Jump to content

Photo
- - - - -

The problem with Multi Player...


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic
Thread Starter
TaktiX
TaktiX

    Private First Class

  • Members
  • 18 posts

  • Joined: 13-March 2012

Posted 15 April 2012 - 07:21 #1

It's been baffling me for ages now (well since I became aware that CC won't ship with MP), and it seemed really odd that a company, with a wealth of programming skillz (mad skillz if you will), didn't design a MP component into a game that was so obviously crying out for it (imagine, if you will, Counter Strike as a SP :eek:).

So it's most probably not a techincal issue...

I think the main issue with MP for CC is the scope and scale of the game. How would you coordinate start and stop times for games/battles? People have been reporting spending over a day (and I'm pretty sure they mean a literal, bleary-eyed 24hrs in the saddle) playing the 9 island SP demo! So, with potentially 30+ islands in the full game, how would you arrange for multiple people to play for such a long time?

I guess one "simple" solution would be to have fewer islands, but that would have a more "arcadey" feel, reduce the strategic and tactical level of play, and generally change the game dynamics.

How do "massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG)" handle this problem? Bear in mind the issues relating to a "persistent universe/world". Also, don't forget the specific issues relating to this game (tech. development, island capture and retention, resource acquisition...etc.).

So folks, over to you. All thoughts and comments gratefully received and exchanged.

(Sorry if someone has covered this topic before, I couldn't find it in searches.)

Gazzareth
Gazzareth

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • 163 posts

  • Joined: 16-February 2012

Posted 15 April 2012 - 11:45 #2

I think possibly a coop fight against a strong defence island would be a good idea, even to the point of allowing 2 carriers. Would certainly give a good length game. For multiple islands you are going to need to be able to save. I think the game lends itself to MP coop rather than head to head, but that's just me..

G

Anticept
Anticept

    Private First Class

  • Members
  • 26 posts

  • Joined: 08-November 2009

Posted 15 April 2012 - 15:37 #3

I'd be happy with co-op only (at least on release) and have it so that each person controls from the same carrier. They can take control of any unit or gun that they wish (hell, imagine a driver and a gunner on a tank). If their unit is destroyed, their view goes back to the carrier and they can control the next one (if available).

Basically, give them the same abilities that single player has. If a unit is already being controlled and someone wants to take over, then it will flash on their screen that someone wants control, and they can switch back to carrier or another unit (think Trine 2 MP).

This game probably should not have a multiplayer lobby. AI War: Fleet Command did not use a lobby because they felt that games with randoms just won't work. They did have an IRC channel for setting up games though, if people wanted to put in a little effort. It worked out really well in the end, because when it takes effort to set up a game, you filter out the people who don't want to put an effort into teamwork.

One person, not necessarily the host, should be voted in as commander to oversee operations as well. Again, if it takes a little effort to start a game, then voting a commander will be insignificant.


This eliminates most, if not all, problems which would be encountered in building MP support for co-op. Plus, you can have pick-up games with friends, and having them join in on the middle of an island assault wouldn't be a strange break in immersion.

Edited by Anticept, 15 April 2012 - 17:02.

Signature.

sav112g
sav112g

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 81 posts

  • Joined: 15-March 2010

Posted 16 April 2012 - 10:46 #4

Once played a saved game in football Manager every week for four or five hours with over ten friends and at some points it was into the teens. Yes totally different game but we started in the football season 2003-4 and played every match managing our teams at the same time till I think it was 2022. it’s not a quick game with periods of just working away and waiting as it moves in game day by day….but very enjoyable it was.

You can make it work if you get the right players and set up. Four ships with a 2v2 would work, you just have to make sure the game is saved by a host to carry on when everyone wants to.

gossamersolid
gossamersolid

    Second Lieutenant

  • Members
  • 4460 posts

  • Joined: 03-February 2006
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 16 April 2012 - 14:00 #5

I think the main issue with MP for CC is the scope and scale of the game. How would you coordinate start and stop times for games/battles? People have been reporting spending over a day (and I'm pretty sure they mean a literal, bleary-eyed 24hrs in the saddle) playing the 9 island SP demo! So, with potentially 30+ islands in the full game, how would you arrange for multiple people to play for such a long time?


You've obviously never played Sins of a Solar Empire.

There would be options for how large of a map you want and of course there would have to be save/load functionality.
logo.png
ArmA 3 - GWAR3
ArmA 2 - PCDF | Gossamer's Warfare
PC - i5 3570K | EVGA GTX 780 ACX | 16GB DDR3

Pastey
Pastey

    Rookie

  • Members
  • 5 posts

  • Joined: 24-April 2012

Posted 02 May 2012 - 19:00 #6

You've obviously never played Sins of a Solar Empire.

There would be options for how large of a map you want and of course there would have to be save/load functionality.


