Multiplayer?

[Max5081]

Since the game is in beta, I don't think they will add it JUST yet until it's out of beta, but I also REALLY want multiplayer! It's a great idea!!

[Someonestolemeberrys]

Multiplayer is fun...Singleplayer I make the rules...

[Bogpad]

was it really needed to necro this thread? But while we are here, let me introduce you to the official klei statement regarding multiplayer, it is as old as this thread, but as far as I am aware, nothing about this question has changed regarding klei entertainment... and if this should change at any point, at any time, I am relatively sure that we will be the first people to know outside klei.

[jordanrw8]

If they can't add multiplayer to the ****ing game, then START MAKING DON'T STARVE 2(T) FOR GOD SAKES.

[Oatmeal]

lol I could so see a VS mode where players try and ruin the other players with a machine in their worlds while trying to survive in their own that's being messed with by the opponent. Could even make it a 4-for-all.Call it, "VS Survival" or "Survival of the Fittest!"But naaaah. They've said multiple times that they ain't putting in multiplayer. It's even a sticky in this forum! :U

[sirmentlegen]

But naaaah. They've said multiple times that they ain't putting in multiplayer. It's even a sticky in this forum! :U

Read the date!

[Oatmeal]

Read the date!

Date of what? This thread? I know. lol Felt like putting in my two cents.And the date of the Multiplayer Sticky weeeeeell... I'd assume they said it once so they wouldn't need to repeat it. Plus it's a sticky and IF there was a chance of a multiplayer, then why would they still have it stickied?! :U

[RebelWarrior1]

Reasons for Multiplayer

First of all i would like to state that i believe a 60 player server on dont starve would suck, Co-op of any kind with 1 or 2 people is all i am asking for.

1. No bad things, first of all, because people can still play singleplayer to feel alone and helpless and if they dont like it, co-op!

2. People claim adding multiplayer would make the game suck and make the quality of the gameplay go down, it wont, it will make the vast amount of exploring go down, which is already huge.

3. Your adding multiplayer. You cant take stuff away from singleplayer if its a entire different gamemode, and you could always go back to singleplayer.

4. Notice half the people who want multiplayer AND dont want multiplayer say things like, "Dont Starve is a great game! But multiplayer will make it worse! The feel of dont starve will be worse and so will gameplay blah blah blah" Notice what they said about dont starve. Adding something that doesnt change the singleplayer at ALL wont change the fact that Dont Starve is already a great game, and, infact, wont change the singleplayer experience at all.

5. When you go swimming and enter a swimming pool, it feels cold. If you go sit in the hot tub for 10 minutes and then enter the pool, its gonna be A LOT colder. Same thing for dont starve, with a partner(s) you will feel safer with with, but when you leave each other its gonna feel MUCH MORE lonely and dangerous!

6. The entire "too little resources and it would take alot of time and reprogramming" thing that creators are saying shouldnt be a reason at all. Im guessing that a full multiplayer thing where there are 60 players and dedicated servers you pay for or something would cost too much and take too much time, but thats not what im asking for, im asking for co-op lan servers. Like (sorry for comparison) minecraft. When that came out, I jumped out of my skin in happiness because I could easily play with friends and with my brothers. While it would take some time, it would hopefully take less reprogramming and less hassle.

7. (This is just something they could do, but honestly not something they should do in my opinion) The creators of the game could release it as a DLC or add-on pack and even make it cost money, like 5.00$ or something.

8. While a good singleplayer is something very needed in order to create a good game, alot of people these days are wanting to have multiplayer, and with co-op, it could increase the rate of Dont Starve sales by attracting a wider spread of gamers with cooperative.

9. Another type of gameplay will be added as well as cooperative play! While im no fan of pvp or fighting one another, it would still automatically be a option for how people could play Dont Starve, which will lure even MORE types people into purchasing Dont Starve!

Details on how it could work.

Difficulty

I honestly believe that increasing difficulty when 3 people have joined you in a co-op experience is silly. In dont starve, what is a constant problem? Resources: like food, good items, weapons, and armor.

Death

The death system should work no different then in singleplayer, if your dead your dead, if you have a amulet or meat effigy your not. Now, on the note of mentioning effigies, people may be wondering what would happen and how it would work. Well honestly, exactly the same. It shouldnt matter if you didnt build it, if its there you're alive, same goes if somebody else dies.

Characters

This is the trickiest part, the characters. With a good assortment, players could easily survive, like if people were Wolfgang, Willow, and Wilson. With Wilson you can create effigies with your beard, with Willow you have somebody to travel with during the night who has infinite fire, and with Wolfgang you have a tanking dude. Plus if somebody was Wendy, then (as long as the ghost doesnt attack other players) you also have another fighter. So the thing about the characters is a good question, now this comes with two options:

1. Everybody would just be the same character as the host of the game (perhaps have name-plates above their head or different colored clothers)

2. Nobody would have character perks. ( Maybe the host or if the host was Wilson but nobody else. And maybe nobody could be the same character? Just spewing out ideas.)

