adding multiplayer

[dsonbill]

Just now, Veeltch said:

I say drop the idea of MP for KSP and leave it for a sequel (or rather prequel) with airplanes only. Seriously. MP is not worth it if it's going to be in the KSP we have now.

It's more fun to race, fight and fly with others than warping and syncing all the time.

Then what you want is a server that doesn't allow time warping, which is trivial.

[Wjolcz]

1 minute ago, dsonbill said:

Then what you want is a server that doesn't allow time warping, which is trivial.

Have fun with that.

[dsonbill]

2 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

Have fun with that.

I don't understand - you want to play without people warping and syncing, and that's how you do it - by removing warping and syncing.

KSP can be any kind of game you want, and that's why people enjoy it. Translating this to a multiplayer format is not that hard, and you can have servers that focus on any number of play styles.

[adsii1970]

13 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

I say drop the idea of MP for KSP and leave it for a sequel (or rather prequel) with airplanes only. Seriously. MP is not worth it if it's going to be in the KSP we have now.

[edited by adsii1970 for relevant content]

No...no...no... I do not care if I ever see multiplayer KSP. One of the reasons I enjoy it now is because it is full featured without multiplayer. Normally, when a game goes multi-player, there are features ONLY accessible in multi-player. I would hate to see them do that to KSP to get people to play in some sort of KSP-multiverse. Nay, I tell you, Nay!

[dsonbill]

1 minute ago, adsii1970 said:

No...no...no... I do not care if I ever see multiplayer KSP. One of the reasons I enjoy it now is because it is full featured without multiplayer. Normally, when a game goes multi-player, there are features ONLY accessible in multi-player. I would hate to see them do that to KSP to get people to play in some sort of KSP-multiverse. Nay, I tell you, Nay!

I doubt Squad would be stupid enough to try and create a centralized server system. It would probably work more like Minecraft, where there weren't even official servers offered for most of it's life.

[Wjolcz]

23 minutes ago, dsonbill said:

KSP can be any kind of game you want, and that's why people enjoy it. Translating this to a multiplayer format is not that hard, and you can have servers that focus on any number of play styles.

Doubt it. I'm no coder, but I'm pretty sure it's easier to create a game based on multiplayer and then add singleplayer mode, than the other way around. If it was that easy, DMP wouldn't be as buggy as it is and we would have MP long time ago.

14 minutes ago, adsii1970 said:

No...no...no... I do not care if I ever see multiplayer KSP. One of the reasons I enjoy it now is because it is full featured without multiplayer. Normally, when a game goes multi-player, there are features ONLY accessible in multi-player. I would hate to see them do that to KSP to get people to play in some sort of KSP-multiverse. Nay, I tell you, Nay!

Yup, I totally agree. That's why I think it should be left for another game (a one that doesn't focus on space exploration and aircraft flying and building instead). I'm totally cool with KSP being singleplayer.

Maybe I phrased it poorly and it wasn't clear enough. I'm not a native english speaker.

Edited July 22, 2016 by Veeltch

[adsii1970]

Just now, Veeltch said:

Yup, I totally agree. That's why I think it should be left for another game (a one that doesn't focus on space exploration and aircraft flying and building). I'm totally cool with KSP being singleplayer.

Maybe I phrased it poorly and it wasn't clear enough. I'm not a native english speaker.

[Edited by adsii1970 for relevant content]

I agree... leave it for another game. I could easily see it be some sort of short version of KSP... to the Mun and back first, but start with the Wright Brothers flyer and go forward... that could be kind of fun.

Your English is fine; I am a native speaker and sometimes I get flabbergasted with some of the rules!

[dsonbill]

2 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

Doubt it. I'm no coder, but I'm pretty sure it's easier to create a game based on multiplayer and then add singleplayer mode, than the other way around. If it was that easy, DMP wouldn't be as buggy as it is and we would have MP long time ago.

I don't necessarily agree. Sure it may be easier from the ground-up, but translating over is actually not that hard. You basically move what you have over to server code, and make a new way to connect to it. Then you move specific parts off onto the client, and you're pretty much good to go. The client does kind of need an internal simulation for lag compensation and such, but they may not really focus on that.

The reason DMP is so strange is because we're client-authoritative, and that's not something the scope of a mod can or should ever attempt to remedy. Being server-authoritative would mean running a majority of the game code on the server, and we're not licensed to do something like that. We could always do *something* like it with Principia or something, but I don't see anyone wanting to do that.