LOL I was just thinking the same thing! 4 of my friends and I had a game that we spent about 8 hours in and played through 4 loads over three days once...still awesome!

I love the beta but I *really* am crossing my fingers for multiplayer - especially coop. So many of my friends and I have days where we cant agree on playing an FPS or a strategy game. Carrier would solve that issue by letting each person play roles depending on their mood. Tons of other games out there have done this very well...Empires mod for Source Engine, Nuclear Dawn, Battlezone I & II, etc.


Also, who composed the music in game? The soundtrack is amazing! Is it Troels Folmann? It seems to have his style to it...anyone know?

R33GoNe
R33GoNe

    Private First Class

  • Members
  • 37 posts

  • Joined: 04-April 2012

Posted 03 May 2012 - 07:06 #7

You've obviously never played Sins of a Solar Empire.

There would be options for how large of a map you want and of course there would have to be save/load functionality.

Exactly there are many mp games that take a long time and require saves F1 2011 co-op, settlers to name a few.

DethChikkin
DethChikkin

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 2 posts

  • Joined: 03-May 2012

Posted 05 May 2012 - 11:16 #8

i dont know about coop, but the idea of taking islands against a human enemy carrier is just boss. i was hoping this would be shipped with the final product.... imagine 50 or so islands being fought over by four different carrier's. madness! but i guess the time-warp would mess that up :/

gunso
gunso

    Staff Sergeant

  • Members
  • 393 posts

  • Joined: 17-February 2011

Posted 07 May 2012 - 02:39 #9

I hope bis implement option for us to jump into island defense too instead of just the carrier units.

This way we can do PvP and sides can just jump to control island defense turret, manta and walrus without being bored to death waiting in the carrier.

Then i can lurk in a walrus behind building to ambush the attacking enemy player =)

Edited by gunso, 07 May 2012 - 02:44.


Tontow
Tontow

    Staff Sergeant

  • Members
  • 253 posts

  • Joined: 25-May 2012

Posted 25 May 2012 - 17:28 #10

Just make a ridiculously huge persistant map, say 200+ islands per world.
Have 2 or more factions fighting over those 200+ islands.
Limit the number of carriers that can be at an island at a given time, but make sure to set the islands up to allow the maximum number of battles at any given time.

Sit back and watch all out war as the community works together to decimate the other side.


This should work with the current design as islands seem to be instanced.

Mojack
Mojack

    Rookie

  • Members
  • 2 posts

  • Joined: 15-June 2012

Posted 15 June 2012 - 20:52 #11

How do "massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG)" handle this problem? Bear in mind the issues relating to a "persistent universe/world". Also, don't forget the specific issues relating to this game (tech. development, island capture and retention, resource acquisition...etc.).

So folks, over to you. All thoughts and comments gratefully received and exchanged.


OMG !
I bought the supporter beta. waiting for ages for this game, ass the OCC was my all time favorte, and back then I dreamed to play in as multiplayer.
I was totally sure, this game is multiplayer. I mean, its the guys making the ArmA titles !

Taktik, I really do not see any problem. Do you know the game WWII online ? Axis vs Allies battling it out, and it usually takes about 3 months untill one sides wins, and then the game
resets. Its the exact same game as CC, just you do not capture island, you do capture towns, and the map is huge. towns got AI defences, and back in the map you have towns with your factories.

IN CC, so far, I did not see any tech tree. The ressources are produce on the islands, so the ressource count per side "stays" on the server.
And more important: their own ArmA game is working just fine, even if the game takes days, and they even have a tech tree.
If you log out, the game runs on a server, so it keeps going. if there is nobody logged on, the island keep producing the ressources, just the fighting and capturing gets a pause.
thats all. Or you could easily add carrier bots to balance the sides. You have that in ArmA as well. (its even optional, you can disable AI or turn it on on both sides, if real players are missing).

I would be happy even on a small scale multiplayer, like a max of 4 vs 4. but of course, the more players, the more fun, the longer the game....or not, if one side is steamrolling.
And yes I forgot, there are indeed other games out there, which have 2 sides fighting, and a round is running for days and weeks, untill one side wins.
no problem.

-FRL-Myke
-FRL-Myke

    Moderator

  • 6571 posts

  • Joined: 27-May 2007

Posted 15 June 2012 - 22:15 #12

And more important: their own ArmA game is working just fine, even if the game takes days, and they even have a tech tree.
If you log out, the game runs on a server, so it keeps going. if there is nobody logged on, the island keep producing the ressources, just the fighting and capturing gets a pause.
thats all. Or you could easily add carrier bots to balance the sides. You have that in ArmA as well. (its even optional, you can disable AI or turn it on on both sides, if real players are missing).


