adding multiplayer

[John JACK]

On 13.05.2016 at 11:03 PM, jwenting said:

KSP Online, now with Microtransactions.

You are mixing up plain old multiplayer with Free-to-Pay MMOs. In multiplayer for a sandbox non-competitive game, where all calculations are done in client, there is no need for centralised servers at all, except some web lobby, that is not a server.

The trouble with KSP multiplayer is, like it was said before, that it's impossible out of Kerbin atmosphere. Even orbital manoeuvres in LKO may need several hours of timewarp, and are impossible in real time. It may be possible with highly-abstract PBEM way, like "leave your station in stable orbit for n time and find friend's ship docked to it", but is it fun enough? Even more abstract is a space race where only timetables and milestones are shared, but that's a forum game level, not multiplayer.

And that feature of course will affect everyone. More time Squad spend on multiplayer means less time spent on other features. There is one mod, is it popular?

[SpaceplaneAddict]

8 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

I agree right up until the inevitable and entirely unavoidable happens after they add a thing not needed: single player content development and polish suffer because resources forcibly shift to the not needed thing.

Content (i.e parts/planets/whatever) would have to be constant between singleplayer, and multiplayer, no? Resources would really just be used to create infrastructure for multiplayer. Afterwards, it's only a matter of keeping it up with the game version, and done. Again, content would obviously stay the same, no?

*Determination.

[Alshain]

10 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

I agree right up until the inevitable and entirely unavoidable happens after they add a thing not needed: single player content development and polish suffer because resources forcibly shift to the not needed thing.

Lets face it, single player development is nearing it's end.  If you think we are getting the often talked about career/science/resources/[insert any major functionality here] overhaul, I've news for you, it's not happening.  I don't even think the request in my signature is likely to get done.  They have said graphics/part models are happening, assuming that is still on the docket, multiplayer would be next and that is probably it, stick a fork in it.

Asside from that little tidbit, a lot people want multiplayer and it has been promised many times.  Not just one little offhand comment either, it's been said several times that multiplayer is coming.  If Squad wants a future beyond KSP they better not disappoint, because a misstep like that could shut down any future projects before they start.

Edited May 15, 2016 by Alshain

[Pthigrivi]

3 hours ago, Alshain said:

Lets face it, single player development is nearing it's end.  If you think we are getting the often talked about career/science/resources/[insert any major functionality here] overhaul, I've news for you, it's not happening.  I don't even think the request in my signature is likely to get done.  They have said graphics/part models are happening, assuming that is still on the docket, multiplayer would be next and that is probably it, stick a fork in it.

What makes you say that? I mean I certainly think many of the suggestions that would require a total re-write are just not going to happen, nor do I think they're necessary, but there's definitely room left for improvement. Mission planning would be big boost, Kerbal skills above level 3 are obviously unfinished. It would be a real shame after putting in all that effort to upgrade to Unity 5 to just abandon it this point. 

Development has been slow and new features were deliberately left off the table during the upgrade. Squad is a small company, Im not surprised it takes time. Still progress is happening. 

[Alshain]

Just now, Pthigrivi said:

What makes you say that? I mean I certainly think many of the suggestions that would require a total re-write are just not going to happen, nor do I think they're necessary, but there's definitely room left for improvement. Mission planning would be big boost, Kerbal skills above level 3 are obviously unfinished. It would be a real shame after putting in all that effort to upgrade to Unity 5 to just abandon it this point. 

Development has been slow and new features were deliberately left off the table during the upgrade. Squad is a small company, Im not surprised it takes time. Still progress is happening. 

Well, first, I'm not employed at Squad so anything I say is my own opinion, but I just don't expect too many new major features beyond what we know.  Thats not to say they won't add anything att all, but its going to be minor.  Total rewrites of major functionality are not going to happen after you go to the trouble of making console ports.

[jwenting]

17 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

why is it people still want multiplayer? there are far too many things that can go wrong, too many hurdles <part counts, mods, trolls, etc> to be accounted for for this to be viable in a game, that I have said before, and shall say again: KSP does not now, nor has it EVER lent itself to anything more than a single player game. 

