Jump to content

KSP 2 Multiplayer Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Master39 said:

Again, this is the way if you want to get another Cyberpunk 2077.

Oh yes, I've heard of the notorious 5 active KSP2 forum users that create Cyberpunk levels of hype for the game. Good thing the other 25 active users always calm things. Otherwise who knows how much wild speculation based expectations could skyrocket. We might even expect team based gameplay.. or even worse.. KSP2 being a persistent world MMO!

Edited by Vl3d
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_socket#Types

A socket is a software structure within a network node of a computer network that serves as an endpoint for sending and receiving data across the network.
They are basically how you send/receive data to/from other computers.

A Datagram Socket uses UDP (User Datagram Protocol). Instead of having a permanent connection, every single package sent to another computer is individually addressed and routed, meaning that the order in which packages are sent may be different from the order in which they will be received. It's not guaranteed that every packages is received. 

Raw Socket allows direct sending/receiving of raw data without any protocol-specific formatting. 

Stream Socket uses a connection, which means that any data going from one computer to the other will go through the same connection. They use TCP (Transmission Control Protocol), DCCP or SCTP. A Stream Socket guarantees that any data sent will be received, in the order it was sent, and is therefore more reliable than a Datagram Socket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you also clarify how this affects multiplayer, and how you would be affected by it? I’m genuinely curious, because other than issues with ordering of data for multiplayer-capable mods, I don’t see much changing on the user end. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Datagram Sockets are more useful if the order the data is received by the server or the client isn't important, and if a few packets that don't arrive at their intended destination don't break everything. It does not require a server that powerful, and is widely used among video games, where there are like 10 packets at least, per second: this way, if a packet is lost, it's not going to affect the game very much as there will be another in a short amount of time. Minecraft, for example, uses them.   -> Simple, but weak.

Stream Sockets are more useful if you want that the received data is exactly the sent data, if you want it to be received in the same order as it was sent, and if you don't want to lose any data in the progress. However, they create a connection between the server and the client, and the server need to be more powerful if it needs to handle a lot of connections. Telnet, for example, uses them.   -> Complicated, but strong.

About Raw Sockets... Well, I think they also use a connection, so it probably is like Stream Sockets (let me know if this is wrong).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what info I've gathered from job postings they will use Cloud services combined with peer to peer networking and also some low latency big database services. Not sure for what type of multiplayer features.

Edited by Vl3d
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, darthvader15001 said:

it will be optional, right?

They said the game at least the single player part will be completely offline and DRM free.

Most likely the multiplayer won't be much different than games like Factorio or Minecraft, so completely optional.

Despite what some want to believe this studio doesn't have the funding or the workforce to build anything like the size of your usual always-online persistent universe, even if KSP was a game that was even remotely compatible with that kind of gameplay.

 

There's only a limited amount of people that can play with the same box of Lego, and KSP is not a big box to begin with.

Edited by Master39
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Nazalassa said:

Will the connection be with Datagram Sockets, Raw Sockets or Stream Sockets?

I think it will be peer-to-peer UDP. There is too much going on to send anything, but user control input and some synchronization data. Look at Factorio and GTA: Online, which uses similar model.

I hope it's not TCP. Because... look at Minecraft. TCP is good for turn-based games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the time video games are basically required to use UDP to send data, simply because the video game has it's own ideas about what the data protocols should be.
If there was a video game specific protocol out there, they would probably use that instead, but there's not. Setting a standard for video game communication would probably not help things in any case, as it's not like video game developers are looking to make their video games interact with each other (eg being able to start up Minecraft and log into a Roblox server), instead each game's networking protocols are intended for that game only. Even being able to connect to the same game on another platform is not commonly seen (this is known as cross-play when it happens, and it's not common at all because the console makers don't care if your game does well on the competition's console or PC or what have you, only on their own platform that they're making money off of).

EDIT: In any case, what specific behind-the-scenes networking stuff they use doesn't matter that much to how enjoyable the multiplayer experience is, assuming it works and that the ping time between the players is both low and stable.

To be honest, what you've said about the alternatives does sound like a good idea for many factory games, because of the need to keep everything synchronized. Otherwise it seems to me like you'd need to label your packets with what order they were sent in, or things would either catastrophically de-synchronize (in games where the order things happen in matters a great deal, like turn based games and factory games), or you'd get things like player avatars teleporting around erratically (in games that are less sensitive to order of operations, such as an FPS).

