Page 5 of 27 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 264

  Click here to go to the first Developer post in this thread.  

Thread: Multiplayer

  1. #41
    Hi all

    I've been wondering why there is no such game type where campaigns could be played co-operatively on lan or net.

    Another idea would be that solved campaign missions would be added to single missions list so that they could be replayed co-operatively later on.

    or

  2. #42
    Well ,if it's possible to balance to workload of the server by using multiple server's in an aray with a mainframe ,then that would provide for the posibilety to play with maybe hundred's of people.That ,although maybe hard to implement ,would mean one of the best addon abilety's of OFP ever and make Ofp definitly the best Multiplayer game at the moment.
    I find that OFP really needs this possibilety to support so many people.Eventually ,the OFP map's can be pretty big ,but the server can't really support enough players to give that map the feeling of being pretty filled.The size of the maps rather fits to play with a number of about a few hundred players rather than a few dozen's.
    It's what's making a game like WWII online somewhat popular ,since it's about the only MP game over the net that can be played by hundred's of people ,but at a high prize.

    I think if BIS would add the posibilety to do this ,and maybe provide a first 300+ player server array for the community ,this game could get very popular early on.

    So i wan't to put forward a motion to support me in demanding BIS to try to achieve this.
    Please second and support me people in this motion so BIS knows that many people want this.

  3. #43
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Oct 12 2001
    Location
    Munich/Germany
    Posts
    1,516

    Exclamation

    Ingame Voice support (also for Sockets Netcode) would also be quite nice. Together with some custom options, like client side shut off of the voice channel, mute individual players, maybe a server side option to open the voice channel on a different server (to reserve bandwidth on the game server)...
    The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement.
    But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth.
    Niels Bohr

    i7 920 @3.7GHz, OCZ 3x2GB DDR3 7-7-7 1600 @740/1480MHz, MSI X58 Pro-E,
    Sapphire Radeon HD7850 2GB @1020/1200MHz, Creative X-Fi Music, Windows 7 Home Premium
    640GB WD Caviar Blue and 250GB Samsung SATA2 HDDs, 1xSATA DVD RW, 1x IDE DVD ROM
    Antec 750W (3.3V+5V 170W max., 4x12V 25A, with 62A max. combined), A+case CS-188AF
    Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152, Logitech G5 Refresh Mouse, Cherry CyMotion Expert Keyboard

  4. #44
    Well, join in progress is going to be implemented as a mission designers perogative.
    Banned.

  5. #45
    JIP gives us alot of new options.... We could for example make a new kinda Online Capture the Island, where Islands of greater size than nogova needs to be taken.

    A server will then realtime refresh current game results to a webserver, so people can see on the web how much 1 army have counqured the island. People can then join and leave as they want, making the world persistent.
    Sadness is just a phase that allways comes prior please.

  6. #46
    BratZ
    Guest
    I think Jip is needed. For instance ... I play several MP games.I like OFP alot but how come I hardly play OFP online anymore?
    I play BF42 and still am in a Tribes 2 clan etc...

    It has to be easy , I don't like simple games either.But OFP needs a nice ingame server browser and click and play type thing.There is no doubt about. SO we don't really want cs like players ruining games, well thats what pvt servers and such are for.
    OFP needs to work on a decent server list (hopefully shows who is in the game too) and Jip if they want to get in on the MP games of choice.
    Some thoughst are...we do like the long , suspense and preparation and thinking needed for a decent intense game.
    Maybe 2 types of gameplay? Arcadish (disposable war gameplay like BF42 I call it) and maybe the serious type game like we are used to with OFP

  7. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Then I suggest players will be forced to read the briefing made by the teamleader before he can JIP.

    Lets say he/she sees the briefing on his/her screen for minute before being able to join in?
    Very good idea. Maybe they should have to scroll down, to show that they have interacted with the briefing, somehow?

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]JIG feature alone would be like a 200% improvement of OFP playability
    200%? Try 500%!

