Co-op lan multiplayer?...

[Hyperxil]

I love this game. But i would love it even more if there was a co-op version. Some of my friends have this game and i would love to play with them, at the same time. 

The way to implement this is to enable a lan option in a game (this will turn off once your leave the game). If your friend wants to join, they have to be connected to the same wifi and it will show up at the top of their games list or something.  Once they join the game they will be prompt for the first time to choose their (3) dupes, then they will join through the spawn portal. They will be able to see the other players selection, such as destroying a patch of dirt in a different colour as their own.

Either the above idea or otherwise there should be a new game section for co-op. In which you can only play the game if your friend is online (by online i mean in the game and connected to the same wifi network) and joins that game.

 

I would love this to be added to the game so that if i play my friends i can actually play this game with my friends. It's boring when your playing with a friend and you can only play by yourself in this game, so basically we just play other games.

 

Please suggest any ideas or changes that i have suggested.

 

 

(lan = local area network (people connected to the same wifi network)

[Rocoto]

 

[Zarquan]

I personally agree that this game could be a nice cooperative experience.  It could be two friendly colonies working in the same world or two people controlling working together to build one colony.  I hope that it does get added in the future.  It would help me introduce friends to the game and make it a communal activity.

However, many people are concerned that making it multiplayer could come at the cost of content or result in the game becoming primarily a multiplayer game,with design decisions based around that idea (at the cost of the single player experience).  I feel that if they were to implement coop multiplayer, it should probably be something that happens later in the development and should not effect single player at all.  Multiplayer is not necessary for the game to be a quality experience and is one more thing that could break in an overhaul of a system that could take time away from developing or other things.

Some people are also downright hostile to the idea of a multiplayer button that they never have to press, which is something I don't understand at all.

I should also note that the devs have said that they do not intend to make this game multiplayer, so the chances are very low.

[magei]

3 hours ago, Zarquan said:

Some people are also downright hostile to the idea of a multiplayer button that they never have to press, which is something I don't understand at all.

It's quite simple to understand actually, To add any form of internet/lan play then they basically need to rewrite the game, Not only would this push release of the current development cycle further away, It also will take more money and time to develop the game, Not to mention the fact it's pulling development time away from us that are hostile to the idea of a multiplayer button as it would dramatically slow down the content created as they would be working so hard just to get the desync issues fixed to start with, Basically to add multiplayer would deprive the singleplayer of dev time which is why we don't want them to even think about multiplayer, Also you have to think of the performance factor, Try playing late game on a map twice as wide, Hell twice as big seeing as there wouldn't be much room on current map, Some of us already feel like the map is way too small, But making it bigger impacts late game performance, There could possibly be a multiplayer mod in the future though if someone is crazy enough to do it, Euro truck sim 2 is a single player game with a great multiplayer mod for example xD 

[Zarquan]

15 minutes ago, magei said:

To add any form of internet/lan play then they basically need to rewrite the game, Not only would this push release of the current development cycle further away, It also will take more money and time to develop the game, Not to mention the fact it's pulling development time away from us that are hostile to the idea of a multiplayer button as it would dramatically slow down the content created as they would be working so hard just to get the desync issues fixed to start with, Basically to add multiplayer would deprive the singleplayer of dev time which is why we don't want them to even think about multiplayer,

This was essentially my second paragraph.  Many people don't want to see the devs spend their time on it because it's thing that isn't necessary but can go wrong. 

18 minutes ago, magei said:

Also you have to think of the performance factor, Try playing late game on a map twice as wide, Hell twice as big seeing as there wouldn't be much room on current map, Some of us already feel like the map is way too small, But making it bigger impacts late game performance, There could possibly be a multiplayer mod in the future though if someone is crazy enough to do it, Euro truck sim 2 is a single player game with a great multiplayer mod for example xD 

I consider this a problem in single player, so it will need to be solved anyway.  I want bigger maps where I can build bigger things and have bigger colonies.  

In the sentence you quoted, I'm talking about people who would object to its presence if we and the devs just woke up tomorrow and had fully functional coop ONI code that just worked without any changes to the single player and never raised an issue.

