User panel stuff on forum
  12 posts on 1 page  1
Site Feedback
2009-05-19, 10:05
Administrator
1857 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
I would like some feedback from people who have used the live stream.

If you have anything you want changed, whats good and whats bad etc?

Thank you
2009-05-19, 11:46
News Writer
283 posts

Registered:
Jan 2007
Yo, I used it briefly yesterday when trying to sort out murmur to get commentary... On the whole I was impressed - it loaded fast, ran fast, and the sound was *almost* in sync. However I'd definitely recommend a more standard texture / graphics setup - though I've just thought, maybe this would make the stream slower due to the extra info it needs to process? In which case prob OK to stick with plainish textures.

I think perhaps a lower FOV too, because some of the detail was hard to see.
2009-05-19, 12:00
Member
792 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
agreed on the standard textures. i don't like these monochrome setups and i don't think they do much for the visibility. also a higher framerate would be nice but i guess that's not possible in a streaming scenario.

i like the hud and the idea of trying to make everything as clear and neat as possible. gj for doing it i the first place, i think it's hugely important in order to get qw out to the masses.
2009-05-19, 12:06
Member
357 posts

Registered:
Nov 2008
I also dont like paper quake :/ would be nice, if possible, base skins and default textures =) (i guess 24 bit tex are distracting and can make the framerate lower)
"the quieter you become, the more you are able to hear"
2009-05-19, 12:15
Administrator
2051 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
While i would rather see a more oldschoolish texture solution, i think the current one is the best way to go unless it's possible to get a superdupermegastream going as the textures just make the screen look more messy when they aren't in a high resolution.
www.facebook.com/QuakeWorld
2009-05-19, 13:42
Member
1099 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
Whenever I recommend people to watch a qw video livestream they say "that looks like crap" and that's it. Surely it is easier to compress but on the other hand codecs like H264 (or the new Theora when it's done) give amazing visual quality with reasonable bitrates.
Maybe there are some third party streaming providers that could handle better bitrates?
2009-05-19, 13:52
Member
792 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
i doubt it works with live streaming but someone please stream kyu.one with this. i'm sure we'd have enough people helping to stream successfully.
2009-05-20, 09:31
Administrator
1857 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
Thanks for the replys

Regarding the r_drawflat settings, this was chosen to reduce compression artifacts in the stream. With constant changes in colors, the busy areas will appear blocky.
-I however will try to do a test with 24bit textures and see if it looks good with the new setup, as the image quality is a lot better today, than it was with the first 2 setups.

Regarding FPS, it already runs at 50fps, this is more than normal streams use, as they run at 30fps. I also use a lot of setting to make it look smoother, like vsync, and custom gfx driver settings.

The image quality of the stream all comes down to bandwidth, not mine, not the servers, but the viewers bandwidth. I try to keep this down to around 1-2mbit.
-I could run a 1024x768@100fps stream, but then only people on 100mbit would be able to watch it. Also if you encode at 1mbit in the codec, that is at 30fps, so when i run it at 50fps it's gonna be 1.5-1.7mbit.

To compare DDE3 uses 1024x576@40fps and runs at 12mbit!?

I'll take a look at the fov setting.

But the feedback I'm really interested in is what you think about the hud, deathmsg's etc etc... Anything missing, or maybe something that should be removed?
2009-05-20, 09:40
Member
1099 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
Just use normal textures, a reasonable resolution (nowhere close to 800x600), sane framerate (duh) and for that boost up the bitrate.
I mean, who are you kidding with using such insane framerates? Those would think they need it will use QTV anyways.
2009-05-20, 09:52
Member
1433 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
I guess it needs some comparing. Maybe 50 FPS low quality looks much better than 30 FPS high quality, maybe high res low quality looks better than low res high quality, etc. You need to care about how the thing looks in motion, not what quality is a single frame.
And yeah, if colors change quickly, the usual codecs of today will make the stream look like crap. Have you tested grayscale textures?
2009-05-20, 12:14
Member
357 posts

Registered:
Nov 2008
I however will try to do a test with 24bit textures and see [...] --> 24bit tex? Why not default ones?
"the quieter you become, the more you are able to hear"
2009-05-20, 12:24
Administrator
1857 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
Spirit wrote:
Just use normal textures, a reasonable resolution (nowhere close to 800x600), sane framerate (duh) and for that boost up the bitrate.
I mean, who are you kidding with using such insane framerates? Those would think they need it will use QTV anyways.

Insane framerates? I had it at 30fps for a time, I got multiple complains when i did the 50 > 30fps switch.
-I just checked my config and for the previous casts it's been 30fps.

The setup is like this; I capture at 640x480@60fps and i then stream it at 400x300@30fps using h.264
-I would think thats a high enough resolution?

JohnNy_cz wrote:
Have you tested grayscale textures?

Why should I switch from orange/white to grey?
-That wouldn't make sense

But enough with all the compression/quality settings, I already said I would test 24bit textures. I'm looking for feedback regarding what actually gets streamed!
  12 posts on 1 page  1