Creating a Server

As i've mentioned time and time again, the server would hopefully be lan (Reasons explained in "Reasons for Co-op" reason number 6 on the list) Now making the server would preferrably be the same as (sorry for the comparison again) minecraft. Pressing one button and then bam, now your server is up! You get two copies of the game so you can make sure you give the copy to a good friend of yours that you can play with whenever you want! Now, the server would shut down if you left, which might be bad for some people, but I'm not really bothered by it. If admin commands WERE put in, they should include /kick, /mute, and /ban. Just in case somebody in your network also has dont starve and joins you.

Joining a Server

Well, if this WAS implemented, they most likely would of added a section underneath the singleplayer button labled 'Co-op' or 'Multiplayer' Upon clicking this, it would probably show a screen labled "Servers" on top and have a huge box containing any servers you could connect to. Now i dont really need to get into details, it would probably have a refresh, and connect button and the normal stuff. And when you see a open server, you would join it, simple as that.

Authors Note

I dont mean to rush my hopes onto anybody, or seem like im insulting Dont Starve, and im especially not trying to tell that Dev team what to do, im just trying to get a message. People want co-op, not a massive multiplayer game or anything, something small they can play with friends. I know, I'm not Kevin or anybody really important, in fact im guessing nobody on the dev team will give this giant essay of a idea any thought or even care to read it all the way. But I dont want to give up on a game that has the potential to be a smash hit! I thought that when Kevin posted his thread about the multiplayer, I wasted my money on something I got bored of after playing a total of 9 hours. But I decided that I wont give up on this, and that while Dont Starve is, infact, something thats amazing already, it STILL will get boring. (Sorry AGAIN for the comparison) Minecraft was amazing but eventually got boring on its own, even with updates. But the multiplayer is what I loved the most, it added a ENTIRE new feel to minecraft! It made chores like getting pork and wood bearable because you have a guy that makes the game feel alive! I know alot of people will spam me and hate on my for what i've said, but I wont stop suggesting and begging until Kevin decides that this is worth it! Im gonna keep shouting at him until he hears what we want and figures out that we dont care HOW long it takes, just that it will be worth it in the end! I hope people can spread all of this, maybe even say some of what i've said to other forums and Dont Starve players to try to convince them to keep asking for this, to convince Kevin! I just hope that the people who agree with me wont give up anytime soon, and that we are loud enough for Kevin to hear us.

P.S Holy **** did I type alot!

[Wilson P. Higgsbury]

we are loud enough for Kevin to hear us..

First of all, I love how everyone thinks Kevin runs the show. Now on to the topic, I doubt that Klei will ever make multiplayer considering the fact that they will have to rewrite most of the games code again. You wasted your time typing out that wall of text.Edit: Kevin runs the show, don't read what that idiot said about Kevin not running it. Edited April 10, 2013 by Wilson P. Higgsbury

[Palpetinus]

P.S Holy **** did I type alot!

And it's all wasted time you'll never get back.

First of all, I love how everyone thinks Kevin runs the show. Now on to the topic, I doubt that Klei will ever make multiplayer considering the fact that they will have to rewrite most of the games code again. You wasted your time typing out that wall of text.

For me, Kevin will always be the one running the show.

[Wohweli]

they would need to start coding all over since how the game works would cause significant problems with crashes and all meters (especially naughtiness meter) and loading the map they would have needed to start with the idea of multiplayer

[RebelWarrior1]

As I said before, with Lan options things run more simpler and are less complex. The naughtiness mete would be the same, if a certain number of animals die by a players hand then they would be punished exactly the same as in singleplayer. And with the multiplayer map, again, lan, which you would probably activate while in singleplayer. So I dont see a issue.

And it's all wasted time you'll never get back.

What wasted time? It took 10 minutes to write this and I feel it was far from wasted. I just wanted to make sure that if devs bring up the idea of co-op or lan again, thay would already have a draft made, or for them to know that most fans like me are simply asking for lan, which is a much easier process. Edited April 10, 2013 by Toaster Fu

[Seriphos]

Your post contained 1343 words. Now, if you had a typing (not including thinking) speed of 1 word per second, you would be done in 22.383 minutes. Are you telling me you had a typing speed of 2 words per second not including the time to think, put things in bold, etc.?No multiplayer for me.

[Palpetinus]

What wasted time? It took 10 minutes to write this and I feel it was far from wasted. I just wanted to make sure that if devs bring up the idea of co-op or lan again, thay would already have a draft made, or for them to know that most fans like me are simply asking for lan, which is a much easier process.

It has been mentioned like 50 times already. Detailed and not.I think they got it already.