[TheExceed]

12 minutes ago, magei said:

It's quite simple to understand actually, To add any form of internet/lan play then they basically need to rewrite the game, Not only would this push release of the current development cycle further away, It also will take more money and time to develop the game, Not to mention the fact it's pulling development time away from us that are hostile to the idea of a multiplayer button as it would dramatically slow down the content created as they would be working so hard just to get the desync issues fixed to start with, Basically to add multiplayer would deprive the singleplayer of dev time which is why we don't want them to even think about multiplayer, Also you have to think of the performance factor, Try playing late game on a map twice as wide, Hell twice as big seeing as there wouldn't be much room on current map, Some of us already feel like the map is way too small, But making it bigger impacts late game performance, There could possibly be a multiplayer mod in the future though if someone is crazy enough to do it, Euro truck sim 2 is a single player game with a great multiplayer mod for example xD 

Adding multiplayer to a game really isn't as difficult as you try to claim. The difficulty would be in how to adjust the game for multiplayer.
It would most likely be like Don't Starve and Don't Starve Together. They would have to recreate the game around multiplayer.
Example: The players are dupes stranded on the asteroid. They have to dig and mine and create everything as their own dupe.
Certain things would have to be adjusted for this since it would be limited players, certain rates would need adjusting and changing.

It would be cool to have a multiplayer version in the future. I like the game and it can get boring playing for so many hours, so many seeds by yourself. But right now it isn't logical. The game is developed for one person controlling numerous dupes and to make 2 squads of dupes for players to control in a map together just doesn't seem right. So, multiplayer would definitely need to be really thought about first.

[cpy]

I'm a MP COOP everything guy, but even I feel that this game is best left alone in single player zone. There is NOTHING in this game that is viable for multiplayer NOTHING.

You need to rewrite so ******* much that it would be COMPLETELY different game than it is now.

[TheExceed]

19 minutes ago, cpy said:

I'm a MP COOP everything guy, but even I feel that this game is best left alone in single player zone. There is NOTHING in this game that is viable for multiplayer NOTHING.

You need to rewrite so ******* much that it would be COMPLETELY different game than it is now.

Ehh the concept would be the same. A lot of the game could be reused.

[onebit]

Keep ONI single player and do a new game like terraria but with ONI physics.

[TheExceed]

25 minutes ago, onebit said:

Keep ONI single player and do a new game like terraria but with ONI physics.

Same thing I said. Oxygen for Two.

[Zarquan]

1 hour ago, cpy said:

I'm a MP COOP everything guy, but even I feel that this game is best left alone in single player zone. There is NOTHING in this game that is viable for multiplayer NOTHING.

You need to rewrite so ******* much that it would be COMPLETELY different game than it is now.

I don't understand why anything would have to change if you have two people controlling the same group of duplicants.  What would change?  Maybe you would have a vote for which dupe to take, but that would be about it.  Orders would be interpreted as in some kind of order and they would be executed as such.

[Hellshound38]

1 hour ago, Zarquan said:

I don't understand why anything would have to change if you have two people controlling the same group of duplicants.  What would change?  Maybe you would have a vote for which dupe to take, but that would be about it.  Orders would be interpreted as in some kind of order and they would be executed as such.

Because you would have to sync the entire map, and the status of each tile, within millisecond accuracy. If even a single tile gas temp, or pressure was off due to differences in processing power, the whole thing would have to be re synced. It would most likely be impossible in current implementation, and require significantly slowing the rate as which things are simulated. 

Show me a physics sim that comes nearly close to the complexity, responsiveness, and rate of calculation of this game that has multiplayer. Then we can talk.

 

[onebit]

It's not impossible, Hellshound. Factorio did it. The trick was having each client calculate the game and only send players intentions over the network. It look a couple of years to work all the kinks out.

[Luthage]

4 hours ago, TheExceed said:

Adding multiplayer to a game really isn't as difficult as you try to claim. 

This is not true.  If you don't have multiplayer as an option from the start, you have to restructure all the calculations to be authoritative and implement messaging to the client(s).  From someone that has done it, that's not as simple as it sounds.

[TheExceed]

13 minutes ago, Luthage said:

This is not true.  If you don't have multiplayer as an option from the start, you have to restructure all the calculations to be authoritative and implement messaging to the client(s).  From someone that has done it, that's not as simple as it sounds.

Depends on how experienced you are. As a dev team that has a numerous amount of games and some with MP.. wouldn't be difficult for Klei. 

[Luthage]

57 minutes ago, TheExceed said:

Depends on how experienced you are. As a dev team that has a numerous amount of games and some with MP.. wouldn't be difficult for Klei. 

Saying it wouldn't be difficult is an oversimplification of the work involved.  

