High latency will ruin the Overwatch experience

[Butosai]

The problem is that these aren't solvable issues. Overwatch errs on the side of favoring the shooter; if they shot you in the head, you got shot in the head. The alternative would be to favor the victim, or favor the server's middle ground. In the former, anyone with a hitscan weapon would be TERRIBLE, since you'd have to predict your opponent's latency and shoot ahead of them, and if they're dodging, just give up; you're useless. And the latter gives you the worst of both worlds; hitscan weapons miss constantly, and you're getting yanked from behind walls and such.

I dont really see what the problem is with "if they shot you in the head , you get shot in the head". Thats how it is in real life. Its not like its a negative to the person getting shot at. You cant tell me you see a widowmaker shot coming and have the reaction time to dodge it. Ever.

[Endus]

I dont really see what the problem is with "if they shot you in the head , you get shot in the head". Thats how it is in real life. Its not like its a negative to the person getting shot at. You cant tell me you see a widowmaker shot coming and have the reaction time to dodge it. Ever.

The "problem" is that your game client only gets notified that you were shot in the head after you've ducked behind a wall, so it "feels" like you got shot behind the wall.

But as long as latency exists, this is a problem that's gonna exist.

[Deleted]

I dont really see what the problem is with "if they shot you in the head , you get shot in the head". Thats how it is in real life. Its not like its a negative to the person getting shot at. You cant tell me you see a widowmaker shot coming and have the reaction time to dodge it. Ever.

no, the problem is that you can literally be behind cover after the first windowmaker shot that misses, be behind cover before the second one and still be killed by it. Several times I have been playing as tracer and been killed when I am no way near where I am (on my screen) on the kill shot due to my blink ability taking me behind a wall, yet I get killed by a sniper.

This is a MAJOR problem, and is down to the server tick rate being so low. There is no real excuse for it when games like CS have a much higher tick rate and are running off an older engine. I am not bothered by being killed by a skilled sniper, I have a problem being behind cover (on my screen) and being out of cover (on their screen)

[Endus]

no, the problem is that you can literally be behind cover after the first windowmaker shot that misses, be behind cover before the second one and still be killed by it.

Because you weren't behind cover. You got shot in the head, in the open. You shouldn't have ever reached cover. THAT is what's "wrong".

[Deleted]

Because you weren't behind cover. You got shot in the head, in the open. You shouldn't have ever reached cover. THAT is what's "wrong".

That's all fine and dandy, however on my screen, from my perspective, I WAS behind cover. if I got shot in the head, Fine. Well played sniper you beat me fair and square, not a problem. The problem is though on MY screen I was behind cover. What should be happening, and is not, is that there are two (in some cases vastly) different perspectives, and in a FPS game this is a major concern, What happens one once screen, should be happening on other screens.

Yes I know there is latency issues, but that is not the only problem. The problem is that the server is not updating the information and getting it back to the players fast enough. The first 5 mins of this video explains it pretty well, as well as the follow up video in the annotations of the video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHO6Ky-w0UQ


The net code for this game is a total mess at the moment.

[Endus]

That's all fine and dandy, however on my screen, from my perspective, I WAS behind cover. if I got shot in the head, Fine. Well played sniper you beat me fair and square, not a problem. The problem is though on MY screen I was behind cover. What should be happening, and is not, is that there are two (in some cases vastly) different perspectives, and in a FPS game this is a major concern, What happens one once screen, should be happening on other screens.

And, in a world where data transfer is not literally instantaneous across large distances, this is an impossible expectation. Not just impractical, literally impossible.

[Svisalith]

Because you weren't behind cover. You got shot in the head, in the open. You shouldn't have ever reached cover. THAT is what's "wrong".

Right now if you have a 20ms ping, your actions are not up to 20ms behind "reality" on the server. They're about 60-110 milliseconds behind at any given time, which means that you can be behind cover for ping + 80 milliseconds and your ass will still be sticking out in view of everybody on the server. This is overwhelmingly due to server delay and that is the source of the problem on low-ping connections. About half of this lag and almost all of the variability comes from the 20hz update rate.