A lot of them want it for exactly that, trolling others... Deliberately crashing their rockets into the space stations others spent days constructing, things like that.

[AlamoVampire]

6 hours ago, SpaceplaneAddict said:

Content (i.e parts/planets/whatever) would have to be constant between singleplayer, and multiplayer, no? Resources would really just be used to create infrastructure for multiplayer. Afterwards, it's only a matter of keeping it up with the game version, and done. Again, content would obviously stay the same, no?

*Determination.

Not necessarily no.

@Alshain It would be folly to forsake single player for multiplayer. They have overly much that must be done before its appropriate to touch multiplayer like say the current major instability with the constant crashing. Do i expect new mechanics? No. Do i want to see say GP2 where Eeloo takes its spot as a moon as i think was originally intended? Yes. I also expect they will fix career mode to ya know make sense and have a story at some point too but ling before multiplayer. I also hope they take as long as they took for resources to ensure its done properly and not slapdash.

 @jwenting a reason to NOT have it. Its one of many reasons i know multiplayer is a bad idea imho

[Alshain]

9 hours ago, SpaceplaneAddict said:

Content (i.e parts/planets/whatever) would have to be constant between singleplayer, and multiplayer, no? Resources would really just be used to create infrastructure for multiplayer. Afterwards, it's only a matter of keeping it up with the game version, and done. Again, content would obviously stay the same, no?

*Determination.

If done correctly yes.  Single player would become a locally running multiplayer server with no outside access.  

Minecraft is a great example of this because it started where the mp client was separate from the sp client.  When Mojang realised they were fixing bugs twice far too often, they merged the client.  Now when you start a single player Minecraft game, its actually a very hidden multiplayer game.

 

 

 

[AlamoVampire]

5 hours ago, Alshain said:

If done correctly yes.  Single player would become a locally running multiplayer server with no outside access.  

Minecraft is a great example of this because it started where the mp client was separate from the sp client.  When Mojang realised they were fixing bugs twice far too often, they merged the client.  Now when you start a single player Minecraft game, its actually a very hidden multiplayer game.

 

 

 

which is a bad thing. too many things can and will go wrong. this would lend itself to making your world <save> being constantly available to anyone which again = bad.

[adsii1970]

19 hours ago, Alshain said:

Lets face it, single player development is nearing it's end.  If you think we are getting the often talked about career/science/resources/[insert any major functionality here] overhaul, I've news for you, it's not happening.  I don't even think the request in my signature is likely to get done.  They have said graphics/part models are happening, assuming that is still on the docket, multiplayer would be next and that is probably it, stick a fork in it.

Asside from that little tidbit, a lot people want multiplayer and it has been promised many times.  Not just one little offhand comment either, it's been said several times that multiplayer is coming.  If Squad wants a future beyond KSP they better not disappoint, because a misstep like that could shut down any future projects before they start.

I don't like multi-player games that much. I prefer to play my games alone. The more people you involve, the more it becomes less about individual enjoyment and more about keeping up with the Jones' as we say here in America. Now, to each their own - if you want to play multi-player, knock yourself out...

The only thing that I am concerned about is Squad "forgetting" the current bugs and simply moving on to the other KSP related projects they have planned. There's about a half-dozen bugs that if aren't addressed, may very well be the end of a lot of hardcore fans supporting/playing the game.

[Guest]

16 hours ago, Alshain said:

 Total rewrites of major functionality are not going to happen after you go to the trouble of making console ports.

I would argue that the game you mentioned in your next post, Minecraft, did just that, made major overhauls after console release.

[Alshain]

10 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

which is a bad thing. too many things can and will go wrong. this would lend itself to making your world <save> being constantly available to anyone which again = bad.

You have no idea what you are talking about.  Your world save is available to no one unless you explicit give open access to it, or your computer is hacked, but KSP being single player only won't stop that.  Your reaching for arguments to support your stance which has no legs to stand on, and you are failing at it.

 

3 hours ago, Otis said:

I would argue that the game you mentioned in your next post, Minecraft, did just that, made major overhauls after console release.

