Multiplayer

[CoolCreation201YT]

Dear Klei And Readers

Like Jonathan Hoffman said in an earlier post, he was thinking of like... derelict bases. i would like to expand on that because i think it can expand onto making a multiplayer.

now Klei, i know you said you werent going to add one, but in the future we could add this.

everyone starts out seperate from eachother, in the planet and instead of having the border rocks, we remove them and that expands into another players base and well.. attack but the player has to be online to be able to dig in there.. or perhaps players get raided, or buy defenses or something, we could make something really cool out of this. it could even be like visiting others in a menu and trading/

feel free to make a post expanding this idea, thankyou Jonathan Hoffman for the idea. I credit him.

Thanks For Reading.

CoolCreation201 Youtube

 

 

 

[AlexRou]

Before even talking about how multiplayer would look like ... you have a huge problem ... the game uses a lot of physics as the core mechanic. Now I cannot even think of a game that is able to sync fluid simulations across the network. So before even thinking about how you want multiplayer to play out ... the problem of synchronizing the physics/world needs to be addressed. Or you could describe a "multiplayer" that works without any synchronization.

[CoolCreation201YT]

7 hours ago, AlexRou said:

Before even talking about how multiplayer would look like ... you have a huge problem ... the game uses a lot of physics as the core mechanic. Now I cannot even think of a game that is able to sync fluid simulations across the network. So before even thinking about how you want multiplayer to play out ... the problem of synchronizing the physics/world needs to be addressed. Or you could describe a "multiplayer" that works without any synchronization.

thanks for the feedback, this is not a definite decision, this is just posting about, if multiplayer was added these are some ideas for it.

[AlexRou]

3 minutes ago, CoolCreation201YT said:

thanks for the feedback, this is not a definite decision, this is just posting about, if multiplayer was added these are some ideas for it.

I know, but you still have to think around technical limitations if you don't want your ideas to be wasted. You can plan the perfect multiplayer but if no one can implement it then theres no point.

[Luponius]

9 minutes ago, AlexRou said:

I know, but you still have to think around technical limitations if you don't want your ideas to be wasted. You can plan the perfect multiplayer but if no one can implement it then theres no point.

I don't really think suggestions and feedback is a forum meant for players to wrestle against the technical aspects of the game and its suggested implementation.  They throw out their wishes and the devs will see to it if it's worth implementing.  I think it's a fair suggestion, although I don't necessarily agree with it.  Raiding bases and such I don't personally find to be all that interesting for all the things multiplayer could do.

[AlexRou]

2 minutes ago, Luponius said:

I don't really think suggestions and feedback is a forum meant for players to wrestle against the technical aspects of the game and its suggested implementation.  They throw out their wishes and the devs will see to it if it's worth implementing.  I think it's a fair suggestion, although I don't necessarily agree with it.  Raiding bases and such I don't personally find to be all that interesting for all the things multiplayer could do.

Fair enough, but I feel that with limitations comes creativity. So something good might come out of trying to get around the limitations. I just wanted to point out that there are limits to whats possible with a game that relies so much on physics. If someone wants to ignore it and continue suggesting what they want I have nothing against it.

[Ecu]

Honestly, I don't really understand the need to implement multiplayer in everything.  ONI is a singleplayer colony simulator with abstracted physics simulation.  Beyond the technical aspects of implementing multiplayer, the game itself was not designed with it in mind at all.  Working to implement multiplayer mechanics would only take away from the current game.

In addition to my mentioned opinion on this, the developers themselves said on their early streams that ONI would not become multiplayer.  In addition to this, on the alpha release thread it again states that they have no plans to implement multiplayer.  Do we really need people to continue to post multiple requests for multiplayer in the suggestions forum when Klei has already made their viewpoint on this clear?

[Zaphias]

The game would only work with a Co-op type multiplayer (ie. players controlling their own dups and help each other build a base) and for the technical details it would need to work with a Server to Client method for managing the physics of the game, that way the server physics remain authority so the client just follows.

