an idea for an alternative to multiplayer

General discussions about X Rebirth.

Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum

Post Reply
Jay_rod109
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun, 5. Dec 10, 07:05
x3tc

an idea for an alternative to multiplayer

Post by Jay_rod109 » Sun, 2. Oct 11, 06:00

I understand that it would be almost completely impractical to have more than one actual player in the same game at once. it would change the game entirely. Instead may I offer a very simplified solution, and upload database thing. Instead of placing the actual players in together, perhaps make a place where player's empires (factories ships et cetera) are uploaded (and perhaps simplified), and then are received via download into other player's games and controlled by AI (acting like the corporations of TC). The whole empire could be imported, or a sort of "loose blueprint" for how it was created. For example, if the imported empire is a boron origin mainly mining based operation with heavy military escorts then it could start with just one ship or station (you'd hardly notice its appearance) and it would do its best to expand much as the actual player did (the "loose" part being adjustability for how it plays out in its new universe)... just a thought

caleb
Posts: 793
Joined: Wed, 6. Nov 02, 20:31
x3tc

Post by caleb » Sun, 2. Oct 11, 06:23

Interesting idea, and it would certainly make the game much more dynamic and alive. But how would you solve the synchronization issues? If the map is updated once per day for example, what happens if pirates destroy base A in your game, but in another players game, he defends base A?

Well, the question is, how often would the map update with all the players info, and how would it deal with conflicting data? I do like the idea, I'm just not sure how it would work out.

Bill67
Posts: 160
Joined: Tue, 9. Dec 03, 00:09
x4

Post by Bill67 » Sun, 2. Oct 11, 08:04

Spore used a similiar concept only it was for planetary bodies already in existence.

The problem I would see here is that this would have to determine if a said area was being used before plopping down factories or else it would be an overlap, plus how would you limit it so now your nice clean solar system doesnt look like NYC where everything is jammed in and crowded.

Altho there could be a way that it could take registered users and maybe replace NPCs with their names so could run into others, but honestly I dont know if want to see CRAZYVADER7590 or some such name in my game.. :)

DJ0JJ
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed, 13. Jan 10, 19:18
x4

Post by DJ0JJ » Sun, 2. Oct 11, 09:00

You know, the only way to keep a functional multiplayer is:

E its for essentially and A for alternative

E1) Simultaneous Sync, which its more like any multiplayer.
E2) Turn Based Sync, which its more like after I finish you sync and continue.
A3) Complicated set of rules that could use the mix of Turn based and simultaneous sync, which will need tons of test until you find a good way to do it.
A4) A common server which would keep the world working while you are not there. Like any MMO

If I had time and patience to do the mod to make a multiplayer, I would do a mix of everything here.
Having a common server (could be any computer BTW) that keeps the data of the world, so the virtual world will only work when someone its playing. The server should be able to tell the active player(s) to quit and save, and then set up the connections for all players to come in and have a simultaneous sync and then again keep playing. Now the trick its the database sync because its all in how the information its shared and where + how it changes. If you sync all the data like every time it just not gonna work and also we dont know how the data is stored and how fast the computer can access, identify it and change it while you keep playing.
So in the end, it depends how the game its built or how much you can change it. Tons of work.

For the faster way to bring a "multiplayer", people should just find a way to make more players, force them to be still, safe and sound when the first one finishes so the next one comes and plays in his turn.
Yeah Turn Based Sync

User avatar
TTD
Posts: 11165
Joined: Sun, 6. Jul 08, 10:29
x4

Post by TTD » Sun, 2. Oct 11, 09:17

For the faster way to bring a "multiplayer", people should just find a way to make more players, force them to be still, safe and sound when the first one finishes so the next one comes and plays in his turn.
Yeah Turn Based Sync
This sounds more like the SMP version that a number of us tried out.

For groups of people who have the time and resources to do this ,it works fine on a turn based system.
But we found in the end that real life takes over and we did not have the time to continue with it.

However, when it ran,particularly the last version in our SMP group,it worked well,once we ironed out a few in-game problems like CAGs taking payments from the main account instead of the station account.