[Kabrute]

Then lets overly simplify it, 1) make sure any 2 games running the same save run the same calculations in the same order. Oddly enough I can't get my own save to repeat its own calculations in the same order so maybe it can't be simplified that easily.
2) server/client but that would require restringing calculations and movements and then parsing swaps as data bits being streamed at a constant for (256x384x5)cell checks per second needing to transmit updates, so around 500,000 updates per second being performed on the average game you would think people would appreciate not just the complexity but the raw volume alone if nothing else.  Btw thats just for temp checks, thats not factoring changes, gas moving, temps swapping, building happening

[cpy]

13 hours ago, Zarquan said:

I don't understand why anything would have to change if you have two people controlling the same group of duplicants.  What would change?  Maybe you would have a vote for which dupe to take, but that would be about it.  Orders would be interpreted as in some kind of order and they would be executed as such.

Just invite your friend over and take turns. This is what you just described.

11 hours ago, onebit said:

It's not impossible, Hellshound. Factorio did it. The trick was having each client calculate the game and only send players intentions over the network. It look a couple of years to work all the kinks out.

Yeah and you could read that they had to change everything to be deterministic. Is klei using deterministic algorithms for everything? Lag hiding is another chapter. Network protocol is also another. Not to mention whole new gameplay would be required. If not then just let your friends come over or just stream and talk over it and play together. This game is NOT MP!

 

There are SO MANY things that will go wrong over internet connection that you don't even know. Steam have WORST connectivity of them all! I can't host my dedicated server for a friend because of some really messed up matchmaking and coding on steam matchmaking part. If stuff does not rely on steam, like minecraft, web server, mumble etc etc it just works, ports are open, IP is public, it just works. But hosting steam matchmaking for 7days to die, space engineers, medieval engineers is major pain, if it works i'm lucky but next hour it will not for unknown reason.

[Zarquan]

20 hours ago, Hellshound38 said:

Because you would have to sync the entire map, and the status of each tile, within millisecond accuracy. If even a single tile gas temp, or pressure was off due to differences in processing power, the whole thing would have to be re synced. It would most likely be impossible in current implementation, and require significantly slowing the rate as which things are simulated. 

Show me a physics sim that comes nearly close to the complexity, responsiveness, and rate of calculation of this game that has multiplayer. Then we can talk.

 

First of all, you don't need to be synched millisecond.  You only need 0.2 seconds, as that is the length of a game "tick".  Second, if you start out with a synched world, then you can actually cut the work you're computer has to do in half by making the other person's computer do it.  Physics simulations are often done on networks of computers because it makes them faster.

7 hours ago, cpy said:

Just invite your friend over and take turns. This is what you just described.

That is hotseat gaming.  I don't like hotseat because it means that I don't do anything while the other person plays and they don't while I play.

[cpy]

2 hours ago, Zarquan said:

First of all, you don't need to be synched millisecond.  You only need 0.2 seconds, as that is the length of a game "tick".  Second, if you start out with a synched world, then you can actually cut the work you're computer has to do in half by making the other person's computer do it.  Physics simulations are often done on networks of computers because it makes them faster.

Hahahaha cute. Gaming happens in real time. Did you know that? Syncing physics calculations over network? This game does not use multithreaded physics not talking about networked multithreaded physics.

Please stay away from programming, you have not even a slightest clue how fast can **** hit the fan when you stray away from single player things in physics heavy games like this.

Why the hell you think physics in games is just for cosmetics and not affect anything?

[KittenIsAGeek]

3 hours ago, Zarquan said:

First of all, you don't need to be synched millisecond.  You only need 0.2 seconds, as that is the length of a game "tick".  Second, if you start out with a synched world, then you can actually cut the work you're computer has to do in half by making the other person's computer do it.  Physics simulations are often done on networks of computers because it makes them faster.

That is hotseat gaming.  I don't like hotseat because it means that I don't do anything while the other person plays and they don't while I play.

Do you know how frustratingly slow 2 tenths of a second is?  I remember the days of dial-up and playing Unreal Tournament with a network lag of 0.15 seconds...  Yes, I know ONI isn't a FPS, but I just shudder to think about it.

[rodr]

3 hours ago, Zarquan said:

You only need 0.2 seconds, as that is the length of a game "tick".

Don't you mean 200 milliseconds?

[thewreckedangle]

one major thing is how the hell would you control time in MP?  one wants it paused while they carefully plan things the other is fast speed/priority 9 only

[Zarquan]

25 minutes ago, cpy said:

Hahahaha cute. Gaming happens in real time. Did you know that? Syncing physics calculations over network? This game does not use multithreaded physics not talking about networked multithreaded physics.