Now the way you would be explaining is a type of mobile game with bases scattered through a seed, which I don't think it would be that much fun, just go play clash of clans or something =P.

But yeah, the devs have stated that multiplayer will not be implemented, or at least not in the near future

[CoolCreation201YT]

3 hours ago, Ecu said:

Honestly, I don't really understand the need to implement multiplayer in everything.  ONI is a singleplayer colony simulator with abstracted physics simulation.  Beyond the technical aspects of implementing multiplayer, the game itself was not designed with it in mind at all.  Working to implement multiplayer mechanics would only take away from the current game.

In addition to my mentioned opinion on this, the developers themselves said on their early streams that ONI would not become multiplayer.  In addition to this, on the alpha release thread it again states that they have no plans to implement multiplayer.  Do we really need people to continue to post multiple requests for multiplayer in the suggestions forum when Klei has already made their viewpoint on this clear?

as i said, this is a representation if multiplayer was added, this would be a preferable way of making it. we dont need to get down to the bottom of things.

[Ecu]

Just now, CoolCreation201YT said:

as i said, this is a representation if multiplayer was added, this would be a preferable way of making it. we dont need to get down to the bottom of things.

I think understanding the environment is actually a rather good idea when making suggestions for a game.  As such, the developers have stated they have no intention of adding multiplayer.  As such, doesn't it make little sense to actually suggest representations for multiplayer?

[CoolCreation201YT]

2 minutes ago, Ecu said:

I think understanding the environment is actually a rather good idea when making suggestions for a game.  As such, the developers have stated they have no intention of adding multiplayer.  As such, doesn't it make little sense to actually suggest representations for multiplayer?

My opinion is, the technicality of multiplayer is left to Klei, what i have simply stated is a wishlist, not a set of instructions on how to do it, this is not an argument i want to start, i am just trying to say some ways of multiplayer. also Ecu i have some very interesting other posts on the suggestions forums, i'dappreciate you checking them out.

I especially think my Special Characters post is interesting.

 

[Ecu]

1 minute ago, CoolCreation201YT said:

My opinion is, the technicality of multiplayer is left to Klei, what i have simply stated is a wishlist, not a set of instructions on how to do it, this is not an argument i want to start, i am just trying to say some ways of multiplayer. also Ecu i have some very interesting other posts on the suggestions forums, i'dappreciate you checking them out.

Except that the FAQ itself states that they have no intention to implement multiplayer.  This is on top of them stating such during the live streams as well.  So I am curious what the reason for suggesting multiplayer features would be?

[CoolCreation201YT]

Just now, Ecu said:

Except that the FAQ itself states that they have no intention to implement multiplayer.  This is on top of them stating such during the live streams as well.  So I am curious what the reason for suggesting multiplayer features would be?

they said they had no plans for multiplayer, they didnt say its impossible or that they dont want to. this post is to tell them that we want multiplayer and this is the type we want. if it can be done, good! if it cant, then darn! im not forcing them with this post.

[Ecu]

I think we're just going in a circle now.  Klei's viewpoint on multiplayer has been stated.  In addition, the technical issues regarding implementing multiplayer have also been stated.  I personally feel like there is little likelihood of multiplayer at this point.  I'll leave it at that, I guess.

[AlexRou]

At least try thinking of ideas within the restrictions. Who knows, it might end up being better than what you came up with without it. But if you want to ignore it and continue with your direction go ahead.

Let me tweak your original idea slightly ...

There is a teleporter that opens up a world list where you can send dupes to attack other people's bases. The player doesn't need to be online and if he is he doesn't see your attack, everything will be computed on the attacker's side and the defenders will be all AI. When the battle is done, maybe his resources decreases or his buildings get damaged (no syncing between players until after the battle and only health/resources and not the entire world). Maybe only one attacker at a time with a timer so everyone can't gang up on one person.

There are also defenses like turrets/sandbags/etc... that the player can place around to defend the base.

Now this is a million times more likely to be done and it's only slightly different from what you described.