Syock
Posts: 83
Joined: Tue, 29. Jul 08, 22:28

Post by Syock » Sun, 2. Oct 11, 15:52

The biggest issues for multiplayer in the past were probably SETA and the vast power that players can exert on the universe. SETA will be gone, but were still all going to end up being powerful enough to take on entire regions of space since we have extraordinary runaway profits and actually use them.

I don't imagine it would be a big deal in a small server/LAN type of setup. For a bigger group of players we would probably have to implement costs that grow faster than income like a harsh tax system or operating costs for station defense, normal maintenance and crew salary. For all I know that may be in the new game already.

Jay_rod109
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun, 5. Dec 10, 07:05
x3tc

Post by Jay_rod109 » Sun, 2. Oct 11, 16:56

[quote] what happens if pirates destroy base A in your game, but in another players game, he defends base A? [/quote]

that was the "loose" part of the blueprint idea. it could just act as an AI corporation, with a structure loosely based on the original player's.

[quote] Spore used a similiar concept [/quote]

exactly what I was thinking! I just couldn't think of the game, thank you.

[quote] plus how would you limit it so now your nice clean solar system doesnt look like NYC where everything is jammed in and crowded [/quote]

It could just store the idea until the space was clear (if it ever did), and as for the overcrowdedness... I hadn't thought of that... good point... maybe let the player select what to download ( although I guess that would defeat the randomness of it)

[quote] but honestly I dont know if want to see CRAZYVADER7590 or some such name in my game.. [/quote]

yeah, me either... good point, I guess it would need alotof filtering and moderation from the upload point of view.

[quote] The biggest issues for multiplayer in the past were probably SETA and the vast power that players can exert on the universe. SETA [/quote]

I wasnt thinking of including more than one player in a game, just take some of the stuff that one player accomplished, and move it into another player's game, then have it be AI owned.

I don't think it would need multiple syncs either, maybe just a one shot upload of what you've got, could be random (when you have internet connection) or I suppose the player could choose when to submit... of course these would have to be vanilla games, just to prevent major problems from downloading stuff that doesn't exist in your game yet.

nielsw
Posts: 448
Joined: Sun, 23. Mar 03, 21:13
x4

Re: an idea for an alternative to multiplayer

Post by nielsw » Mon, 3. Oct 11, 01:29

Jay_rod109 wrote:I understand that it would be almost completely impractical to have more than one actual player in the same game at once. it would change the game entirely.
impractical? uhh, they ARE starting from scratch, no?

The only reason why I'm still playing shallow old Freelancer, and have played it for longer than the last 2 X games together, is cause I can play with some friends.

If they really need ONE thing added, its some form of small multiplayer.... with existing fast IP frameworks like MessagePack, that shouldn't be so hard. And its not hard to double up on ships either if there's another player doing co-op.

Homeworld too, I still play it sometimes to pass the time with some friends.


Don't get me wrong, I loved X since the first version. But with Reunion, I pretty much stopped after I completed the storyline. Buying Terran Conflict was pretty much a waste for me, I looked at the shiny nice graphics, did not even finish the storyline.

The last time I logged out of TC, I thought "I wish EVE had graphics like this and would let me fly my ship" but then I went back to playing EVE, just cause there's some REAL people in it.

Now, I'm not a huge MMO fan, but just a tiny 2-player co-op mode would make a hell of a positive difference to X...

And we've been begging since forever.

Bill67
Posts: 160
Joined: Tue, 9. Dec 03, 00:09
x4

Post by Bill67 » Mon, 3. Oct 11, 02:21

I guess it will depend on how you wanted your game.

1. Imported characters from another game so yours would feel like a psuedo multiplayer one. They would either start from scratch somewhere else or replace some existing corporation.

2. Competitive mode. Where like games like Masters of Orion or other 4x game, its a race to dominance. Altho this model I would like because the 1 thing I did like in the X games was setting my own pace and not to rush things.

Aside from the story arcs that may involve certain corportations or segments of space where the game would have to establish no build zones, I think it would be cool to allow you to pick some community members and let them start randomly with the same type ship and cash and let the AI determine how they work out.

Now how much of a resource drain this would be to script so they have sufficient brainpower to want to get richer and make an empire I dont know. But to see a comparison chart on how well each is doing and if still alive would be cool.

Post Reply

Return to “X Rebirth Universe”