Please stay away from programming, you have not even a slightest clue how fast can **** hit the fan when you stray away from single player things in physics heavy games like this.

Why the hell you think physics in games is just for cosmetics and not affect anything?

Ever heard of friendly discourse?  Where two people talk without insulting each other or swearing or mocking?  Those are nice conversations.  There are many examples here on the forums.  Comments like yours make me tempted to ignore you.  Your comment screams of "everyone who disagrees with me is an idiot" and people who talk like that aren't generally worth talking to.

Addressing the third comment:  I do not think the physics is cosmetic.  What part of anything I said implied that?  The physics is one of the most important features of the game. 

Also, from your third comment, the things I say are irrelevant to the things you think I believe if I disagree with you, I should make things clear:

• I am not sure this game could be played over the internet.  I am only considering LAN, as per the OP's suggestion.
• I do not think they should drop what they are doing and work on multiplayer.  If they choose to implement it, it should be a long time in the future because multiplayer would just be another thing that they would have to maintain during the development.
• I do not think multiplayer will be trivial or easy to implement or that the Klei developers are lazy for not implementing it.  I only think it is possible and they are capable of implementing it.
• I do not think the game needs multiplayer to be playable.

Addressing the first comment:  Many of the calculations are Embarrassingly Parallel, meaning they are independent of each other.  This game is almost is the optimal situation for parallelization.  The calculations on one square do not effect the calculations on an adjacent square in a single calculation.  The issue is that this would take dev time, as does any feature.  If you had the multithreading, it becomes simpler to outsource the work.  I do agree that the latency of getting the work back might be too large to handle over the internet, but it could work for LAN. 

There are also other things that can be done, like only having the host compute the physics and only give you what you need to see the game.  For each block currently on the screen (and some around the screen so you can move), all you have to know by default is what kind of block (visually), what it's made of, and whether it is melting or breaking.  It only needs to do this transfer once.  Then if you mouse over a block, it asks for the temperature of that block and gets the temperatures of the block around it.  When you turn on an overlay, it asks for the temperatures of all the surrounding blocks and updates regularly.  It certainly isn't impossible.  It might not show the exact right temperature all the time, but it will give you the gist of what is happening and since one computer is doing all the work, the physics remains consistent.

I could actually make a video of playing ONI over LAN right now via Steam's inhome streaming and that works great without the program even knowing anything about the game.  It essentially sends you in real time the sound and image from the game.  The game skips and lags occasionally, but  my router is horrible and it doesn't effect gameplay too much.. 

And my response to the second comment, if you say anything like that to anyone again, I will ignore you.  That is a reprehensible and you should be ashamed of yourself.

2 hours ago, KittenIsAGeek said:

Do you know how frustratingly slow 2 tenths of a second is?  I remember the days of dial-up and playing Unreal Tournament with a network lag of 0.15 seconds...  Yes, I know ONI isn't a FPS, but I just shudder to think about it.

0.2 seconds lag is annoying in an FPS, but it is completely irrelevant in this game as long as the controls don't lag, which they wouldn't have to.  I believe the physics in this game updates at this rate.  I honestly think 0.5 second lag on the game wouldn't be too bad (as long as the controls didn't lag). 

2 hours ago, rodr said:

Don't you mean 200 milliseconds?

0.2 seconds is 200 milliseconds.  1000 milliseconds is 1 second.

[rodr]

2 hours ago, Zarquan said:

0.2 seconds is 200 milliseconds.  1000 milliseconds is 1 second.

I'm aware of this.  I believe you said, "You don't need ms you just need 0.2s".  I thought that was interesting to dismiss the ms resolution and use a fractional second instead because ms are fractional seconds.

2 hours ago, Zarquan said:

I honestly think 0.5 second lag on the game wouldn't be too bad (as long as the controls didn't lag). 

You may be okay with it but in reality most people would notice > 100ms of lag to the detriment of UX which is why a 100-148ms response SLA is justified as a UX constraint.

2 hours ago, Zarquan said:

I could actually make a video of playing ONI over LAN right now via Steam's inhome streaming and that works great without the program even knowing anything about the game.

This has nothing to do with difficulties of MP.  MP would be much harder than this.  Dumb terminals or KVM over IP, depending on your view, have existed for awhile. 

I repeat a mantra a lot to other developers at work who often say "this would be easy its just (insert something minor)" that I think applies to this thread -- when programming there's no such thing as just.