Edited by SciMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Some Kerbal out there said:

but i don't know if multiplayer is a good idea at all.

There isn't a game out there that wouldn't be better with at least a 2 player coop mode.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Master39 said:

There isn't a game out there that wouldn't be better with at least a 2 player coop mode.

Very debatable, but that doesn't matter. As someone who has done co-op missions several different ways, I can definitely say that KSP and KSP 2 do benefit from multiplayer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, t_v said:

Very debatable, but that doesn't matter. As someone who has done co-op missions several different ways, I can definitely say that KSP and KSP 2 do benefit from multiplayer. 

I'm sure you can find some genres that doesn't go well with that, city builders for one, I'd hate to share my city with someone.

But even there it would be perfect for tutoring new players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Some Kerbal out there said:

I don't know how the multiplayer is going to look like but i don't know if multiplayer is a good idea at all.

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it. Single player will always be an option, and the code shouldn't take up too much more storage.

Edited by SkyFall2489
meh grate speeling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Master39 said:
11 minutes ago, t_v said:

Very debatable, but that doesn't matter. As someone who has done co-op missions several different ways, I can definitely say that KSP and KSP 2 do benefit from multiplayer. 

I'm sure you can find some genres that doesn't go well with that, city builders for one, I'd hate to share my city with someone.

But even there it would be perfect for tutoring new players.

You both have valid reasons to think what you both think. And at that, neither of you are any more right than the other - there's no reason to say that KSP 2 would be better or worse off with multiplayer. This is a lot more personal than it is objective compared to other parts of KSP 2.

Edited by Bej Kerman
Typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bej Kerman said:

there's no reason to say that KSP 2 would be better or worse off with multiplayer. This is a lot more personal than it is objective compared to other parts of KSP 2.

There's more than one reason to say at least a game like KSP would only be better with a coop mode.

If you ever had to explain how something works to a friend you'd know that being there in their game would help a lot. There's only so much you can do by screen sharing on Discord.

 

People with a bad view on multiplayer are probably thinking about turning the game in some sort of live-service MMO monstrosity and not about real co-op games.

Think about Skyrim and similar action-RPG games, wouldn't they be better with friends in your party instead of a series of brainless NPC companions that are only good at bodyblocking you standing in front of doors?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Master39 said:

wouldn't they be better with friends in your party instead of a series of brainless NPC companions that are only good at bodyblocking you standing in front of doors?

Completely agree that RPGs (generally) benefit from this, and I think it also reveals one of the reasons why co-op is so good at improving games. Any automated systems implemented in a game won't be as good as another human sitting there (even theoretically), and while I don't think NPC algorithms should be discarded for an only-multiplayer system, multiplayer would certainly allow some people to have a better experience than single player. 

For example, in KSP, there's been suggestions to automate booster recovery with some systems that work various ways (abstracting, recording flights and editing them, etc.) or allowing people to go back and recover the booster themselves, but those systems will never be designed better than how someone else could recover the booster. 

2 hours ago, Master39 said:

I'm sure you can find some genres that doesn't go well with that, city builders for one, I'd hate to share my city with someone.

I actually think that co-op city builders could be great, as managing a city is a task that inherently requires a lot of attention divided among multiple systems, and being able to dive really deep into, say, the plumbing while someone else makes sure the tourism industry doesn't die out would be fun. However, I was mainly saying that generalizing things to "all games" won't work, and as Bej said, it is highly personal. I don't want to be landing boosters for shared missions, but for another group of people, that gameplay might be a massive improvement over the single player option. 

 

Edited by t_v
won'e is me
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Some Kerbal out there said:

I don't know how the multiplayer is going to look like but i don't know if multiplayer is a good idea at all.

Welcome to the forums! I completely agree and I never even wanted MP.

3 hours ago, Master39 said:

There isn't a game out there that wouldn't be better with at least a 2 player coop mode.

 

I also agree with this but large global public servers would be too much 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, darthvader15001 said:

large global public servers would be too much 

That's why I specified co-op, people always forget that Multiplayer doesn't mean turning KSP into an MMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...