[cpy]

I don't see how multiplayer would work or if even it would add anything to the game.

You can make deterministic game and just need to sync commands over network but that would create even more problems.

DST is perfect example why you should have MP in it. ONI is not.

[AlexRou]

1 minute ago, cpy said:

You can make deterministic game and just need to sync commands over network but that would create even more problems.

This doesn't work the moment you have physics. Simulated game physics are not 100% reproducible. 

[cpy]

1 minute ago, AlexRou said:

This doesn't work the moment you have physics. Simulated game physics are not 100% reproducible. 

You don't know what deterministic means do you?

[AlexRou]

22 minutes ago, cpy said:

You don't know what deterministic means do you?

It means everything that happens on one client can be exactly be reproduced on another client with the same input.

Which is impossible for game physics or close to it. If anything takes even a slightly different time to process the differences will start snowballing very quickly. And sending only commands means you're not syncing the world which means ping will result in the commands coming in latter than they would be causing a different effect.

Or are you talking about getting rid of the fluid simulations entirely and redesigning the whole game?

[mr_anderson]

The devs have already stated that they have no intentions to make multiplayer. If you want multiplayer just play games that are specially designed for multiplayer. Also implementing multiplayer would take too much time and manpower which could otherwise be used for greater things. Plus the current gameplay and the game mechanics are primarily focused on singleplayer, for example, you cant directly control your dupes-you kind of give them hits on what they should be working on. Even if they wanted to add multiplayer it would have to be a separate game (like dont starve) and this would only happen if the majority of the community wanted it, making the creation of multiplayer worth the time. Im not even gonna go into the whole physics sync issue cause im not educated enough to talk about that stuff, yet.

[cpy]

11 hours ago, AlexRou said:

It means everything that happens on one client can be exactly be reproduced on another client with the same input.

Which is impossible for game physics or close to it. If anything takes even a slightly different time to process the differences will start snowballing very quickly. And sending only commands means you're not syncing the world which means ping will result in the commands coming in latter than they would be causing a different effect.

Or are you talking about getting rid of the fluid simulations entirely and redesigning the whole game?

Deterministic lockstep and welcome to my ignore list because i don't have time to deal with people like you.

[AlexRou]

8 hours ago, cpy said:

Deterministic lockstep and welcome to my ignore list because i don't have time to deal with people like you.

Show me a example of it working on a production game with fluid simulations then.

[CoolCreation201YT]

On 3/19/2017 at 5:26 PM, AlexRou said:

At least try thinking of ideas within the restrictions. Who knows, it might end up being better than what you came up with without it. But if you want to ignore it and continue with your direction go ahead.

Let me tweak your original idea slightly ...

There is a teleporter that opens up a world list where you can send dupes to attack other people's bases. The player doesn't need to be online and if he is he doesn't see your attack, everything will be computed on the attacker's side and the defenders will be all AI. When the battle is done, maybe his resources decreases or his buildings get damaged (no syncing between players until after the battle and only health/resources and not the entire world). Maybe only one attacker at a time with a timer so everyone can't gang up on one person.

There are also defenses like turrets/sandbags/etc... that the player can place around to defend the base.

Now this is a million times more likely to be done and it's only slightly different from what you described.

good idea! i hope that the turrets and sandbags and such would only be in the multiplayer game and i hope that singleplayer and multiplayer will be completely seperate save files and such because if singleplayer had that stuff then it would be silly.

[cpy]

Go play clash of clans or any other game that have angry dude icon on it.

[azzaisme]

On 19/03/2017 at 2:49 AM, AlexRou said:

Before even talking about how multiplayer would look like ... you have a huge problem ... the game uses a lot of physics as the core mechanic. Now I cannot even think of a game that is able to sync fluid simulations across the network. So before even thinking about how you want multiplayer to play out ... the problem of synchronizing the physics/world needs to be addressed. Or you could describe a "multiplayer" that works without any synchronization.

Battlefield 4 simulates water physics in real time for everyone. We all see the same thing