adding multiplayer

[jwenting]

13 hours ago, Nich said:

 My big problem is cheating Anyone can make an instant death laser mod or modify their craft files so the Juno gives 5 mega newtons of thrust.

If it's implemented like ARK does it, all mods are synched from a server whenever you log in on that server, ensuring everyone is running exactly the same game.

My biggest concern with multiplayer isn't the game, it's the players. Players in multiplayer games are overall an incredibly hostile, toxic, bunch of trolls and griefers. It'd turn the KSP community into something like the world of tanks community (if you can call it that), which is the last thing I (or any sane person) wants to happen.

And another major concern is that development of multiplayer will cause development of single player content to be abandoned, more and more features of the game to require you're playing in multiplayer mode in order to be able to use them (including things that'd work perfectly well in single player mode).

[Buster Charlie]

I forgot I posted this idea here (my bad) so I posted an in depth idea here

If anyone likes this idea, go to that thread so not to hijack

 

 

[AlamoVampire]

Just say NO! To multiplayer. To be blunt ksp =\= multiplayer. That. Simple. This a game that does NOT now, NOT ever lend itself to multiplayer being a good idea. 

Just say NO! The risk of it going wrong in any and ALL ways is unacceptable. Especially if it hurts single player content development (which is a REAL risk).

[AlextheBodacious]

Is this the longest KSP not-exactly-necro-post ever on the forums? Maybe. Is it pointless because Squad said they will, in the end, after all is said and done? Probably. If KSP multiplayer is anything like DMP, everything will be fine. Content dev? You'd think that'd be integrated... like how WoWS gets new ships...

[Evanitis]

4 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

Just say NO! To multiplayer. To be blunt ksp =\= multiplayer.

But-but-but... I wanna' ninja-claw onto your station when you aren't looking so I can deorbit it to my KSC. Space piracy for the win!

[Draradech]

On 19.2.2016 at 6:21 PM, razark said:

But how does such a system handle mutually exclusive events?

Player A timewarps a day ahead on the timeline of Player B.  A launches a ship, rendezvous with and docks to a space station.  The player is now docked to the station on day 2.

Ten minutes in real time later, B launches a ship on day 1, rendezvous and docks to the station, on the same docking port.  B then syncs their clock with player A. 

The clock is now set to Day 2 for both players, and who is docked to the station?  What happens to the other player?

Or, before B syncs, A deorbits the station.  What happens to B's ship when the sync occurs?

 

It just seems to me that to avoid logical inconsistencies, all players would need to be within the same timeframe.

That's a nice (interesting) scenario. How does DMP handle this? Genuinely curious...

[razark]

6 hours ago, Draradech said:

That's a nice (interesting) scenario. How does DMP handle this? Genuinely curious...

So am I, but no one has answered it.

I might just have to set up a second machine and see if I can get DMP working just to try it and see how it "solves" the problem.

[FishInferno]

16 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

Just say NO! To multiplayer. To be blunt ksp =\= multiplayer. That. Simple. This a game that does NOT now, NOT ever lend itself to multiplayer being a good idea. 

Just say NO! The risk of it going wrong in any and ALL ways is unacceptable. Especially if it hurts single player content development (which is a REAL risk).

Or you could just not play multiplayer when it comes out.

[AlamoVampire]

@FishInferno True but see also: to big of a risk to HARMING SINGLE PLAYER CONTENT.  Also see also: this game does not lend itself to multiplayer. 

Just say NO! To multiplayer.

Edited February 24, 2016 by AlamoVampire

[FishInferno]

3 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

@FishInferno True but see also: to big of a risk to HARMING SINGLE PLAYER CONTENT.  Also see also: this game does not lend itself to multiplayer. 

Just say NO! To multiplayer.

I don't see this happening.  Any new parts added couldn't hurt single player, the physics are all the same.

[razark]

1 hour ago, FishInferno said:

I don't see this happening.  Any new parts added couldn't hurt single player, the physics are all the same.

I believe the idea is: Time spent working on implementing multiplayer is less time spent working on actual game content.

[AlamoVampire]

@FishInferno Pull your view out a bit. 1. Squad is NOT a computer game company. They are an AD firm FIRST with KSP an allowed project for one of their employees. 2. Given #1 it means not a huge budget or dev team.

3. Given #2 this means that to do multiplayer they must either A: hire more ppl but given the near certainty of not having a budget like a major game company they must move devs to work on what the mod community HAS ALREADY DONE. Which is not only illogical but wholly irresponsible. This ALSO means harming single player content. So again say NO! to multiplayer. Having squad redo what DM already is, is flawed. 

