Make game multiplayer

[abhiraz]

Hey Dev,

Can we have game mode available so that group of friends can play together online by sync :

1. upto 4 players can join a map seed and play with their idea of developing base.

2. Interaction with other player for resources via the game could make game refreshing.

suggestion welcome

[pether]

tldr: no

[Jann5s]

Abhiraz, please understand Peter's harsh answer is because you are the millionth person to ask this question seemingly without taking any effort to search the forums.

[sakura_sk]

56 minutes ago, Jann5s said:

Peter's

... missed an "h" there 

[Jann5s]

Nah did type it, but my phone didn't agree. Need to please our digital overlords 

[pether]

I didn't mean to be harsh, sorry if it turned out that way. I meant to be brief.

[SharraShimada]

4 hours ago, pether said:

tldr: no

+1

[gabberworld]

On 8/21/2022 at 10:14 AM, abhiraz said:

Hey Dev,

Can we have game mode available so that group of friends can play together online by sync :

1. upto 4 players can join a map seed and play with their idea of developing base.

2. Interaction with other player for resources via the game could make game refreshing.

suggestion welcome

how this idea would work? lets say i have intel 12900k pc and you have some old pc, how would you able play my base at your pc? can you run 1000 dupes?

im just asking as multiplayer would not work in this game that good. the effort what devs would spend for this, not give them back the results what they would want

[NewWorldDan]

A more general point - multiplayer works very well for Don't Starve because you're controlling a singular character. Likewise for Factorio, Satisfactory, Raft, and any of a number of other games. The key benefit you get from multiplayer in these games is parallel labor. In ONI, you get that benefit from simply having more dupes. The gameplay really isn't conducive to multiplayer and neither is the underlying game code.

[Tytan]

to have a multiplayer on oxygen the game would have to change to individual control of dupes or a specific set, could you do it? could do! the problem is the current inevitability of the computational limit that the game currently faces xD

if the game currently cannot be "run" indiscriminately without losing fps, imagine several players with several computers: "cycle 1 everything is beautiful, cycle 100 reasonable, cycle 1000 unplayable"

about the possibility of a multiplayer: the fanbase here is divided between having and not having multplayer, it seems to me a sensitive topic for some here, some don't like to mess with their stats quo, so be careful with what you suggest, folks here won't take it easy xD

but... I believe that for the game to last as well as its older twin (dont starve) it will inevitably go that way, even if it's a dlc, just like (together) and spaced out, which changes the game completely

but the game is already multiplayer look how many beautiful dupes we have in the same base working together and with a single goal xD

[myxal]

8 hours ago, NewWorldDan said:

A more general point - multiplayer works very well for Don't Starve because you're controlling a singular character. Likewise for Factorio, Satisfactory, Raft, and any of a number of other games. The key benefit you get from multiplayer in these games is parallel labor. In ONI, you get that benefit from simply having more dupes. The gameplay really isn't conducive to multiplayer and neither is the underlying game code.

 

6 hours ago, Tytan said:

to have a multiplayer on oxygen the game would have to change to individual control of dupes or a specific set, could you do it?

I'm no game designer, so I don't get this - why is splitting up the workload among players by the game "necessary"? Today, ONI lets you pause the game and queue up multiple errands, change configurations etc. in between game tics. What's wrong with just allowing those errands and commands to come from multiple players, and not caring about which player issued what command? Don't think "public game server" or multiple-colonies, playing with randos - think "ONI colony as a group effort". Team collaboration is a thing in many workplaces. Probably schools, too.

Looking at past discussions, the idea of "multiple views/controls" of the same map was already floated by @Zarquan and I also think this would be a good fit for ONI - the value in a map is not (just) in resources, but the nontrivial machines built with the basic buildings and quirky mechanics of the game.

On 8/22/2022 at 9:47 AM, gabberworld said:

the effort what devs would spend for this,

I think you're right on the money here - a codebase like ONI probably requires too much effort to make netcode-ready to push as a DLC/update, which the above-described "low-feature multiplayer" would be seen as, and would not have enough new content/features of its own to warrant purchasing as a separate game.

But the devs could go lower on the effort scale - @degr mentioned sharing save files ("sneakernet multplayer") as a basic form that the game allows today - how about making this experience less painful by having per-map mod configuration as in DST?

On 8/21/2022 at 3:10 PM, Jann5s said:

Abhiraz, please understand Peter's harsh answer is because you are the millionth person to ask this question seemingly without taking any effort to search the forums.

Apparently the answers didn't stick.

[BezKa]

The only thing I can think of is two asteroids, two players, payload launcher.

[pether]

4 hours ago, myxal said:

Apparently the answers didn't stick.

Just because you didn't like the answer it doesnt make it any less true or accurate.

Devs will NOT add multiplayer to ONI, doesn't matter if you like that or not.