[AlamoVampire]

6 hours ago, dsonbill said:

I don't understand - you want to play without people warping and syncing, and that's how you do it - by removing warping and syncing.

KSP can be any kind of game you want, and that's why people enjoy it. Translating this to a multiplayer format is not that hard, and you can have servers that focus on any number of play styles.

imagine going to Eeloo in REAL TIME. how much fun would that be? to take MONTHS OR YEARS IRL to reach it?

[Jatwaa]

There is something special about bringing in multiplayer after the mail sail is set. The features are not omitted only added. As it has been said plenty of times, this could be a feature that thise who do not like it could simply ignore. I play Minecraft and Starbound solo most the time. But many people like to share that experience in a low latency, well devised and fine tunable setting. DMP was and is great, but it is not refined enough. Are there things to sort first? Oh

..ohhhh yes. Wheels mainly. A few things I would love to see would be single kerbal controls for multi crewed ships. In multiplayer. Time warp is handled well via DMP, rehash reuse. Let's say that the legoes are there on the field, Squad just would have to pick up the blocks and make it all a nice prettier package than DMP. It's too dangerous to go it alone Link...take Jeb with you. 

#TeamMP lol

[Columbia]

On 7/2/2016 at 2:18 PM, AlamoVampire said:

What about mods? What about part count? Player count? Trolls? the list is as long and varied as there are stars in our known universe and beyond. When this game is 10 or 15 years old, then MAYBE multiplayer can be stock. But now? With soo many issues that NEED PRIORITY, like crashing, or the resurgence of this cannot deploy while stowed bs <as examples that are still  priority> must be dealt with FIRST. Not to mention the risk to single player content. No, multiplayer isnt ready to be a thing yet. Not now, not in the near future. Sorry, but brutal truth is brutal truth.

Quote

What about mods?

Have servers with certain mods? A server with FAR, or BDArmory, or something like that. Don't know how that would work though.

Quote

What about part count?

Imposing restrictions on ship part count, as well as maximum players. I'm no coding expert, these are just my ideas.

Quote

Trolls?

As mentioned somewhere in page 9, trolls cannot be prevented, but recovering can be easier;

• Backups,
• Whitelists,
• and banhammers

Can be put into place. It sure as hell won't be avoidable, but its effects can be dampened to the point of virtually nothing.

Quote

With soo many issues that NEED PRIORITY, like crashing, or the resurgence of this cannot deploy while stowed bs <as examples that are still  priority> must be dealt with FIRST.

I mean, KSP 1.0.5 was made to add a whole new host of useful and nice-looking parts. Why'd they add that instead of fully focusing on 1.1, and why when we're having issues with KSP's performance? 

Also, nobody stated that it had to be done now. I'll give you that, there are a lot of issues that need priority before multiplayer is implemented, but if you wanted KSP to be absolutely bug-free before anything else.. Sorry mate, but much of KSP's potential will be left unused.

Quote

Not to mention the risk to single player content.

What risks?

Also, dude, chill. Squad probably won't be implementing it for like a year or so.

 

[AlamoVampire]

@Columbia Risks? Single player content sees less dev time. Examples include the campaigns of Battlefield 3&4. They suffered so multiplayer could get working in ways they wanted so SP content was slapped together.

Bugs to get KSP mp working cause major issues and nastier bugs in sp.

these are but some of the risks.

 

[dsonbill]

56 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

Bugs to get KSP mp working cause major issues and nastier bugs in sp.

these are but some of the risks.

 

As I already said, this is the opposite of what would happen. Tons of single player bugs would be fixed as the movement from a monolithic system to an internal server based one happened.

 

17 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

imagine going to Eeloo in REAL TIME. how much fun would that be? to take MONTHS OR YEARS IRL to reach it?

In a server that's focused on flight on kerbin and not wanting to warp, I doubt you'd want to go to another planet. You're ignoring that KSP can be many different kinds of game, which was the entire point of my post.

[Wjolcz]

49 minutes ago, dsonbill said:

As I already said, this is the opposite of what would happen. Tons of single player bugs would be fixed as the movement from a monolithic system to an internal server based one happened.

Yeah, maybe. But the career would still be rubbish, because that's appearantly what a "feature completed" game means. We would get a crappy career mode and a (probably crappy) multiplayer. Anyway, my point is devs should focus on making the game enjoyable first. Career overhaul first, a proper multiplayer mode later (preferably in a sequel/prequel that focuses on airplanes).