[smile.gif]

NO no multiplier

[dra6o0n]

the only multiplayer I would think can work is if there's a mod that overhauls the game into two game modes.maxwell mode - you play as a demon and influence the biome by controlling minions in a RTS style. you can only control chess pieces and move them on the chessboard terrain. you can expand the terrain bit by bit.you have a machine you protect and you can spawn minions out of it. you also have abilities to manipulate the world... but it cost you points. you gain income every day and from activities you do... like creating evil flower circles, etc.your income increases as you place more into the world... but Wilson can abuse it.Wilson mode is the regular playing style. except you survive against the opponent. line of sight and fog of war becomes ideal as Maxwell cannot see exactly where you are.when using minions... maxwell is its own faction. other creatures are hostile to them.the only issue I see is that the game would last forever between 2 players.its more like a single player with a maxwell meta game on a browser... you do strategic turn based meta game on someone's single player game...invasion mode anyone? (Like demons' soul)

Edited April 10, 2013 by dra6o0n

[dra6o0n]

The funny thing is that, at times people underestimate the game programming, thinking that its impossible to change it to utilize a small network plugin that just does hello world to the person it connects to...we are even using mods that can override the game's programming too so I'd suggest modders to experiment with game ideas from outside the box a bit more... currently modders edit and insert small contents but I've yet to see someone even prototype a "chat box" into it for local testing...

[RebelWarrior1]

I agree..? I think?

Edited April 10, 2013 by RebelWarrior1

[Magnemania]

Hey guys, I have a brilliant idea.

You know how every single piece of code in the game refers to a lone, unique player object? And how sanity, hunger, health, and naughtiness are probably just saved integer/real values instead of sets of integer values, with the same going for sanity regeneration rate? And how the inventory is a single list of objects that probably works a bit differently than the duplicate-able backpack inventories? And how the Hounds/Deerclops only need to spawn around the player's position values, rather than select from a set of position values? And how Hallucinations are objects that simply spawn when a single sanity variable is low enough, then despawn when said variable is high enough? And how those Hallucinations adopt a completely different behavior that directly conflicts with their previous behavior when said lone sanity variable is low enough? And how the save system saves individual variables and not sets of variables? And how the game has been tested using these individual values instead of sets of values for months?

Let's change all of that.

[elitefroggy]

Hey guys, I have a brilliant idea.

You know how every single piece of code in the game refers to a lone, unique player object? And how sanity, hunger, health, and naughtiness are probably just saved integer/real values instead of sets of integer values, with the same going for sanity regeneration rate? And how the inventory is a single list of objects that probably works a bit differently than the duplicate-able backpack inventories? And how the Hounds/Deerclops only need to spawn around the player's position values, rather than select from a set of position values? And how Hallucinations are objects that simply spawn when a single sanity variable is low enough, then despawn when said variable is high enough? And how those Hallucinations adopt a completely different behavior that directly conflicts with their previous behavior when said lone sanity variable is low enough? And how the save system saves individual variables and not sets of variables? And how the game has been tested using these individual values instead of sets of values for months?

Let's change all of that.

Could you not have all of these things stored on each client?

It should all work except the hallucinations I think.

I doubt it will be added anyway, maybe in Don't Starve 2?

Even just an asynchronous multiplayer would be good (you can challenge a person, you both get the same world and whoever survives longer wins!)

[Magnemania]

Could you not have all of these things stored on each client?It should all work except the hallucinations I think.I doubt it will be added anyway, maybe in Don't Starve 2?Even just an asynchronous multiplayer would be good (you can challenge a person, you both get the same world and whoever survives longer wins!)

One could do asynchronous multiplayer in that fashion already by sharing saves, though I suppose you'd have to die to choose a different character. It would be nice if there was a seed-sharing system, though..And the problem isn't the storage of all those variables, as storage doesn't really require any space. The host still needs to access those values and work with sets of values in all its actions. One just can't get around the fact that working with multiple characters and multiple sets of values requires completely different code than that used for single player.

[Eren Jaeger]

Just commenting to say that I support the multiplayer idea, even though I know it won't happen.

[Alchemist]

Or maybe if one player dies, he drops a 'special' item that you can take to a functioning touch stone or meat effigy, like a voodoo doll or something then the player could respawn? similiar to SP, when you die how in the heck do you respawn to that meat effigy, its VOODOO magic!

Edited April 12, 2013 by Alchemist

[eddie10089]

OK so i just learnt some coding and i noticed it will take too long and it would be a waste of time to rewrite the code or make a new game. There are lots of multiplayer games out there already and the devs promise the best singleplayer experience ever in your life.

[Palpetinus]

OK so i just learnt some coding and i noticed it will take too long and it would be a waste of time to rewrite the code or make a new game. There are lots of multiplayer games out there already and the devs promise the best singleplayer experience ever in your life.

I also understand the basics of lua coding far enough to tell that it would be too much efford.