Sylvain Garden
Assigned
Reported
Comments
For your information, the same client/server sync obvious delay in a single player game also occurs when the frame rate is set at 20fps. I guess that a 20 fps frame rate may be encountered on many machines fitting the minimum requirements.
I can reproduce this right now on my PC with this week snapshot. When setting the frame rate to 10, it should only affect the screen refreshing rate. A low screen refreshing rate is not supposed to alter the game logic itself as long all the computer resources are available: disk, ram, cpu...
Instead, when one breaks dirt blocks here and there, the block is destroyed on the client part, and then *seconds after* on the server side (the block eventualy disappears and turns into an item). Same thing with chunck loading, when the player is running, chunck fails to be loaded immediately ; only seconds after it should have been. Limit the scope limit to the minimum so to evidence the phenoma.
wait wait, just a minute. Did you read the problem is the same on a high-end pc?
Yes Mikkel, the CPU of my 3 netbooks are very weak (Atom first gen or Celeron). I'm aware that 10 fps is logical in such a context and I'm used to it.
However the game was still relatively playable until 1.7.10. Not Now anymore because of some additional delay (I guess in client/server messaging) as soon as the client FPS is not high enough.
No offense but I feel like you're missing the point. On my last computer: Lenovo Z580 with plenty of ram, CPU and GPU horsepower, I can still reproduce the bug. If I choose to limit the frame rate to 10 fps via the options screen, a single player game looks like I'm connected to a remote server in North Corea.
I'm going to edit the issue description so to better reflect this anomaly.
IMHO, the primary problem of the bad user experience is that the heavy computation should be triggered when the user releases the mouse button, not on every mouse move event as it makes this slider very difficult to manipulate even on a powerful platform.
It's as simple as that. I regret I didn't describe this bug in this way.