Jump to content

KSP 2 Multiplayer Discussion Thread


 Share

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Superluminal Gremlin said:

I don't think resources will be "shared" as in you can access materials off planet. Rather if you want to stuff and your friends have it then you have to go grab it.

Yeah who knows! The question is what if any will be the coop options. Share control of everything? Just pooling science together with a mutual tech-tree? Are there any abstract resources like money that could be traded or shared? We'll just have to see. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

Yeah who knows! The question is what if any will be the coop options. Share control of everything? Just pooling science together with a mutual tech-tree? Are there any abstract resources like money that could be traded or shared? We'll just have to see. 

Well that's the whole idea of having a 1-4 man team for each KSC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

Yeah who knows! The question is what if any will be the coop options. Share control of everything? Just pooling science together with a mutual tech-tree? Are there any abstract resources like money that could be traded or shared? We'll just have to see. 

A new KSC building?  The Mint, where you stamp unobtainium mined from Mun into coins?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

Yeah who knows! The question is what if any will be the coop options. Share control of everything? Just pooling science together with a mutual tech-tree? Are there any abstract resources like money that could be traded or shared? We'll just have to see. 

Due to unforeseen consequences I found myself watching old KSP2 hype vids - and consequently find myself less sour on the prospects of MP being part of the release package. 

Edited by JoeSchmuckatelli
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

money

That surely should be tradable. It makes sense

I think science should be tradable if you only have one space agency. If there are multiple, then its kind of like money maybe...

 

For the deal with timewarp, my theory is that you follow one timeline, and if someone timewarps everyone timewarps. This means that people need to communicate that they need to time warp. It could be that a pop up on screen appears telling you that someone wants to timewarp, and everyone has to agree that they can. This avoids the problems of weird ghost rockets as mentioned above, but is slow and quite clunky, im willing ot admit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Superluminal Gremlin said:

For the deal with timewarp...

I really doubt that it will work this way.  It's a very unpopular opinion.

My best hope is that there are options in how MP timewarp works, and that this is one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Superluminal Gremlin said:

That surely should be tradable. It makes sense

I think science should be tradable if you only have one space agency. If there are multiple, then its kind of like money maybe...

Im so glad after 50 pages we can talk about my favorite subject: social aspects. Chris Adderley (Nertea) mentioned something in the interstellar vid about whole civilizations working together to build interstellar vessels. This is probably just a reference to colonies and multiplanetary Kerbal civilizations working in concert to build these things, but I like the idea that 3 or even a dozen players might combine their efforts to do the same. It brings up a bunch of questions about how ownership and use would work when several players have all contributed modules to a station or supplied various resources to a shared colony. What does the interface look like that allows some collaboration but still gives players some personal control over individual vessels or mining outposts? To me keeping multiplayer relatively small is important. I wouldn’t personally play in a game with more than 12 participants. You need to be able to build up trust and a culture of exchange and cooperation, and minor conflicts are somewhat inevitable. I’ll be really interested to see what the rules and options are to navigate all that. 

Edited by Pthigrivi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, razark said:

I really doubt that it will work this way.  It's a very unpopular opinion.

Well , considering the amount of people who have suggested this type of time warp management, I wouldn’t say unpopular, just disliked, as are all the other systems to varying extents.
 

This brings me to what might be an actual unpopular opinion: I don’t think that they will show multiplayer mechanics until the game is practically released. There are a lot of opinions, and a lot of strong opinions, about MP, so announcing what solution they’ve found before the game is released might cause some serious issues. People (probably including me) will be sad that their solution didn’t become stock, and then because no one has a copy of the game, they won’t be able to test what the actual solution is like for themselves, so a lot of worst-case assumptions and misunderstandings will be made to fill in the gaps. The leapfrog model will actively incentivize people to speed apart and not rejoin, the cyclic (my model, that’s what I’m calling it) model will have completely broken rendezvous mechanics, the MMO model will have transfer windows in real time, etc. And the modding API is also not out so no one knows if they even have the ability to mod their system in… it is better to just give players the game so that worries can be concretely dispelled. It think that if the devs talk about it, it will be as close to release as possible. We might have a while left before any news drops on MP. 
 

43 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

What does the interface look like that allows some collaboration but still gives players some personal control over individual vessels or mining outposts?

I’m still hopeful for my kerbal populations idea. I’ll have to think about how that works for time warp under the different systems though; if something you are co-controlling is warped into the future, does that interaction cut off for you? Wait, if someone in the future just docks with a ship that you alone own (with permissions and all) and makes an interaction, is that ship unable to be interacted with until you catch up? There better be a pretty good anti-griefing system in that case…

Edited by t_v
Out so outside
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, t_v said:

I wouldn’t say unpopular, just disliked

I'm missing the distinction here.  If it's disliked, it is unpopular.  The options that are liked by people are popular.