And I'm not saying that because I don't like the idea. I'm saying that because devs confirmed they will not do that. And I understand why, despite frequent multiplayer requests - the whole game would need to be redesigned with multiplayer in mind, reimplemented from scratch just to conduct this kind of experiment.

If you need more arguments, please search the forum for multiplayer threads, you will find plenty examples why ONI MP is a bad and/or impossible idea.

4 hours ago, BezKa said:

The only thing I can think of is two asteroids, two players, payload launcher.

It wouldn't work. Also, it wouldn't be much a multiplayer, it would be single player with random game pauses from your mate and occasional resources deliveries (probably not unlocked before cycle 100-200). What would work is N players, N maps, with some limited trade interface, eg using temporal tears. If you are interested in that, there is already mod for something similar.

[myxal]

2 hours ago, pether said:

Just because you didn't like the answer it doesnt make it any less true or accurate.

I was referring to the fact whatever answer is there, hasn't made it to stickied topics. In fact, I still haven't seen/found it. Searching for multiplayer or coop in all selectable ONI-related sections of the forum, the only post by a dev/mod is from 2017, dryly stating that "it's not planned". If there's a more detailed response by dev, please share.

EDIT: Never mind, found it in the Support section.

[Tytan]

10 hours ago, myxal said:

18 hours ago, Tytan said:

to have a multiplayer on oxygen the game would have to change to individual control of dupes or a specific set, could you do it?

I'm no game designer, so I don't get this - why is splitting up the workload among players by the game "necessary"? Today, ONI lets you pause the game and queue up multiple errands, change configurations etc. in between game tics. What's wrong with just allowing those errands and commands to come from multiple players, and not caring about which player issued what command? Don't think "public game server" or multiple-colonies, playing with randos - think "ONI colony as a group effort". Team collaboration is a thing in many workplaces. Probably schools, too.

Looking at past discussions, the idea of "multiple views/controls" of the same map was already floated by @Zarquan and I also think this would be a good fit for ONI - the value in a map is not (just) in resources, but the nontrivial machines built with the basic buildings and quirky mechanics of the game.

I am, so I didn't hit the hammer and I expanded the idea

when people think of multiplayer for oni they usually hit this barrier: "ah but how are you going to control dupes?" as if we control it, we give the order and they execute it, so we could implement this in several ways in multiplayer, we can do synchronous as asynchronous

or controlling each player a dupe, or controlling a set of dupes, or giving orders to the colony in general and the dupes are from everyone, or each one controls a planet that can be visited, many other ideas ideas can be approached, to the biggest problem for me is not "no multiplayer possible" the biggest problem is computational, how much a colony will weigh on these computers, since we know that there comes a point in oni that it will simply devour your pc

3 hours ago, myxal said:

Never mind, found it in the Support section.

taking advantage that you took the post about "they don't want a multiplayer" I'll repost here as a "end" for this topic, but remembering: today is today and tomorrow no one knows how it will be, it may be that one day they change idea, or just not

About Multiplayer

[juni3227]

... I really do not think current design is meant to be played with multiple players at once. This is like asking if Cities: Skyline will have multiplayer.

[yoakenashi]

14 hours ago, myxal said:

sharing save files ("sneakernet multplayer") as a basic form that the game allows today

I should really look into this. It would be really cool to play 1, 3, or 5 cycles on a game and then sent off to another player. It would be fun to see what others have built and build on top of that. You could make small improvements or place the construction plans for a huge project that someone else will need to complete.

I even remember watching the devs play on a stream before where they hot seated the game, passing the keyboard back and forth every cycle. It was really fun to watch.

But shared ONI is already alive in some form. I have seen Twitch gamers do this by making their stream very interactive; taking suggestions from people and even naming new dupes after people from chat. You may not be able to click and place buildings, but you can still help and identify bathrooms that will back up or heat sources that will roast their bristle blossoms.

[cpy]

 

[ZombieDupe]

It could though it wouldn't change much. I imagine one player would host a game, and then another could join with remote play, meaning there is potential for different tasks in multiple areas to be done simultaneously. Would probably need to incorporate a new thread to run simultaneously for assigning new tasks with every new player however and beyond 4 players there would not be much point. It would help with SO's multiple planetoid management at least though instead of one colony managing itself while you create digging and construction tasks solely on another planetoid. They all run simultaneously one way or another either way.

There could even be the option to have tasks separated between ones you assigned and the other player assigned so a set group of duplicants you select could potentially work on it, or be set to work on all tasks by default. We already have 2 priority systems working in tandem, so this wouldn't be a huge stretch.

On 8/21/2022 at 11:32 AM, pether said:

tldr: no

Very strange to see replies like that around ONI, I expected better responses. No point saying no if you're not going to explain reasons why you wouldn't want that or don't think it could ever work.

