QoE assessment of interactivity and fairness in First Person Shooting with group synchronization control

Abstract

In networked real-time games such as First Person Shooting (FPS) through a network which does not guarantee the Quality of Service (QoS), the consistency and fairness among players may be disturbed owing to network delay and jitter. To keep the consistency and fairness high, this paper carries out group synchronization control, which adjusts the output timing among multiple terminals. However, the interactivity slightly deteriorates under the control. By the Quality of Experience (QoE) assessment for FPS, this paper investigates the influences of network delay and a parameter of the group synchronization control on the interactivity and fairness.

A Quality of Experience Model for Haptic Virtual Environments

“…One research group [Huang et al 2012;Iwata et al 2010;Tatematsu et al 2010;Kusunose et al 2010;Ida et al 2010] relies on subjective measures solely to assess the QoE of various applications. They use Mean Opinion Score (MOS) to determine the overall QoE.…”

Perceptual view inconsistency: An objective evaluation framework for online game quality of experience (QoE)

“…Previous properties of QoE include: interactivity, responsiveness and consistency [1]; interactivity and fairness [2]; real-timeliness and interactivity [3]. It needs to be stated clearly that QoE is a subjective perception, so the properties of QoE cannot be directly replaced by objective attributes of system.…”

“…An analysis of players' experience in different game scenarios [1], [2], [5] (e.g. shooting, moving, reward, exploring etc.…”

“…The arithmetic difference |(8b)-(8a)| divided by l corresponds to the relative precision inconsistency (9c); and the geometric difference |(8b)/(8a)| minus constant 1 corresponds to the relative responsiveness inconsistency (9d). So, we can see the metric φ from (2) completely quantifies the inconsistency between client1 view and server view.…”

“…All of these reasons seem to make an objective evaluation approach to QoE nearly unachievable. Most previous studies [1], [2], [3] have resorted to subjective evaluation methodologies, using players' opinion scores to resolve the problem. Although newer subjective evaluation approaches have made players' scoring easier and more instinctive than the previously most popular method of Mean Opinion Score (MOS range 5~1) rating test, they all still suffer from a number of issues: 1) the need for a sufficient sample space which means large numbers of participants, 2) the fact that empirical scores do not reflect the sources of QoE variation, and 3) the test data and empirical model [4] cannot be reused in other games.…”