Many games that have come out in the past few years have suffered greatly from really awful hit detection, I'm wondering if Splash Damage has kept their excellent quality on this. Since RTCW: Enemy Territory has one of the greatest net codes out of any game out there, I am cautiously optimistic.

A client sided hit detection code with full lag compensation up to around 200 or 300 ms is most likely the best way to go about it in a game where most guns are hitscan (as in the bullets are instant and not projectiles). Enemy Territory has this and it is extremely consistent.

I'm sure most FPS gamers are aware of the amount of frustration you experience when your aim is directly on the target when you fire, but the bullets simply don't connect. In some games this happens extremely often (look at Black Ops or Bad Company 2 for example), but some games actually have a good system in place and it is extremely rare that your bullets don't connect. This can really make or break a game for many players and I hope Brink does not fail in this regard.

I think the lag compensation is actually the major flaw in Call of Duty and Battlefield games. It allows you to kill people who have already taken cover because your client compensates their lag.

That is actually a common misconception about lag compensation. It doesn't allow players to "shoot behind corners", it's just that the players who have already gone behind the corner feel that way, but in actuality the player who shot them, shot them when they were in plain sight.

Lag compensation sacrifices a little from the experience of receiving damage to enhance the experience of DEALING damage to everyone. It _IS_ the best way to do it. Otherwise you would give *incredible* advantages to people with low latency.

Think about it, would you rather have a game where your shots always hit the target when you aim at them but sometimes get lag shotted a split second after you've gone to cover...
...or a game where you consistently miss due to lag and lack of client sided hit detection but always get to cover safely?

I like Counter-Strike more than Battlefield or CoD, concerning hit-detection.

At a ping of 60+ you'd have a hard time, yes, but you can actually play with a ping of 16 in CS. Proper network-coding > lag-compensation.

Counter-strike has lag compensation. Battlefield games are just awfully coded or all the servers are garbage so everyone has [censored] ping and thus the corner shot effect of lag comp is more noticeable.

Counter-Strike might have it. But that's not my point. My point is, that you can play Coutner-Strike with pings that do not require Lag Compensation.

It's not even possible to play Modern Warfare 2 at a ping under 40 on dedicated servers, if you're not in the same room like the server.

So what, lag compensation vastly improves the game if you are playing on a server that isn't right by you, being able to aim directly at the model instead of 50+ ms ahead of where you think it will be far out weighs the few instances where you get shot around a corner by some guy with 150 ping.

You like CS more because pings are low there, so the hit detection code doesn't have to be good? The amount of times I ripped my hair out back in 2002 when I still played CS is vast. I have played Modern Warfare 2 and Enemy Territory for years and I don't even remember a time in those games that my shots would not have hit their target. And the amount of times that I have got frustrated about being shot "around the corner" is negligible.

But the amount of times I got mad in CS, COD4, Black Ops or Bad Company 2 among other games for missing even tho my crosshair was directly on the target is insane. A client-sided hit detection is the only reasonable way to go in a game where the vast majority of weapons are instant hit. As already said here a few times, the benefits of client-sided hit detection _vastly_ outweigh the drawbacks.

This is an important subject, so I would like to hear some more discussion about this and hopefully, if possible, have this added to the Q&A.

Long story short: my internet svcks b***s. I'll average 120-140ms on a good day, and that's with Battleping running. I used to play CS on 56k, and while not impossible, it wasn't nearly as enjoyable as it could be. Today, ping is obviously better on a still slow (but way better than 56k) 3G broadband ISP, but I'm still at a serious disadvantage to those whom have a ping of say... 30ms. If I could just get to 80ms, I'd be happy. Remember, that's a full round trip, not just one way. 40ms for the packet to reach the server, another 40ms to get the result back.

Course, I'm being selfish: if the hit detection were server side, on my end it would still feel like I'm being shot through walls. Fact is, it's starting to become the norm for FPS' to go the CSHD route because it takes most of the lag out of killing people. Of course, survival is sacrificed in the process. Things will change when the nations ISP's stop price gouging us by the gig and actually set up some real quality lines that CAN handle the bandwidth, or Google's "super fast internet" becomes the norm, whichever happens first. Even Korean games are taking a more CSHD approach, and they're all about online gaming over there.

Well I seem to still be unbeaten on any forum I visit for having the worst connection, so if it doesn't lag for ME then SD have done a stellar job. :thumbsup:

... though I REALLY don't have high hopes

As long as the connection does not have me spraying people without them taking damage, run towards cover and die when behind it, or have people learn the power of teleportation. I am good.

not to mention in cs you can shoot through walls including corners