written on Tuesday, November 15, 2011
It's the shooter season of the year and this fall was all about Modern Warfare 3 versus Battlefield 3. And being the kind of game they are they also try to keep their audience playing by introducing some additional level of engagement. Both Call of Duty and Battlefield introduced their own online community websites and statistic platforms. Call of Duty has Elite, Battlefield has Battlelog.
But what are they doing? Notwithstanding some of their respective extra features both Battlelog and Elite are essentially a social network for shooter games that expose the statistics of your individual gameplay as well as the one of your friends to you. Everything you do in the game is reflected on these websites and you can further interact with the game there by commenting on gameplay and chatting up with friends.
Elite by itself is not very interesting technology wise, however Battlelog certainly is. It shows that an application that is probably used by millions of gamers can be built on modern web technology as well. And under the hood is one of the most interesting ways to built a modern web application that I think you should check out.
A few months back I was claiming that WSGI is not the place for pluggable applications and that it would make sense to assemble applications on the client-side. Turns out, Battlelog is doing just that. While I do not know what all of their infrastructure looks like, their network graph and license information on the page is revealing.
If you send an HTTP request to the website it appears to work as if it was a regular website. You get a bunch of HTML rendered and nothing interesting happens. However if you click on any link you do not get HTML transmitted. Instead what is transmitted is JSON, the HTML5 history API is used to modify the URL dynamically and all the HTML is rendered on the client. Since it appears to be able to do both we can compare the sizes of the data transmitted easily.
The HTML for the index page is 18KB in size. If we trigger the request to the same URL with just the JSON it's 4KB. Not only is it less to transmit, it also means that the server is essentially just generating JSON instead of rendering whole templates which also means a performance improvement for the client.
The platform is a work of beauty in general and I am amazed how little I have heard on the interwebs about it. So to give you an idea why it's an incredible technical achievement on so many levels, here the breakdown.
To understand what Battlelog is here a brief overview of what it does. These are not necessarily the features that are immediately obvious to the user but are very obvious for the interested developer that wants to peak under the hood:
In order to understand why Battlelog is interesting engineering we have to reconstruct what it appears to be doing. Again, I am not claiming knowledge of their server technology, I basically just observed what I saw and concluded a few things from it.
The data you get back is everything the page needs to render, including the name of the template. When that data arrives on the client the browser replaces the current page content with the data that was rendered on the client side from the received JSON. Not only that, it also makes sure to use the HTML5 history API to change the browser URL.
The user does not notice that anything interesting is going on unless he's tech savvy enough to open the firebug network panel and watch the system operate. In fact the whole thing is so incredible smooth that you would not notice anything interesting besides the fact that the page loads fast. I mean seriously fast. Clicking on a link in Battlelog is such a snappy operation it's haunting for the trained web developer eye. Very few systems respond this quickly. This is especially noticeable on pages that do not involve a lot of different data such as the news section of the website or the forums.
If you look at the website it also has a bar on the bottom of the screen that shows notifications, your friendlist, open chat windows and a few other things. This bar can have state. You can toggle windows open and closed, you can scroll in the chat window, enter new next and the bar will stay open and unchanged if you navigate to a different page. True, this is nothing special these days, facebook does it too. However from the design that Battlelog follows this comes natural. When the page contents are hooked in the DOM element for that bar on the bottom is preserved and not touched.
The other aspect of Battlelog is the real time component with web sockets. I have not looked too far into that but it appears that it's based on an abstraction layer on top of web sockets, Flash or whatever is supported that was written by ESN for other projects in mind as well. The server code sends an information to the push hub which handles the socket connection for the clients. This way various systems can inform the client about updates, that does not even have to be Battlelog itself.
While it's not necessarily the case with Battlelog, there are a bunch of really good reasons why you want to render stuff on the client side:
The real interesting thing about Battlelog however is a Windows PC specific component. If you are heading to Battlelog from a Windows PC and you own the PC version of Battlefield 3 you can launch into a game right from within the browser. How does this work? It works with the help of a browser plugin that exposes additional functionality to the in browser client. Namely it has a function to start the game and pass it information as well as a general purpose function to ping an IP address which is used for the server browser.
In fact if you are playing on PC this is how the game is launched, always. There is no in game menu, you join from within your browser. This is mind blowing thing. First of all it makes it easier for DICE to update the server infrastructure since it's now mostly separated from the client and also makes for much quicker iterations.
The communication for the most part works in one-way but in a cycle as it seems. If you log into Battlelog and head to the server browser you get a list of servers. How does that work? Here's how:
Now here was me thinking. Would the plugin be necessary to accomplish all of the above things or could it be done in a different way? Native applications are here to stay, that's a given. However more and more stuff of what a native application does can be moved into a browser for great success. So how does a web application speak to a native application?
The traditional way is by letting the application register a custom URL scheme and then letting the user click on that link which then launches the application. That's unfortunately a one way communication only. But that might be everything that is needed.
So here is how it could be done. Battlefield or any other application that wants to do the same but without the browser plugin could instead register a URL handler with a unique name. Let's say battlefield3://. The operating system then knows about this URL scheme and can start a handling application. What can we do with this?
But instead of launching the game it starts a daemon. That daemon takes the token and picks a random TCP port on the system and starts an HTTP server there. Once that server is running it notifies the central server that it's running and on what port. Since the web browser has a push notification channel open it will get a notification now that the daemon is running and on which port.
After that it can use HTTP and JSONP to communicate with the daemon. But how does the daemon know when to shut down? Basically that daemon will needs to be informed when to shut down. I would assume that 15 minutes without a ping from the browser would be a good indication that it should destruct itself. When shutting down it also tells Battlelog that it's no longer running to clear out the port entry.
Additionally to make this better it should not only record the port but also an identifier that uniquely identifies the machine the daemon is running on so that the user can alternate between different computers without ending up with weird behavior where the central server is informing the browser that the game is running when in fact it's running on a different machine.
Since Battlefield 3 supports only one running game per user account it does not make sense to support more than one session. If that would be wanted it could obviously be done.
The downside here obviously is that it needs a websocket connection and a central server that acts as mediator between the different systems (daemon, client side app). In Battlefield 3's case that would not be a concern (and already is not) since it's an online game. The second problem here is that it needs one additional user interaction: the user has to click on the link to activate it. This currently is not necessary in Battlelog since it's provided by a plugin.
The whole concept of using a browser application as a frontend for a native application is an interesting thing indeed. Due to offline support becoming widespread that is also no longer a concern if the application can largely run in the client side. But that would break my above hypothetical example of interacting with a local application.
Falling back to a browser plugin currently is the only way to make a consenting communication with a local application. I really wonder if there is not room for improvement by having an API in HTML5 that makes this possible which would also work for offline applications.
Basically what would be needed is a simple way for a two way communication with a local application. That application would have to register itself somewhere and then be able to respond to the client's requests. It could totally work like a CGI script (eg: speak HTTP via stdin/stdout).
I think there is a lot of potential for such applications in the future and Battlelog shows that it can be done already with a little help of a small plugin.
One last thing. Battlefield 3 sold a couple millions of copies. The PC users all have to update to recent version of their browsers since the website basically demands a modern browser. Even with all the fallbacks in place, it kinda forces people to update. For a certain audience websites like Battlelog can be the killer application of modern HTML5 features. Keep this in mind. In case you have a similar audience that's something to take advantage of.