Minecraft wasn't ported, it was re-written.  The console versions are separate entities entirely (Java doesn't run on Apple, and I doubt it runs on PS4, it definitely doesn't run on Wii U) . My understanding of KSP is that will not the same, it is a direct port.

3 hours ago, adsii1970 said:

I don't like multi-player games that much. I prefer to play my games alone. The more people you involve, the more it becomes less about individual enjoyment and more about keeping up with the Jones' as we say here in America. Now, to each their own - if you want to play multi-player, knock yourself out...

The only thing that I am concerned about is Squad "forgetting" the current bugs and simply moving on to the other KSP related projects they have planned. There's about a half-dozen bugs that if aren't addressed, may very well be the end of a lot of hardcore fans supporting/playing the game.

If the game is done right, the bugs that affect single player will be the same in multiplayer.  As I said above, they would be the same client.  The only bugs that would independent of single player would be anything involving connections.  I can't tell you how Squad is implementing the game, but I would certainly hope they would do it that way, it makes the most sense programmatically.  As for bugs that exist now, that really shouldn't be a factor since multiplayer isn't coming right away.  I agree, I hope they fix those first.  I have nothing against people who want to play singleplayer, as you say, to each his own, but some people in the thread are saying nobody should get multiplayer because they don't want it, and that is just selfish.

Edited May 16, 2016 by Alshain

[AlamoVampire]

@Alshain What i am doing and succeeding at is showing situations that can happen. Remote though they may be, a chance they are. It is not my fault that you dismiss anything with less than a 85.75% chance of certainty. I can not control your exceptionally limited breadth of scope but dont you dare say my breadth of scope and accounting for possibilities down to 0.025% chance as failure. I account for things down to that small a chance, you clearly do not.  

[Alshain]

12 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

@Alshain What i am doing and succeeding at is showing situations that can happen. Remote though they may be, a chance they are. It is not my fault that you dismiss anything with less than a 85.75% chance of certainty. I can not control your exceptionally limited breadth of scope but dont you dare say my breadth of scope and accounting for possibilities down to 0.025% chance as failure. I account for things down to that small a chance, you clearly do not.  

You haven't given anything at all.  There is a 0% chance that anyone will get into your save file for a single player game if multiplayer is implemented in any way that can't be done right now. Not 0.025%.... NONE, ZIP, ZILCH.  It isn't remote, it is non existent. You are making stuff up about things you do not understand.  You know what else is NONE, ZIP, ZILCH?  The number of real reasons you have given why multiplayer would affect you playing single player.

 

Even if there was such a chance, that is not a reason to not do something.  There is a higher than 0.025% chance that implementing any of the things you want will break your save game.  Is that a justification for not doing them?  No Gas Planet 2 for you, it could potentially break the game.  No alterations to career mode either, because well that could break your game.  Any development of any kind could break your game, 1.1 is proof of that.  Are you saying Squad should just stop right now?

Edited May 16, 2016 by Alshain

[KerbonautInTraining]

Multiplayer is something that's way off right now.

I think after we get past the rocket part revamp/antenna range updates and their respective bugs, then Multiplayer should become a priority. 

Squad taking a significant amount of time to develop multiplayer right now would be like a pilot making tea after his right engine explodes.

[Rmack]

I'm only part way through this subject, and I have to scoot soon, and I was wondering if anyone has thought of this;

What if it's a limited multi-player mod that would only allow different players to play different crew members on one spacecraft?

[The_Rocketeer]

15 minutes ago, Rmack said:

I'm only part way through this subject, and I have to scoot soon, and I was wondering if anyone has thought of this;

What if it's a limited multi-player mod that would only allow different players to play different crew members on one spacecraft?

I may be wrong, but I seem to remember reading something about Squad wanting to go beyond what has already been achieved in mods, i.e. KMP/DMP. AFAIK (correct me please) IVAs aren't planned to become anything more than what they already are. I mean, besides bouncing around inside the cabin, what exactly would your various MP crewmembers be doing?

Wait, I know! They'd be having a LAN party and playing Artemis!