High-ping is broken, but for different reasons. There's a pretty high threshold for allowing shots from laggier players at the moment which can be adjusted in the future.

[Sarevokcz]

Because you weren't behind cover. You got shot in the head, in the open. You shouldn't have ever reached cover. THAT is what's "wrong".

no.

often you "werent" behind the cover because the server is way too slow to notice you already ducked and it takes too long for the other client to see your correct position and that is simply unacceptable nowadays.

and people are able to hit and snipe stuff just fine in other games at way higher tickrate, so really, some hitscan BS excuse is just that, an excuse, if you wont be able to hit anything, maybe you should just get better and improve your aim

[Elim Garak]

maybe you should just get better and improve your aim

In a blizzard game? Getouttahere

[Endus]

no.

often you "werent" behind the cover because the server is way too slow to notice you already ducked and it takes too long for the other client to see your correct position and that is simply unacceptable nowadays.

Yeah, this is straight-up incorrect.

You aren't getting shot 1/10th of a second after ducking into cover. You're getting shot 1/10th of a second before that, when you're in the open. your client is the one that's "slow".

[tangers58]

If you're excited to get into the Overwatch beta you may be in for rude awakening when you find out all the servers for Overwatch are currently hosted in the west coast datacenter. I live on the east coast and currently have a RTT (round trip) ping of ~160ms.

FPS games, specifically fast-paced mid-range centric ones like Overwatch, play like absolute garbage at >~60ms unless they're babied down with assisted aim and/or have client side hit detection. Close range skirmishing becomes a guessing game at the latency I'm experiencing, and a large number of the cast aren't really viable options to play at all. Characters that are more "immune" to latency are floating to the top and are in every game, usually with multiple on each team. Pharah, for example, is extremely easy to play at high latency (all attacks splash) and is absurdly effective against high latency (high ping opponents will be closer to blast radius of shots, taking more damage.) Soldier:76 and McRee's ultimates have a similar boon in being "aimbots" of sorts. Lucio is also extremely effective since all you do is run around like an asshole with a speed buff and swap to heal mode to use your E-skill.

The best part of all is you can see your latency on the replay camera. Watching your deaths becomes extremely discouraging after a while because what you see does not match what you experienced. For example, running towards a health pickup and getting there first on your screen just to die on the replay as the person you're fighting with gets it instead. Getting vacuumed into Reinhardt charges that you clearly moved away from. Being shot multiple times after moving out of LOS from Torbjorn's turrets, and him getting kill blows as you're clearly behind a wall.

For me, with high latency, Overwatch very quickly devolved from a fun game to a game that feels unfair. While not everyone is going to experience these issues, and the latency will likely be addressed in the future by expanding the servers to the Chicago datacenter, it's still very clear that partying with your friends in different geographic locations is going to suck no matter what, and the design they've gone for with Overwatch absolutely does not play well in a high-ping environment.

Get a real computer, pay for a real connection, and you will be fine. Get a job.

[Elim Garak]

Yeah, this is straight-up incorrect.

You aren't getting shot 1/10th of a second after ducking into cover. You're getting shot 1/10th of a second before that, when you're in the open. your client is the one that's "slow".

That is incorrect, it's the server that is slow. Player get's into cover, server gets an update, meanwhile another player sees outdated state in which the first player is not in the cover yet, they shot at them, server gets an update, server is confused because it was too slow to be in sync with all the clients. Server gives the kill to the shooter and notifies both players.

[Deleted]

That is incorrect, it's the server that is slow. Player get's into cover, server gets an update, meanwhile another player sees outdated state in which the first player is not in the cover yet, they shot at them, server gets an update, server is confused because it was too slow to be in sync with all the clients. Server gives the kill to the shooter and notifies both players.