 

12 minutes ago, t_v said:

I don’t think that they will show multiplayer mechanics until the game is practically released.
...
It think that if the devs talk about it, it will be as close to release as possible. We might have a while left before any news drops on MP. 

I agree with these parts, but for different reasons.

We're on page 54 of a thread about a feature that has no concrete information.  I think the company knows how much it is anticipated, and doesn't want to release too much information until close to release so they can use the hype to build sales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, razark said:

I'm missing the distinction here.  If it's disliked, it is unpopular.  The options that are liked by people are popular.

That’s not correct. Lots of things are disliked and yet very popular. Such as “Friday!” by Rebecca Black. 

Edited by MechBFP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KSP lover said:

hi , I have a question will multiplayer in KSP 2 be on local servers or on global?

I obviously can't know for sure but I can only assume local servers. If it were on global servers it would have to be monetized via skins, outfits, maybe parts and other microtransactions for server upkeep. I don't think anyone here wants to deal with that and the development team knows that. I imagine something like minecraft multiplayer with LAN connections and probably some servers hosted by players for anyone to join.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, t_v said:

MMO model will have transfer windows in real time

No it does not. You just set the destination in the journey planner, desync from multiplayer and warp to the transfer window. The server shows you the appropriate map screen configuration. You resync to multiplayer when you arrive at the destination.

Edited by Vl3d
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Vl3d said:

No it does not. You just set the destination in the journey planner, desync from multiplayer and warp to the transfer window. The server shows you the appropriate map screen configuration. You resync to multiplayer when you arrive at the destination.

This is exactly what I was talking about: I made a false statement about the system (as are all the statements in that block of text) and people were confused about whether it is true or not. I think it is going to be so easy to have miscommunication filled arguments about multiplayer that talking about it now would just be inviting a flame war. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, t_v said:

This is exactly what I was talking about: I made a false statement about the system (as are all the statements in that block of text) and people were confused about whether it is true or not. I think it is going to be so easy to have miscommunication filled arguments about multiplayer that talking about it now would just be inviting a flame war. 

Yes, can't wait for the multiplayer feature video that's going to spark the really controversial discussions. The minimum we can hope for is that multiplayer is well integrated, simple to use and fun.

Edited by Vl3d
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Vl3d said:

No it does not. You just set the destination in the journey planner, desync from multiplayer and warp to the transfer window. The server shows you the appropriate map screen configuration. You resync to multiplayer when you arrive at the destination.

I think t_v is right that these each have their pros and cons. For us and many others given KSP2’s colony mechanics we’re not just going around with a couple of vessels spectating what others have built. I’ll go on youtube for that. We’re hoping to be able to build a whole integrated network of clockwork infrastructure with surveyors and mining posts feeding stations with supply runs and balancing recourse products, and then to integrate and combine those with others. So its not a one off synch, you need to know exactly where and when everything is all the time. If I timewarp I need everything I own to also timewarp. If everyone is doing that then all these objects are constantly blinking in and out of existence which makes rendezvous and docking very difficult. t_v found a clever workaround in that everything gets fixed to your timeline when you arrive, so it warps with you and you can approach and dock, but you still have a bit of disconnect especially with other players vessels that are in transit. Because they’re at a different time the planets are all in different places, which makes it difficult to understand where their vessels are going and what their infrastructure network is actually doing. It’s probably manageable with communication, it just creates a different set of hurdles. 

Edited by Pthigrivi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Vl3d said:
On 10/13/2022 at 5:26 PM, Vl3d said:

Paradigm shift and accept that KSP2 WILL BE MULTIPLAYER AT ITS CORE.

Just want to point out that Nate liked the following post / comment

For clarification, the post talks about the implementation of multiplayer on the code side. If you don’t have a system that is multiplayer capable already, it is really hard to tack on multiplayer and have it function well. For example, Minecraft (which has a lot of single player users) sets up a server to play on even in single player worlds, because the way the code is set up for multiplayer, the client isn’t designed to generate the world and make changes to it, so there always needs to be a separate process that the client connects to to make the game run. Multiplayer really should be technically up and running near the start of development, even if single player mode is a viable option. In other words: we still have no evidence towards specific or general multiplayer solutions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, t_v said:

For clarification, the post talks about the implementation of multiplayer on the code side. If you don’t have a system that is multiplayer capable already, it is really hard to tack on multiplayer and have it function well. For example, Minecraft (which has a lot of single player users) sets up a server to play on even in single player worlds, because the way the code is set up for multiplayer, the client isn’t designed to generate the world and make changes to it, so there always needs to be a separate process that the client connects to to make the game run. Multiplayer really should be technically up and running near the start of development, even if single player mode is a viable option. In other words: we still have no evidence towards specific or general multiplayer solutions. 

To add to this, there are rare case of the opposite too.

Fallout 76 is an MMO game that runs on an engine that isn't built for multiplayer. The way they retrofitted it into the game is more similar to multiplayer mods and hacks than a true multiplayer engine.

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...