 

On 16/05/2016 at 5:27 PM, Alshain said:

Java doesn't run on Apple

Ahem: Get Java for your Mac

[Alshain]

5 minutes ago, The_Rocketeer said:

Ahem: Get Java for your Mac

Mac runs the same Minecraft version as PC and Linux (that is the beauty of Java), But not iPhone or iPad because there is no Java runtime, which has a separate "Apple" version, which of course had to be rewritten in Objective-C.  I would guess all of the console versions, including the Windows 10 Store version, were rewritten in that manner.

Edited May 18, 2016 by Alshain

[The_Rocketeer]

Just now, Alshain said:

Mac runs the same Minecraft version as PC and Linux (that is the beauty of Java), But not iPhone or iPad because there is no Java runtime, which has a separate "Apple" version, which of course had to be rewritten in Objective-C.

This makes me inexplicably annoyed.

[Rmack]

16 minutes ago, The_Rocketeer said:

I may be wrong, but I seem to remember reading something about Squad wanting to go beyond what has already been achieved in mods, i.e. KMP/DMP. AFAIK (correct me please) IVAs aren't planned to become anything more than what they already are. I mean, besides bouncing around inside the cabin, what exactly would your various MP crewmembers be doing?

Wait, I know! They'd be having a LAN party and playing Artemis!

 

Ahem: Get Java for your Mac

LOL!

I know what you mean, but being a rookie, I could have used at least a co-pilot to call out vertical speed and what-not on my first Munar landing.

[Columbia]

On 5/16/2016 at 2:06 PM, AlamoVampire said:

which is a bad thing. too many things can and will go wrong. this would lend itself to making your world <save> being constantly available to anyone which again = bad.

I'm with Alshain here. What, if you don't like multiplayer, don't play it. It won't affect how you play the game.

I'll attempt to counter the arguments I've seen:

"It's a bad thing because it will divert resources from developing single player, and because too many things can go wrong."

You know what else diverted resources from developing the game itself? 1.1. Squad knew that it was difficult and so they took their time (A little less than a year after 1.0) and released it. 1.0.5 as well added parts that made aircraft much better, and helped make many more possibilities for a space game. For all I know, that 11 months consumed making 1.1, 1.0.5, 1.0.4, 1.0.3, 1.0.2 and 1.0.1 could have been used to fix career mode, add a DV Readout, work on the demo version more, and expand rocketry. I guess with that logic, Squad should have never added career mode to work on the things Sandbox needs, and should not have introduced a whole new set of problems with the game to fix. Right? Right??

And also, you know what else had too many ways to go wrong? 1.1. It was porting from one engine to another, and it could be argued that it was one hell of a risky move. If you decide to dismiss an idea just because too many things could go wrong, well, that's gonna get you nowhere. 

For all I know, aerodynamics was also risky because it made calculations far more complex, and made the launch phase of a flight somewhat harder which some might not like either.

And it is true that it would be a crappy idea to start working on multiplayer now, but there will be a time that's ripe.

Also, AlamoVampire, if you are so against multiplayer, what about the people who both share a common love for KSP and want to play together? Hmm? It could be argued that you could just install a mod, but that doesn't mean you should remove a possibility from the stock game. And once again, as Alshain said, if you do not want to have anything to do with it, don't have anything to do with it. Don't play multiplayer. It's that simple.

And the argument for it being a total ****storm with trolls is pretty solid, but it doesn't mean it will definitely happen. For trolls and griefers, as someone said before, comparing it to the way Minecraft ended up is just not fair. Minecraft is a game made for the younger audience (not necessarily meaning the older audience can use it), it's easy, and it's trolling potential is really high. Not to mention that among younger audience there tends to be the less mature part of the audience who has fun out of ruining someone's day. KSP is a space simulation game that's notorious for it's steep learning curve, has a lot of building involved, and is built around orbital mechanics, aerodynamics and rocketry. Unless you're referring to aircraft or rockets taking off and being shot down (bdarmory hurr durr), it's pretty unlikely that someone who comes to the game for the sole purpose of liquiding someone off would be as willing to learn rendezvous, orbital mechanics and how rockets and planes work as much. And even then, there's always the banhammer, and assuming a system that DMP uses, the victim would have to allow him syncing with his "bubble".

I'm not saying there will be no trolls, but comparing it to something like Minecraft isn't accurate nor fair.