This is correct. It is also why you when you play high speed heroes such as tracer can actually see yourself on fraps doing one thing and then see it not happen in the replay of you getting killed.

[Deleted]

And, in a world where data transfer is not literally instantaneous across large distances, this is an impossible expectation. Not just impractical, literally impossible.

Other games rely on interpolation as well but none are as shitty as Overwatch. Things that occur in Overwatch rarely or do not occur in other games at all.

[Elim Garak]

Well if Overwatch is biased towards the shooter - no wonder it's bad - that's no interpolation at all. Interpolation would be objective with a margin of error of course, and if player got into cover before getting shot (time-stamps, motherfuckers) - they will be safe and the shooter will just see their target teleport in what is known as a lag-jump. Having lag-jumps is easier to defend because, duh, slow connection - go play over LAN if you want to minimize it.

[Endus]

That is incorrect, it's the server that is slow. Player get's into cover, server gets an update, meanwhile another player sees outdated state in which the first player is not in the cover yet, they shot at them, server gets an update, server is confused because it was too slow to be in sync with all the clients. Server gives the kill to the shooter and notifies both players.

This is not how it works. You're operating under the false impression that your client is the accurate one. It isn't. The server is what's accurate. If your client disagrees with the server (which is what's happening), it's because your client's lagging behind. You aren't getting snagged behind cover. You're getting snagged BEFORE you reach cover. You're just not getting that update fast enough.

It is an issue, but it isn't one that's "unfair" to anyone, and it's entirely cosmetic.

[Elim Garak]

This is not how it works. You're operating under the false impression that your client is the accurate one.

Read again, please. I didn't even use the word accurate. I used the word slow. Someone's client is more accurate than the other's due to latency, obviously, but only server knows which and if it's objective it will sort the things properly so if player A got into cover before player B made the shot - player B would miss, but if it's biased towards shooter - then it will be wrong ~50% of the times. That's hardly accurate.

Bias towards shooter is clearly unfair

[Endus]

Read again, please. I didn't even use the word accurate. I used the word slow. Someone's client is more accurate than the other's due to latency, obviously, but only server knows which and if it's objective it will sort the things properly so if player A got into cover before player B made the shot - player B would miss, but if it's biased towards shooter - then it will be wrong ~50% of the times. That's hardly accurate.

Bias towards shooter is clearly unfair

That isn't how anything works, no.

And the alternative to "bias towards the shooter", as you put it, is "hitscan weapons are useless". Which is obviously far worse. Without going by the shooter's perspective, hitscan weapons can't hit moving targets, because you aren't where you appear to be.

[Elim Garak]

That isn't how anything works, no.

Funny how a person who doesn't know how it works tells me that it's not how it works, while I haven't even tried to explain the how.

And the alternative to "bias towards the shooter", as you put it, is "hitscan weapons are useless".

First of all, no, you are plain wrong. server knows WHERE everyone is in relation to time. If hitscan says that player A has been hit at coordinates XYZ and time S, and player A was actually at the same coordinates at that exact time - it's a hit. But it's a more complex implementation of course. Than just the lazy "trust the shooter's client" approach.
Secondly in this age of internet and computing power it is better and more advantageous to simulate bullets and say FU to hitscan. That's again a bit more complex than the lazy approach. But it is the future that can be implemented RIGHT NOW.

Which is obviously far worse. Without going by the shooter's perspective, hitscan weapons can't hit moving targets, because you aren't where you appear to be.

Lazy Hitscan implementation in online games sucks, on that we agree.

[Endus]

Secondly in this age of internet and computing power it is better and more advantageous to simulate bullets and say FU to hitscan. That's again a bit more complex than the lazy approach. But it is the future that can be implemented RIGHT NOW.

This just offsets the same issue. Without favoring the shooter's perspective, "aim" is irrelevant, since you're just throwing bullets in the general direction of the enemy and praying they step into their path.

That's not great gameplay.