So for instance imagine you're playing an FPS and if you pressed the fire button, the weapon didn't fire until that packet traveled to the server, was processed, scene rendered, and finally returned. An extra 100ms or whatever might not seem like much, but it nonetheless feels very wrong, and also can have a majorly detrimental effect on skilled players' ability to play the game because you're basically adding that time to their reflex rate. And 100ms is more of an aspirational goal than a typical norm. Stadia, for instance, had latency that could reach upwards of 250ms.
Nothing says you can’t do some amount of local rendering to help with that feeling of prediction.
> and also can have a majorly detrimental effect on skilled players' ability to play the game because you're basically adding that time to their reflex rate.
Professional twitch FPS gamers aren’t the target market. The target market is casuals who just want to pick up and not fight with installs, disk space, updates, etc etc.
It's also not just 'professional twitch FPS gamers' that this is an issue for. If you get anywhere near the latency that the Stadia had in certain games (280ms in that article) then that is going to be very jarring even to the most casual gamer. That's less than 4 frames a second! It's going to feel like your character controls like a tugboat. Even at more reasonable latencies you still end up with some significant frustration in games where time matters.
And now a days there's basically zero friction in gaming even on PC. You buy a game with one click, you install with one click, you're playing, often in a matter of seconds.
I love being downvoted for this statement by people who don’t know what I had worked on in the past.