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]more importantly JIP is the breeding ground for quitters, if some1 knows that they can join another game instantly then they'll just leave when things arent going there way. Even just having the option to do JIP will result in more games ending because of a lack of players rather than the clock running out.
    If they quit, they lose. What's the problem?

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Which would need 3 options we could have access when setting up server (Dho! EDIT : I did not see Furia proposition, that's 4 options) :
    - no JIP
    - full JIP
    - JIP only for players who were present when the mission began. (use ID to check).
    - Admin controlled JIP (needs an admin ).

    Excellent idea, Baron.
    Yep, very good ideas.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]It would be cool if the guy with the most skillz(leader for their side) in the game at the time can see everyone on the map except the enemy,Unless friendly units mark it on the map.So their can be plans.
    That would be mission designer's prerogative, but a Company Commander (100 troops?) would stay close to a vehicle radio and do things like coordinate attacks and call in artillery. The Commander should be a target. Give snipers something to shoot at.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]one particular thing is to introduce voice over net in the socket netcode.
    This needs to be an option that can be toggled by the server admin.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]but i think ppl will find the players that join in the middle of the game will be no differnt to the ones that were at the start,
    Not to mention that it would be realistic. Sometimes reinforcements arrive in the middle of a firefight and have to play catch-up, as far as situational-awareness goes.

    Would be cool to have vehicular insertions (as Team Fortress 2 was supposed to) where the game waits for so many vehicle passengers before sending in the reinforcements for joining.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]I'd like the ability to dynamically join and leave a group during a MP mission. Maybe leave it up to the squad leader to detach/attach group members...but it'd be a nice option to have in any case.
    I'm not sure, but I think that could already be done with add action menu commands.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Result:
    Nice gaming till 20, maybe 24 ppl. terrible desync above that.
    System was at 20%, maybe 25%.
    How much RAM did you have?

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]I think if BIS would add the posibilety to do this ,and maybe provide a first 300+ player server array for the community ,this game could get very popular early on.
    I've suggested publisher/developer-run dedicated servers since the beginning, as Novalogic had for DF1, DF2, DF:LW, etc.

    Codemasters did not deliver this. Funny that when they released IGI2 they had dedicated servers offered by Codemasters. Codemasters has done some disappointing things with OFP since v1.00. They didn't even get the vehicle pictures right in one of the manuals.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Ingame Voice support (also for Sockets Netcode) would also be quite nice. Together with some custom options, like client side shut off of the voice channel, mute individual players, maybe a server side option to open the voice channel on a different server (to reserve bandwidth on the game server)...
    Definitely needs server-side option to open the voice channel, else the server could be bogged by voice.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]JIP gives us alot of new options.... We could for example make a new kinda Online Capture the Island, where Islands of greater size than nogova needs to be taken.
    One thing that needs to be done is what Soldner is doing for its large maps... Playing zones that are unit-dependent... Jets need lots of room to have dog-fights, helos less room, and ground units even less room then that.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]A server will then realtime refresh current game results to a webserver, so people can see on the web how much 1 army have counqured the island. People can then join and leave as they want, making the world persistent.
    This should depend on intel and recon provided by players/A.I. .

    --Uziyahu-IDF
    http://www.idfsquad.com/
    One of the OFP "Veterans"

  8. #48
    How about being able to change sides (East-West-Res) while playing... is that the same as JIP or would the person have to disconnect and reconnect to change teams. Talking in CTFs, TDM, etc...

    -=Die Alive=-

  9. #49
    Joining groups etc is possible in game already with actions but each group has to be explicitly defined as well as who will be joining it. Very much a thing that people don't bother with. If it was implemented as a radio message type system it'd be better.

  10. #50
    Hell I think there should be the ability to not only join but the ability to save MP games. That might not have much effect on the internet gaming community, but damn. I'd love to be able to play a coop multiplayer campaign and save and reload with my buddies.

Page 5 of 27 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •