Mulitplayer

[CBJ]

Well, it seems we have a new forum, but the same old arguments and misunderstandings about the reasons why there has yet to be a multi-player game in based on the X Universe, and about what might or might not be a viable option in the future, are apparently still alive and kicking.

Anyway, the little FAQ I wrote a couple of years ago may be quite old now, but the reasons it sets out are still just as relevant to X Rebirth as they were to previous games. I don't think I've seen any points in this thread that are not already covered there, but feel free to point out any I've missed.

[Skeeter]

Well it is a popular subject CBJ and ALOT of players expected mp finally in a x game after such a long time having none and 5 games later in the x series and still no mp type of gameplay. I just wish everyone would not base mp to mean mmo as no one wanted that.

I would leave this topic CBJ and just let people dream of mp in here. One topic for all the mp discussions in here and merge any others in here if they pop up would be my idea of keeping it contained. Just a suggestion.

[a6214622]

[T]he real reason there is no multi-player: because the money to undertake that development has never been available. ... The only way a LAN-based game would be likely to happen would be as a side-effect of the development of an MMO game, or as a stepping stone on the way to one. Why? Because profit from additional sales of a LAN-based game over and above the sales that would be made with just single-player functionality, couldn't possibly hope to pay back the cost of developing the multi-player element.You don't need to take my word for it: if it were a profitable model then you can be pretty sure there'd have been a Freelancer 2 by now!

With all due respect, this part of the explanation sounds completely bogus. First of all, it doesn't take much talent, money, or time to implement most basic multiplayer functionality. I would know. Even I don't code much nowadays, I single-handedly created a multiplayer component for a small-scale indie game back in 2001. It may not be easy, especially when you don't have much experience, but it's certainly not THAT hard or time-consuming as some made it out to be. But don't take my word for it: 1993's Doom, 1994's Transport Tycoon, 1994's Wing Commander: Armada and hundreds and hundreds of other even more ancient, obscure, low-budget or indie titles have multiplayer. Are you really saying that a mature, independent, professional game development studio like Egosoft isn't capable of implementing such a commonplace feature for almost no cost? Really?

Of course, second of all, with X Rebirth being the 6th product in the X universe, if Egosoft had bothered create the framework back in 1999, countless man-hours would have already been saved from not having to moderate or participate in endless discussions like this.

[CBJ]

With all due respect, things have changed a bit since 2001. Even back then this series had challenges that would have made it rather different to the majority of games which only need to concern themselves with a few objects in relatively small "universe" at any one time. So yes, I really am saying that it could not be done for "almost no cost". Do you really think I'd create work for myself on the forums by making this stuff up?

[Cycrow]

the more complex the game is, the more complex the multiplayer componant will be, the more data the game uses, the more work is required, both to implment and to test

you say no cost, but as you said, they are professional development studio, which means any time spent to plan, code and test costs money as well as take development time away from other areas

[em3e3]

With all due respect, this part of the explanation sounds completely bogus. First of all, it doesn't take much talent, money, or time to implement most basic multiplayer functionality.

Aye, there's the crux of the matter. While it doesn't take much to implement multiplayer (there's free engines that do it, for goodness sake!), the X series has never been about 'simple'. As some have mentioned, maybe this incarnation brings us one (or more) step closer, it's still a very complex game. You're not talking about Pv8 or Pv16 - more like PvNPCvP^8 (that's player-versus-NPC-versus-Player to the eighth power). Something like this has to be handled either via a central server farm, or through a complex distributed computing structure. Neither of which is 'simple', 'inexpensive', or 'quick'.

Do you all really want a 'farmville' version of the X series?

[Skeeter]

It still seems like you are trying to justify the no mp because of the complexity of the game and the amount of objects. Well what happens in the single player doesn't necessarily mean thats what it will be in the mp aspect of the game. All players want is to fight in a game not build of have thousands of objects to track type of game at all just a mp map a ship and a scoreboard for dogfights using the x games gfx. Take freespace 2, freelancer, any decent space games mp gameplay and use it for a mp mode for a x game as that is all really what people would have liked to do in a x game. Have the complex part for yourself and then have a fight with randoms or mates in some mp maps with a static map i.e no tracking objects, static stations which you can repair on maybe and upgrade and you earn money through kills or loot.

[A5PECT]

It still seems like you are trying to justify the no mp because of the complexity of the game and the amount of objects. Well what happens in the single player doesn't necessarily mean thats what it will be in the mp aspect of the game.

But if you take all of those aspects out of the game, is it really X anymore? To be honest, if you cut down any of the X-series into solely their combat aspects, they'd be pretty crappy games.

All players want is to fight in a game not build of have thousands of objects to track type of game at all just a mp map a ship and a scoreboard for dogfights using the x games gfx.

Speak for yourself. If there is going to be a multiplayer X game, I want all or nothing. I not only want to fight with and against my friends, I want to be able to compete and co-operate economically and politically. If I can't get that level of multifariousness then there's no point in making X multiplayer; just create a new IP and build that from scratch.

[Mightysword]

It still seems like you are trying to justify the no mp because of the complexity of the game and the amount of objects. Well what happens in the single player doesn't necessarily mean thats what it will be in the mp aspect of the game. All players want is to fight in a game not build of have thousands of objects to track type of game at all just a mp map a ship and a scoreboard for dogfights using the x games gfx. Take freespace 2, freelancer, any decent space games mp gameplay and use it for a mp mode for a x game as that is all really what people would have liked to do in a x game. Have the complex part for yourself and then have a fight with randoms or mates in some mp maps with a static map i.e no tracking objects, static stations which you can repair on maybe and upgrade and you earn money through kills or loot.

^ so basically you want a "strip downed" version of the game for the MP? Then I have to ask, what's the point? If you're only interested in the "shoot them up" with no string attached then play those games you listed. Basically you're saying "I want an X MP game, but it doesn't have to be like the real X or have features that what make X - X", which make no sense to me. It's like dragging yourself to a highclass restaurant because you want to enjoy a full course dinner, but since it's so expensive that once you sit down you only order a salad and a soda ... shouldn't you just go to a Hambuger stand in the beginning?

I don't clamor for a MP mode, but if one ever release I will expect the MP mode to deliever a comparable experience to the SP mode, and I think that would be what the developers want to.

[Kor'ah]

If I want multi-player in space I'll resub to eve-online. Rather EgoSoft spend the money on the single player.

[Cycrow]

All players want is to fight in a game not build of have thousands of objects to track type of game at all just a mp map a ship and a scoreboard for dogfights using the x games gfx.

Speak for yourself. If there is going to be a multiplayer X game, I want all or nothing. I not only want to fight with and against my friends, I want to be able to compete and co-operate economically and politically. If I can't get that level of multifariousness then there's no point in making X multiplayer; just create a new IP and build that from scratch.

me too, i dont just want a stripped down combat game.
there are plenty of shoot em up multiplayer games, if it was going to multiplayer, i would prefer the complete game, multiple people all owning fleets of ships, stations, etc.

but id much prefer more focus on the single player game first, to many games are relying on multiplayer now, i just like to play single player games where i can rule the world, not have to compete with everyone else.

i've played my share of MMO's, and other multiplayer games, but i like to play good single player games as well

[a6214622]

With all due respect, things have changed a bit since 2001.

Yes, I'm sure they have. With DirectPlay receiving a major streamlining overhaul in DirectX 8 and dozens of new middleware libraries eliminating the need to re-invent the wheel in network coding, it became so difficult to implement basic multiplayer that nearly other game that comes out on the market, including such AAA-budget giants like Minecraft, Terraria, Torchlight II, E.Y.E, Men of War, FarmVille, or RuneScape, has one.

^ so basically you want a "strip downed" version of the game for the MP? Then I have to ask, what's the point? If you're only interested in the "shoot them up" with no string attached then play those games you listed. It's like saying "I want an X MP game, but it doesn't have to be like the real X", which make no sense to me.

I know you wasn't talking to me, but I just want to note that even with a basic henchman system of co-op players basically being remotely controlled copies of the main player, co-players could also buy, sell, transport, participate in story missions, upgrade ships, initiate and complete secondary missions, and pretty much do almost everything SP players currently can. The experience would be stripped down only from the point that the all players would have to be part of a single team/fleet/empire, and possibly that some of the key plot-related decisions could only be taken by one of the players, most likely the team's leader, the game's host.

Although this idea of slightly unequal partnership may not sound that appealing, it's been used by dozens of popular titles, and it can be perfect for parents and children, players with different skill levels, or pretty much anyone who can play together as part of a team. It also would certainly be much better than current nothing. And it still wouldn't be that expensive or difficult to implement.

Back to lurking.

[CBJ]

Yes, I'm sure they have. With DirectPlay receiving a major streamlining overhaul in DirectX 8 and dozens of new middleware libraries eliminating the need to re-invent the wheel in network coding, it became so difficult to implement basic multiplayer that nearly other game that comes out on the market, including such AAA-budget giants like Minecraft, Terraria, Torchlight II, E.Y.E, Men of War, FarmVille, or RuneScape, has one.

Low level network code is not, and never has been, the issue. And you can list as many completely unrelated titles as you like; it won't change the fact that multiplayer for this type of game is a non-trivial exercise, which has so far not been supported by the funding that would be needed to make it viable.

I'm really struggling to understand why you feel the need to argue over this simple statement of fact, or for that matter why you think I would be lying about it. I'm therefore going to leave the discussion at this point, as I don't think there is anything to be gained from continuing.

[Saber15]

No multiplayer in Rebirth, but judging by the changes in gameplay (No SETA), it'd be possible to have multiplayer at some point in the future between the current date and the end of the time.

[Syock]

No multiplayer in Rebirth, but judging by the changes in gameplay (No SETA), it'd be possible to have multiplayer at some point in the future between the current date and the end of the time.

Based on every Ego response I have seen on this topic, they want to go MMO or nothing. Nothing is likely to win out until they make some blockbuster cash cow of a game to precede it. There is no sense arguing with them about it.

[Skid]

Creating a basic multiplayer, like every other game out there, yer that would be easy. Each player, 1 ship, 1 zone, no problem. However it stops being an X game is you do this because you remove Explore, Build and trade from the game the other 3 main components. If this really is the type of multi-player you want, then your playing the wrong game.

When most people in this forum say they would love a multi-player version of the X games, then mean that literally, they would love to play around in the whole X universe with their friends. Or fight over the whole universe with their enermys. That however would require a crap load of effort to code and test.

For a game that is sold on its single player world, sure a multiplayer would be cool, but that's not why most people get this game. As such, as is said in the FAQ, due to the size of Egosoft they just don't have the resources to code that size of sub element to the game.

[Skeeter]

Sorry but i have to disagree. First of all this is a new type of gameplay this isnt like the old x games anymore which i am so thankful for.

Now, I want the build fight think etc for the sp part only. For the mp part i want to fight mates with the nice gfx of the x games in dogfights (dont say play freelancer or some rubbish because you know full well i couldn't play with the gfx of the x engine that way). This is the mp part of the x games which will attract new players. If i just wanted dogfights i could use other games but then i wouldn't have the nice ships and gfx of the x engine would I?

If you wanting mp but of the style of sp then you not going to get it because that would require alot more work and might as well be a mmo for which i have no interest as their would be eve online or star trek online or star wars online or black prophecy sure some aspects wont be in that x has but who cares they would be better mmos as if x turned into a mmo it would be far too boring and slow to enjoy. Eve-online already pushes many peoples limits.

A simple dogfight mp action mode added on to the game so ppl can fight each other with the cool ships that is in the recent x games would be nice.

And no i wouldn't be losing out on build, fight trade, think because the sp game would have all that, the mp experience would be separate from the gameplay of the sp. So no way would anyone lose anything you would only gain a new gameplay mode which could be enjoyed by the more casual player base which is out there.

[Inauxas]

This thread is bad and you should feel bad.

[perkint]

A very simple multi player mode would be fun. And it would be easier to develop than full multi player. But even if it only took one days coding (it would obviously take significantly more than that), I doubt it would bring in enough new sales to cover its cost. People will not buy a game for a little cut down extra mode you can play!

The reason Egosoft keep looking to MMO when people talk about multi payer is not because it is what they think people want or what they want to develop. It's because it's the only form of multi player that brings in extra revenue beyond the extra sales. And the extra sales are not likely to be sufficient to balance the increased development costs...

Tim

[LTerSlash]

The only multiplayer mode that will work at first and whould be the easily to impement is the cooperative gameplay(maybe a typical 4-player coop mode), any pvp mode is just a bad idea, because it need a lot of extra work balancing stuff, fixing hacks, etc...