[Holo]

18 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

imagine going to Eeloo in REAL TIME. how much fun would that be? to take MONTHS OR YEARS IRL to reach it?

Not really. But the person who only wanted realtime was talking about planes only. You're not going to get to Eeloo in an atmospheric plane flying around the KSC ever.

[Drelam]

I don't understand the point of playing KSP in multiplayer anyway. I admit, i'm from another generation of players and never understood why ppl. nowadays can't do anything on their own anymore.

But playing KSP in multiplayer seems contradictory to me.

 

[Jatwaa]

6 minutes ago, Drelam said:

I don't understand the point of playing KSP in multiplayer anyway. I admit, i'm from another generation of players and never understood why ppl. nowadays can't do anything on their own anymore.

But playing KSP in multiplayer seems contradictory to me.

 

I look at it like this, I still have fun. With the game solo...actually am circumnavigating Kerbin...with a new craft this time. Been playing all day. I have 3k+ hours in the game. Is it fun? Yes. Would i like to fly the world with a wingman? Oh hells yes. Do I need it? Nah...but I would love the multiplayer experience. Some people play games with others, some do not. The possibilities for multiplayer are limitless. VR, races, wingmen, war sims, build projects...the list goes on. 

Edited July 23, 2016 by Jatwaa

[AlamoVampire]

If I may be so blunt. This is NOT Kerbal Aviation Program. This IS Kerbal SPACE Program. If you want to race planes and dogfight then please play a game suited for such activities and by all means make THAT GAME multiplayer. 

Kerbal SPACE Program is a game where you run a, funnily enough a SPACE Program and not a military or aviation program. 

This not to say those who enjoy BDA are wrong, but to try to force a multiplayer farce on a game that is not DESIGNED or APPROPRIATE for such things completely detracts from and could DESTROY the game is negligent of what this game is. 

The fact that Squad looks like its going to pander to a tiny fraction of players to take away from fixing what is wrong with KSP when there is a functional mod that does what you guys want is almost criminal. 

Stop asking for Squad to divert valuable time, effort and limited resources to MP when you have a MOD that gives it to you. 

Now get off my lawn before I have Smithers release the bee breathing hounds.

[Jatwaa]

10 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

If I may be so blunt. This is NOT Kerbal Aviation Program. This IS Kerbal SPACE Program. If you want to race planes and dogfight then please play a game suited for such activities and by all means make THAT GAME multiplayer. 

Kerbal SPACE Program is a game where you run a, funnily enough a SPACE Program and not a military or aviation program. 

This not to say those who enjoy BDA are wrong, but to try to force a multiplayer farce on a game that is not DESIGNED or APPROPRIATE for such things completely detracts from and could DESTROY the game is negligent of what this game is. 

The fact that Squad looks like its going to pander to a tiny fraction of players to take away from fixing what is wrong with KSP when there is a functional mod that does what you guys want is almost criminal. 

Stop asking for Squad to divert valuable time, effort and limited resources to MP when you have a MOD that gives it to you. 

Now get off my lawn before I have Smithers release the bee breathing hounds.

I hardly find the game negligent...well the wheels need work. As far as it being Aviation, sorry, it is. In order to create a SSTO one must understand how to make a proper plane. As far as Military, that is a mod. Not Squad, no real point. BDA is pretty fantastic bit of code as well. But one thing that seems blatantly wrong is forcing anyone to play multiplayer. We are speaking peer-peer or dedicated servers. Nothing that is too far fetched for Squad, as they had mentioned before that they were investigating and testing such things. The "tiny fraction" has no verifiable evidence. But I would lean that if people could play with a friend, they would. Because such things have appeal to co-op-ers. Now, if DMP had a powerful functionality like say...Minecraft, which has some fantastic streamlined servers available, this wouldn't even be a discussion. 

My last launch with DMP saw a mirrored station go into orbit..that was...interesting. 

Nothing wrong with people playing the game with all of the available possibilities or enjoying a game with friends. Nothing at all. As long as they don't force MP or servers. Besides, if the code is there in a variant and the time was already spent, why not use what you have?  That time that people talk about being wasted on MP code...the code would have to be there if they had noted they were testing it prior.