And IMO if KSP would get multiplayer, *maybe* there could be a system where certain players could get into another's "bubble" and both of those could play with each other but no one else, or at least no one who they wouldn't want to see. More and more friends could play together in their own world separate from others without the problem of trolls and griefing. Then again, that system has way too many flaws, and I have no idea how a server system works.

 

[Dills0n]

On 5/15/2016 at 8:27 AM, John JACK said:

You are mixing up plain old multiplayer with Free-to-Pay MMOs. In multiplayer for a sandbox non-competitive game, where all calculations are done in client, there is no need for centralised servers at all, except some web lobby, that is not a server.

The trouble with KSP multiplayer is, like it was said before, that it's impossible out of Kerbin atmosphere. Even orbital manoeuvres in LKO may need several hours of timewarp, and are impossible in real time. It may be possible with highly-abstract PBEM way, like "leave your station in stable orbit for n time and find friend's ship docked to it", but is it fun enough? Even more abstract is a space race where only timetables and milestones are shared, but that's a forum game level, not multiplayer.

And that feature of course will affect everyone. More time Squad spend on multiplayer means less time spent on other features. There is one mod, is it popular?

Before you go on blindly nay-saying multiplayer with your own imagined reasons why it would be bad, try the Dark Multiplayer Mod, you'll realize that a solution has already been reached for time warping. You see, kerbal, runs on your computer. Not on your friends computer or the computer that hosts the multiplayer game. When you time warp on your computer, your personal kerbal program (your client) warps time ahead and makes all the necessary calculations to the present. This does not, however, cause time to warp on other clients, they remain in the past with out calculating the time warp. To avoid traffic jams at the space center, there is a scalable "safety bubble" around KSC. When you are at KSC YOU are the only ship there, no matter howm any people in the game are launching. Usually the safety bubble is >1Km so when you are 1000 meters from KSC your ship becomes "real" to the rest of the players. With the DMP mod there's a DMP menu that lists all the player's, their current activity (VAB, SPH, Launching, Piloting Vessel). It also notes their current time and gives you the option to "Sync" with them which will instantly bring you up to their time, this doesn't change the position of your ship but everything else is concurrent with the present time.

D-MP has already implemented multiplayer, even if it's a bit unstable, they've done it.

There are flaws but it's already a proven concept and would invite players who would rather share the game with other players than plug away in a lonely single player style. If you haven't yet, try out DMP. They're working on KSP 1.2 which will be D-MP 2.3.59 maybe?

Edit 10/20/2016- I fixed some typos and today wanted to add that I really hope Multiplayer doesn't become some kind of DLC for the game, as it has been hinted at being implemented, as soon as 2015 ... . . .

Edited October 20, 2016 by Dills0n
added more info about DMP

[dsonbill]

It's amazing how people still claim certain facets of multiplayer won't work with KSP, despite the fact that DMP successfully solved all of these.

Maybe it's even more amazing though, that people want to control the way in which others play KSP, a game that is literally up for shaping into any kind of game you want.

 

GROW UP PEOPLE. AND JUST LOCK THIS STUPID THREAD.

[technicalfool]

40 minutes ago, dsonbill said:

It's amazing how people still claim certain facets of multiplayer won't work with KSP, despite the fact that DMP successfully solved all of these.

Maybe it's even more amazing though, that people want to control the way in which others play KSP, a game that is literally up for shaping into any kind of game you want.

 

GROW UP PEOPLE. AND JUST LOCK THIS STUPID THREAD.

Ahem. Request denied. People are going to discuss multiplayer, and this thread might as well be the place for it.

By the way ladies and gents, dsonbill is one of the contributors to the DarkMultiplayer project. You want to know how multiplayer is very much possible? You might want to listen to this guy.

[razark]

22 minutes ago, technicalfool said:

Ahem. Request denied. People are going to discuss multiplayer, and this thread might as well be the place for it.

By the way ladies and gents, dsonbill is one of the contributors to the DarkMultiplayer project. You want to know how multiplayer is very much possible? You might want to listen to this guy.

Oh, well maybe he can answer my questions:

On 2/19/2016 at 11:21 AM, 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?