Multiplayer question, how important it is to you?

[mcwaffles2003]

21 hours ago, Scarecrow71 said:

It honestly has nothing to do with whether I've met nice people or not.  The simple fact is these types of people/players exist, and I don't want to deal with them.  It is easier to just do solo, which is what I'll do.

you know moderation exists, right? its pretty rare when i play factorio that griefers damage things and passwords make it so only allowed people can play. but whatever floats your boat

[Guest]

15 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

a PURELY FLUFF feature (which regardless of how much one wants or likes multiplayer, multiplayer is a 100% fluff feature)

Purely fluff features usually don't have the same potential at bringing new sales and user as multiplayer does.

IMHO, controversial opinion, IVA is a Fluff feature*, not spending time on it would make someone complain but it would die rather quickly and not make a dent in sales. Sadly, VR would be another such feature*, we VR users are too small of a niche to even move a rounding error amount of sales. But multiplayer? Seriously? You really think all those games wasting time and resources in implementing multiplayer it's all for nothing?

_{*I want to make it very clear, I'm not saying that I don't want those, just that them missing wouldn't be a big deal marketing/sales wise.}

 

15 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

A while back i openly stated that I feared what would happen if they devoted dev cycles too early

Retrofitting multiplayer into a single player code base causes 100000x the problems and headaches (Look at FO76, it was supposed to be a coop DLC for FO4).

 

15 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

and how it may negatively affect things.

Even if all the stereotypes and misconceptions about "Fortnite kids" invading the game were to be true you still can play in single player.

 

15 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

Flash forward to the day of early release and it seems my fears were justified. Im not saying their focus on mutiplayer caused some issues that we see currently but im also not not saying it. 

[Citation Needed]
To me it looks like a lot of systems are far behind at the same time, I don't see how you could even hint at the idea that it's all to blame on multiplayer development somehow. It's not an easy feat, sure, but so are a hundred other things when you're rewriting KSP from scratch trying to avoid the same pitfalls.

Edited April 21, 2023 by Master39
EDIT: Removed the double post

[caipi]

On 4/20/2023 at 8:16 AM, AlamoVampire said:

I also fail to see a way for parts counts, mods or timewarp to be dealt with in a way that wont feel awkward.  Do others agree with me?

Well, the way DarkMultiPlayer (DMP) handled mods was okay for me and didn't feel awkward at all. In essence, the server just handled the current position, time and assets of the clients (the things in the save file) while the game was running on the clients (that's oversimplifying it, but for the sake of explaining it, it might suffice - also, i'm a noob in such matters ;-) ).

The server allowed white and black lists for mods. So if you had a certain mod like HyperEdit and if it were blacklisted, you weren't able to connect to the server. If you didn't have a certain part pack like OPT when it was white listed (i.e. necessary), you couldn't connect either. The server itself didn't need the mods, though. It's just a name in a save file for the server.

But yeah, I do agree with you one the timewarp and awkwardness. But I have stated that before, I think.