You do know that CC uses a completely different engine than the ArmA series or ToH? So it's not that easy to say "ArmA had it too".
Posted Image

o0Jedi0o
o0Jedi0o

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 75 posts

  • Joined: 24-July 2009

Posted 16 June 2012 - 11:32 #13

I also hoped for multiplayer. What with the 360 port nature of this project though I have gotten used to disappointment.

Carrier Command seems like a quick game for a quick buck. With this business face on I hope BI have spotted the potential in a refined online sandbox/MMORG zombie apocolypse game. More gamers want Zombies than War. They can't be the only ones who have noticed the steam sales and the number of online servers for Arma2/Dayz.

Edited by o0Jedi0o, 17 June 2012 - 22:12.


Mojack
Mojack

    Rookie

  • Members
  • 2 posts

  • Joined: 15-June 2012

Posted 17 June 2012 - 23:56 #14

Myke;2172650']You do know that CC uses a completely different engine than the ArmA series or ToH? So it's not that easy to say "ArmA had it too".


@Myke
1) why do you hate me ?
2) different engine. ok. noted. but how is that an argument for not having multiplayer ?

gunso
gunso

    Staff Sergeant

  • Members
  • 393 posts

  • Joined: 17-February 2011

Posted 18 June 2012 - 03:01 #15

They will implement MP later but not in the initial release

-FRL-Myke
-FRL-Myke

    Moderator

  • 6571 posts

  • Joined: 27-May 2007

Posted 18 June 2012 - 07:17 #16

@Myke
1) why do you hate me ?
2) different engine. ok. noted. but how is that an argument for not having multiplayer ?


1) I don't hate you, silly idea.
2) Counter-argument to your "ArmA has MP" argument. MP is part of the engine and since CC doesn't use the RV engine, MP is not onboard by default.

Be assured that i also would like to see MP in CC.
Posted Image

Spartan1608
Spartan1608

    Rookie

  • Members
  • 4 posts

  • Joined: 19-June 2012

Posted 19 June 2012 - 22:39 #17

I am afraid of simplification, which seems to be the only way to implement multiplayer.

Nails077
Nails077

    Private First Class

  • Members
  • 14 posts

  • Joined: 04-July 2012

Posted 14 July 2012 - 00:09 #18

Speaking of persistent worlds and MMOs and multiplayer and carrier command. I was just sitting here thinking about what you would get if you were to cross breed carrier command and planetside.

JuggernautOfWar
JuggernautOfWar

    Sergeant Major

  • Members
  • 1549 posts

  • Joined: 25-August 2007

Posted 22 July 2012 - 13:11 #19

I am afraid of simplification, which seems to be the only way to implement multiplayer.


My thoughts exactly. While a multiplayer mode would be nice this is a singleplayer game at heart and you have to learn to enjoy it. It is an ode to classic games and the fun we've all had playing them over the years. We do not need a strong multiplayer component to enjoy an otherwise brilliant game made by brilliant developers. If a multiplayer mode were to be implemented at some point it would have to be a simple coop island capture scenario or similar. Too many gamers these days think they need multiplayer and PvP to have fun. Just look at Assassin's Creed, Mass Effect, Dead Space, and other singleplayer games with multiplayer later tacked on for the bullet point on the back of the box. They could have spent all that development time (creating multiplayer from scratch really is time and resource consuming) creating a better core game, rather than tacking on a feature true fans do not care about whatsoever.

Speaking of persistent worlds and MMOs and multiplayer and carrier command. I was just sitting here thinking about what you would get if you were to cross breed carrier command and planetside.


Yeah I've thought the same hybrid concept would work rather well. When asked the Planetside 2 developers did not deny naval combat being added in the future, only stating "why not space instead?". This gives me hope there will be naval combat added in eventually since they did not deny it. I'm rather confident they will add space combat from that remark.

Edited by JuggernautOfWar, 22 July 2012 - 13:21.

Windows 8.1
Intel Core i7-4710MQ CPU @ 2.50GHz-3.50GHz
3072MB NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M
8GB DDR3 RAM
Yes, I have a gaming laptop.

DeAdSeYe
DeAdSeYe

    Private First Class

  • Members
  • 22 posts

  • Joined: 19-December 2010

Posted 26 July 2012 - 14:20 #20

Just started yesterday with this game, and i like it. But to bad there isnt any MP.

But how about an realtime match that continues when people leave or join. For example 1 player join an match and plays againt AI, when an other player join the match, he can choose side and slot that he wants.

There are 2 slots on each side for the carrier, those 4 people can give orders and build supply's that are needed. The other people uses the vehicles to attack island or enemy forces. They can ask for supply's, equipment or help or build structures on island.

When somebody leaves the match, the unit doenst dissepear but the AI take's control an recieve orders from the carrier. When everyone leave's the match, the match pause and continues when somebody join the match and plays againt AI.

Edited by DeAdSeYe, 26 July 2012 - 14:35.