9 minutes ago, razark said:

I believe the idea is: Time spent working on implementing multiplayer is less time spent working on actual game content.

This. A grahams number this.

Edited February 24, 2016 by AlamoVampire

[Aperture Science Employee]

1 hour ago, AlamoVampire said:

@FishInferno Pull your view out a bit. 1. Squad is NOT a computer game company. They are an AD firm FIRST with KSP an allowed project for one of their employees. 2. Given #1 it means not a huge budget or dev team.

3. Given #2 this means that to do multiplayer they must either A: hire more ppl but given the near certainty of not having a budget like a major game company they must move devs to work on what the mod community HAS ALREADY DONE. Which is not only illogical but wholly irresponsible. This ALSO means harming single player content. So again say NO! to multiplayer. Having squad redo what DM already is, is flawed. 

This. A grahams number this.

Can you open your mind?  Why not pull your head out of the sand, and realize that look what SQUAD has done for us, they made this game, and they will make it better. If a MOD did it, the DEVS can do it. Thought about that? Maybe they can work with the DMP dev. Half the work done.

Edited February 24, 2016 by Aperture Science Employee
Guidelines 2.2 SCT B

[Guest]

Not sure if this was said before, but multiplayer is on the "Do not suggest" list...

[Buster Charlie]

So much hate, I will say that I doubt that all the call of duty people will be hopping on here to destroy the community.

 

I myself would love to play with my spouse,  working on building a space station, or a duna colony.

 

 

[sal_vager]

3 hours ago, Aperture Science said:

Not sure if this was said before, but multiplayer is on the "Do not suggest" list...

Which is now the "Already Suggested" list, which links to this thread.

Multiplayer is planned and will be a thing, arguing against that is not really of any use.

I for one am excited for multiplayer, I have played KSP extensively and I look forwards to the new gameplay that multiplayer will bring.

How it will ultimately end up is open to speculation, hence this thread.

[Nightshift83]

Once played multiplayer with a friend with said darkmod and it was unstable as soon as we got into each others range but that was most likely due to my pc specs.. That said just seeing the others constructions floating in 'my' universe (and vice versa) was such a great thing to have! We instantly rented a server for one month although we didn't play for more than two days or so. 

Anyway with something somewhat stable it's as with most other 'open world' games (don't you even start arguing about that term, it might not be 100% correct but it does it's job now), if you play only with friends you can play it in any way you want just as you can do now in singleplayer..

 

Most tempting for me would be like a US-Sowjet space race with occasional interception of spy satelites, but even working for the same side as coop would be awesome as we figured that the most fun we had in games was doing them coop (since it allowed for much greater communication during gameplay), where as playing as opponents most fun would usually be revealing our plans and assets when we knew game could be ended prematurely..

 

Intersolar battle would be nice too, since you still had to figure out launch windows and the like and have a kind of strategy game where time is a really different component than you would have in any other game. I wouldn't even want to play it with any weapons mods since you could construct small rockets that just crash into enemy satelites or whatever or make your dropbombs out of little tanks.. Maybe just KIS/KAS so you don't have to replace the whole thing once it's damaged but rateher just bring up the parts that needs to be replaced..

 

Long story short multiplayer isn't mandatory but it'll be great and it's probably under heavy development allready and they just want to surprise us with it so that the hype isn't too big and not everybody asking every five seconds for it to be finished (I read it in my fortune cooky!)..

[AlamoVampire]

@Aperture Science Employee Um, let me say it again: multiplayer dev time in a SMALL ADVERTISING FIRM that is working on the SIDE to make this game has a 99.99999999% chance to take time and people off of working on single player content. Which WILL HURT single player. Period.  You say I should look at what's been done so far? Ok. Stroll with me then. There is a mod called Procedural Fairings. It is easy to use, 100% duplicatable when you need to pull the fairing off to adjust payload, it splits on ejection like REAL WORLD fairings. THEN Squad comes along and designs their own "fairing" and its a confetti making, unituitive, unduplicatable mess. To be blunt, this gives me absolutely zero faith in them doing multiplayer better than the unstable dmp mod, and that thing has been around ages.

also, any game out there aside from some EXTREMELY rare games do single player content with any quality once focus hits multiplayer. My justified fear seeing how truly tiny the game arm of, and I cannot say this enough, an ADVERTISING firm is, that KSP devs cannot do both a proper (read: what ksp has been since inception) single player once the multiplayer box is opened.

the truth is, there are way way way way way way too many variables for it to be done right.

just say NO! to multiplayer.

Edited February 24, 2016 by AlamoVampire

[KerbonautInTraining]

I'm not excited for multiplayer at all really

 

...probably because I don't have anyone to play it with... 

