1 sends his move to the Server (how does the game talk to Node.js?). I'd need to identify the Game Id (where and how should I store it?), and make sure the player hasn't manually modified it, so it won't interfere with someone else's game (how?).
I'm aware that the whole thing, as I wrote it, is very messy, but that's precisely how I feel at the moment. I can't figure out where to start, therefore any suggestion is extremely welcome.
Too many things and probably in the wrong order.
A lot of the issues don't seem to me to be particularly related to HTML5 in the first instance.
Start with the obvious thing - you want a single page (basically a javascript application) that plays chess, so build that. If you can't build that then the rest is substantially irrelevant, if you can build (and I don't doubt that you can) then the rest is about building on that capability.
So we get to your first question - well at the point at which you load the page you will have the session, its a web page, like any other web page, so that's how you get the session. If you're offline then you've persisted that from when you were online by whatever means - presumably local storage.
You want to move the AI to the server? Ok, so make sure that the front end user interaction talks to an "interface" to record the player moves and retrieve the AI moves. Given this separation you can replaces the AI on the client with an ajax (although I'd expect the x to be json!) call to the server with the same parameters.
This gets better, if you want to do player to player you're just talking about routing through the server from one user/player to another user/player - the front end code doesn't have to change, just what the server does at the far end of the ajax call.
But for all this, take a step back and solve the problems one at a time - if you do that you should arrive where you want to go without driving yourself nuts trying to worry about a bucket full of problems that seem scary that you can probably easily solve one at a time and I'd start by getting your game to run, all on its own, in the browser.
About question one: You could maybe give the user a signed cookie. E.g. create a cookie that contains his userid or so and the SHA2 hash of his userid plus a secret, long salt (e.g. 32 bytes salt or so).
About question two: For exchanging stuff and calling remote functions, I'd use the RPC library dnode.
About question three: Use the same thing for calling methods between clients.
Client code (just an example):
DNode.connect(function (remote) {
this.newPeer = function(peer) {
peer.sendChatMessage("Hello!");
};
});
You don't have to use game IDs if you use dnode - just hand functions to the browser that are bound to the game. If you need IDs for some reason, use a UUID module to create long, random ones - they're unguessable.