News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Partial WebAssembly backend for the GNU toolchain. Parent comment

Re:Partial WebAssembly backend for the GNU toolchain by larsiusprime on Saturday March 04, 2017 @07:44PM (#13793902)
Latency will always be a consideration though; the fidelity might get there in terms of audiovisuals, but you can't engineer around the speed of light.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Partial WebAssembly backend for the GNU toolchain by girvo on Saturday March 04, 2017 @11:01PM (#13794526)
I use a LiquidSky cloud gaming PC as my main games machine. For Overwatch, I have a ping of 1ms, as it's next to the OW servers, 40ms total ping from my home to LiquidSky. it's kind of amazing and works wonderfully
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Partial WebAssembly backend for the GNU toolchain by tomatsu on Sunday March 05, 2017 @07:18AM (#13795678)
> Latency will always be a consideration though

And it will always be way too high for VR.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Partial WebAssembly backend for the GNU toolchain by Jyaif on Sunday March 05, 2017 @07:29AM (#13795704)
They could stream a spherical texture (with depth map). Locally you would only have to render the sphere from the view point of the eyes.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Partial WebAssembly backend for the GNU toolchain by d0vs on Saturday March 04, 2017 @07:50PM (#13793928)
If we can get closer though, I suspect most people wouldn't be bothered.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Partial WebAssembly backend for the GNU toolchain by SomeStupidPoint on Saturday March 04, 2017 @08:49PM (#13794159)
It would basically double the current latency (about 100ms) by adding a 50ms trip to both receiving and sending. (And that's being generous -- it could easily add 100+ms to each trip.)
[ Parent | on HN ]