[Jatwaa]

3 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

@Aperture Science Employee Um, let me say it again: multiplayer dev time in a SMALL ADVERTISING FIRM that is working on the SIDE to make this game has a 99.99999999% chance to take time and people off of working on single player content. Which WILL HURT single player. Period.  You say I should look at what's been done so far? Ok. Stroll with me then. There is a mod called Procedural Fairings. It is easy to use, 100% duplicatable when you need to pull the fairing off to adjust payload, it splits on ejection like REAL WORLD fairings. THEN Squad comes along and designs their own "fairing" and its a confetti making, unituitive, unduplicatable mess. To be blunt, this gives me absolutely zero faith in them doing multiplayer better than the unstable dmp mod, and that thing has been around ages.

also, any game out there aside from some EXTREMELY rare games do single player content with any quality once focus hits multiplayer. My justified fear seeing how truly tiny the game arm of, and I cannot say this enough, an ADVERTISING firm is, that KSP devs cannot do both a proper (read: what ksp has been since inception) single player once the multiplayer box is opened.

the truth is, there are way way way way way way too many variables for it to be done right.

just say NO! to multiplayer.

Hate to rain on the parade...but they confirmed this was already in testing prior to last year. This game would be comparable to a survival crafting game in terms of multiplayer. Most other co-op multiplayer games are co-op separate campaign. Thus the actual game itself suffers when multiplayer is focused on. All they would need to do in this instance is
 

• Add the option to permit\deny sharing of resources\contracts
• Deal with time warp
• Launch pad priority

Theoretically, all these are easy to rectify. There are plenty of options. In a survival crafting game, it's about resource and time management. This is the same here. There have been plenty of multiplayer games (Ark is one newer) that implements this well. Single player and Multi are the same, biggest difference is one is a localized "offline". Minecraft handles this, Mojang...in Java even. These things can be tackled by a group of people with even limited knowledge and perfected as they go. Squad WAS a Marketing company, but Now they are an award winning development studio as well. 

DMP was great for what it was, but was not a fully integrated multiplayer module. It was a Server\Client check\place, which was placed in after the fact. To be fully integrated would remove the additional latency and performance issues leaving it down to a bit of leaky code which could be identified and corrected and then basic end user hardware limitations. 

There are not as many variables as one would think, else, less people would be doing it. 

[sal_vager]

I say YES to multiplayer!

Oh by the way, Squad is a games company which had its roots in Electro Chango, a small online marketing company in Mexico if you check the Squad website you'll see that they are trading under the name DEPORTED  B.V. (Squad looks like it was already taken), and no longer under Electro Chango.

So it looks like Squad went independent, and loud claims that they are "merely" an advertising company no longer carry any weight.

So I'll appreciate it if you stay on the topic of multiplayer.

[briansun1]

17 minutes ago, sal_vager said:

I say YES to multiplayer!

Oh by the way, Squad is a games company which had its roots in Electro Chango, a small online marketing company in Mexico if you check the Squad website you'll see that they are trading under the name DEPORTED  B.V. (Squad looks like it was already taken), and no longer under Electro Chango.

So it looks like Squad went independent, and loud claims that they are "merely" an advertising company no longer carry any weight.

So I'll appreciate it if you stay on the topic of multiplayer.

 

 

Actually, If I remember correctly there was a blog post about them splitting the gaming side of the company and the marketing side.

I do want multiplayer though it will probably not ending up with these big giant servers with a bunch of people on it, but probably more self-hosted servers with a few friends.

Edited February 24, 2016 by briansun1

[Nightshift83]

What's so bad about advertising companys? Not like they never had their brilliant moments (or long lasting campaigns for that matter).. just a side note.

[razark]

1 minute ago, Nightshift83 said:

What's so bad about advertising companys? Not like they never had their brilliant moments (or long lasting campaigns for that matter).. just a side note.

Success in one business does not automatically translate into success in another.  Just because a company had a good history of marketing, you can't expect them to have success with, for example, writing video games.

 

(Of course, there's nothing to say a company can't be successful in a different industry than they have previously worked in.)

[Redneck]

If multiplayer is in ANY form of implementation or development at all it would be nice if squad would comment on the ACTUAL work or tests performed. If none at all then a comment on that to would be nice. What is the actual status of multiplayer? Last we heard at the height of KMP (the name of multiplayer back in the gimp days) was that it was going to be implemented. So is this still true squad, or was this just a knee-jerk reaction to KMP? Because before KMP squad was saying there absolutely wouldn't be multiplayer 

Edited February 24, 2016 by Redneck