 

[AlamoVampire]

@Jatwaa You missed my point. The folks I addressed are not talking SSTOs. They are talking turn and burn air races. You make mention of BD Armory as did I. Let the mod makers handle non space aviation and mp. Squad needs focus on fixing bugs not mp.

As to minecraft that's an incorrect comparison to a space game that uses physics and time warping to handle months of travel in seconds. 

As to negligence? I said diverting such limited manpower, such limited resources to something handled by a mod is negligent.

[dsonbill]

14 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

This not to say those who enjoy BDA are wrong, but to try to force a multiplayer farce on a game that is not DESIGNED or APPROPRIATE for such things completely detracts from and could DESTROY the game is negligent of what this game is. 

Your assumption that adding multiplayer will somehow detract from anything is false, because things don't work like that with software development - working on a specific part will never detract from things that aren't going to be worked on to begin with.

Multiplayer has been in the works for a while now. More of it has been developed than you've been told. I can only extrapolate from things I've known for quite a while, and that leads me to believe there is a significant portion of the work done already, especially since they haven't rescinded their promise of delivering multiplayer. You may want people not to encourage Squad, but it's far too late for that. Work has been done, and multiplayer is coming regardless if you like it or not.

[Snark]

Folks, emotions are running a bit high, here.  Can we please take it down a notch?

Multiplayer is just a feature, like any other.  Regardless of whether it ends up in the stock game or not (and, if so, regardless of when that happens), that's all it is:  a potential feature.  A fairly large one, yes, but just a feature.

There are lots of features in KSP.  There are also lots of potential features.  Any continuously-evolving game, like KSP, is going to be adding features as it goes along.  Since the development team is relatively small, and there are far more potential features than there is time to do them in, this means that the devs have to pick and choose which features to implement, and in what order.

And there is no feature that is universally desired-- or reviled-- by everyone.  Doesn't matter which feature you name:  there will always be some people who love it and think it's a must-have, and others who hate it and think it must not go in, and still others who don't really care one way or the other.

Should KSP have a dV meter?  A telemetry feature?  More rocket parts?  More spaceplane parts?  And on and on.  All of these have passionate advocates on both sides of the issue.  (And just in case it wasn't obvious, folks:  all of the questions in this paragraph are rhetorical.  Please don't weigh in on them here, there are other threads for that.)

And that state of affairs is perfectly okay.  Different players like different things.  There is no feature that is objectively "right" or "wrong" to include in the game; it's simply a matter of whether more players or fewer players want the feature in the game.

• If you love multiplayer and would like to see it included:  great.  That's a perfectly reasonable thing to want, feel free to voice your opinion.
• If you hate multiplayer, think it has no place in KSP, and don't want to see KSP devs waste their time on it when there are other things you believe are more important:  great.  That's a perfectly reasonable thing to want, feel free to voice your opinion.

Regardless of which side of the issue you come down on, though:  please be respectful of others' opinions.  Your opinion is just that, your opinion, not right or wrong, and reasonable people can disagree.  Being dismissive of others, or getting angry because they happen to disagree with you, doesn't help anybody.

So by all means, put in your two cents-- but once you've done so, relax!

We now return you to the multiplayer debate thread already in progress.  Please be civil. Thank you.

[ZooNamedGames]

And people wonder why Squad hasn't focused on multiplayer *sigh* .

[dsonbill]

On 7/24/2016 at 7:57 AM, ZooNamedGames said:

And people wonder why Squad hasn't focused on multiplayer *sigh* .

They most certainly are focused on it - though seem to be insistent on not making official announcements regarding it.
The only reason I know anything is because I spent quite a lot of time on IRC, but the information I have is extremely limited, and shouldn't be repeated no matter how minimal - I can only give my own interpretation of that information, in good conscience.

But just because they've done a decent buttload of work doesn't mean you'll see a release any time soon, and that may be the reason they refuse to give official statements on the subject.

[ZooNamedGames]

6 minutes ago, dsonbill said:

They most certainly are focused on it - though seem to be insistent on not making official announcements regarding it.
The only reason I know anything is because I spent quite a lot of time on IRC, but the information I have is extremely limited, and shouldn't be repeated no matter how minimal - I can only give my own interpretation of that information, in good conscience.

But just because they've done a decent buttload of work doesn't mean you'll see a release any time soon, and that may be the reason they refuse to give official statements on the subject.

Yes, but it won't be a release anytime soon. Not in the next few years. Too many issues, not enough technical support to host it and too much bickering from the community.