[Sasza22]

10 hours ago, ZombieDupe said:

Very strange to see replies like that around ONI, I expected better responses. No point saying no if you're not going to explain reasons why you wouldn't want that or don't think it could ever work.

It`s both people getting tired of writing reasons why they don`t think it`s a good idea and fearing the devs might consider it and spend resources on something a lot of old players won`t use. It`s common that people are against stuff that would distract the devs from making content they like.

Another thing is implementation. Imagine for a second you play ONI without a pause... or even without the ability to set game speed. It is doable but annoying. Now would it be better if there were 4+ players using pause all the time? It`s just the simple things and issues already start, it`s hard to imagine the amount of work to make the whole game a smooth experience for multiple players.

[Sebastiangperez]

On 8/22/2022 at 4:47 AM, gabberworld said:

how this idea would work? lets say i have intel 12900k pc and you have some old pc, how would you able play my base at your pc? can you run 1000 dupes?

im just asking as multiplayer would not work in this game that good. the effort what devs would spend for this, not give them back the results what they would want

Maybe the game could run in a Supercomputer... 

[amorek]

More (or only) reasonable way to implement multiplayer in ONI is that every player has his individual colony with limited resources and they have ability to exchange resources via rockets or some kind of market. Not sure if it would be any exciting though.

[gabberworld]

On 8/31/2022 at 2:14 PM, amorek said:

More (or only) reasonable way to implement multiplayer in ONI is that every player has his individual colony with limited resources and they have ability to exchange resources via rockets or some kind of market. Not sure if it would be any exciting though.

user can have only 1 dupe and its only as manual , then its thinkable make as multiplayer

[Gurgel]

On 8/31/2022 at 1:14 PM, amorek said:

More (or only) reasonable way to implement multiplayer in ONI is that every player has his individual colony with limited resources and they have ability to exchange resources via rockets or some kind of market. Not sure if it would be any exciting though.

That would likely be doable via mod. Probably not very exciting though. The ressource progression is a main mechanic in Oni and messing with it may just make the game boring.

[KittenIsAGeek]

 

On 8/24/2022 at 5:13 AM, ZombieDupe said:

It could though it wouldn't change much. I imagine one player would host a game, and then another could join with remote play, meaning there is potential for different tasks in multiple areas to be done simultaneously. Would probably need to incorporate a new thread to run simultaneously for assigning new tasks with every new player however and beyond 4 players there would not be much point. It would help with SO's multiple planetoid management at least though instead of one colony managing itself while you create digging and construction tasks solely on another planetoid. They all run simultaneously one way or another either way.

There could even be the option to have tasks separated between ones you assigned and the other player assigned so a set group of duplicants you select could potentially work on it, or be set to work on all tasks by default. We already have 2 priority systems working in tandem, so this wouldn't be a huge stretch.

Very strange to see replies like that around ONI, I expected better responses. No point saying no if you're not going to explain reasons why you wouldn't want that or don't think it could ever work.

This topic comes up a LOT on the forums.  ONI is not a game that would transition well to multi-player for a very large number of reasons that have been discussed at large.  The game would need a complete re-design in order to even function as a multi-player platform, and that's before getting into all the issues around resource management on your PC.

First, lets look at rendering the map. I don't know the particulars, but each "tick" of game time analyzes temperature drift, gas/liquid movement on the map, gas/liquid pipe loops, electric loops, automation systems, input/output processes, updates the dupe's hierarchy of tasks, and maps out movement for all dupes/critters.  A tick happens four times a second.  The overlays get updated as necessary, and the whole thing is sent to your graphics card at (hopefully) at least 30 times a second.  To make this multiplayer, the server will have to handle ALL of that, as well as updating the client on pertinent changes.  If nothing is happening, then that isn't really a problem.  However, the stuff all mentioned above?  Its a HUGE amount of data that is being moved from the RAM to the CPU for processing, then back to the RAM.  It has been shown in previous posts that the game bottle-necks on the CPU/RAM pipeline, meaning if you have a single 8gb RAM chip, you'll run at half the speed of an identical system with two 4gb chips that supports dual-channel memory.  Assuming that the code is smart enough to only process stuff that is likely to be changing, then you're still looking at far too much data to transfer over the network to another machine.  A far less bandwidth intensive method would be to stream the video signal to the client.  The client, then, would have no way of determining if a requested command was a legal one or not, because the data would not be present on the client -- only the video output.  So the client would need to transmit all "command" data to the server, such as mouse movements and clicks, and the server would need to render a screen based on that data.  This creates its own problems.  It means the server needs to maintain TWO full displays of the map.  One for the server location, and a different one for the client location.  Otherwise, you would only see the screen where the player on the server has positioned the map.

If you're not transferring a rendered video stream of the game, then you need enough bandwidth to transfer updated details for every element that has changed, four times a second, otherwise your client will be out of sync with the server.  If the pipeline between the CPU and the RAM can't keep up with it, then your internet definitely can not.