Multiplayer would it be possable

[magicorp1]

So i final got one of my friends to buy X3:TC then one day i was thinking "Multiplayer how would that work so i whent through a few ideas, skirmishes online where 6 or some people could duke it out in free for all or being allies then that idea expand Playing in the same universe it could just be 2 or people but would it work?"

[Gothsheep]

No.

[fOSSil]

Yes, but going through ideas and actually doing it, reliably, fast, and balanced are different things alltogether. Like building a house with lego compared to planning and building a real skyscraper.

Keep dreaming though ...

[Stars_InTheirEyes]

Like gothsheep said:

No.

Not ever.

[delray]

This game would have to be redone from scratch to support multiplayer. It would require rethinking the whole mechanism it runs upon.

I doubt it will ever happen.

[Saracen]

SETA is the main problem. It would be like trying to implement Bullet Time into a multiplayer version of Max Payne.

[shanrak]

SETA is the main problem. It would be like trying to implement Bullet Time into a multiplayer version of Max Payne.

Not really, most people use SETA to get from point A to B faster, just implement it like how they did it in freelancer (basically giving you a super speed boost, but you can't shoot while in it and being shot at kicks you out of it).

Being able to dogfight other players would be interesting though

[Gothsheep]

The biggest problems are things that you, as the player, would never see. How the systems talk to each other, how the math for physics is resolved. Things like that.

[GCU Grey Area]

No thanks - adding multiplayer would use up far to much dev time for little benefit (IMO). I'd much rather they used that time for improving the single player game. Anyway, there are plenty of multiplayer games out there for those who want to play them - I don't & would stop playing X games if they ever turned multiplayer. I like having my own private universe that no one else can mess with while my computer is switched off.

[Saracen]

Not really, most people use SETA to get from point A to B faster, just implement it like how they did it in freelancer (basically giving you a super speed boost, but you can't shoot while in it and being shot at kicks you out of it).

Being able to dogfight other players would be interesting though

Eh? SETA's a time accelerator, not a booster. If you used it, how would your game predict what I'm going to do in advance?

[Hrodeth]

No thanks - adding multiplayer would use up far to much dev time for little benefit (IMO). I'd much rather they used that time for improving the single player game. Anyway, there are plenty of multiplayer games out there for those who want to play them - I don't & would stop playing X games if they ever turned multiplayer. I like having my own private universe that no one else can mess with while my computer is switched off.

Speaking of which, wasn't there a new Space MMO coming out? (Not related to Eve online) ?

It vaguely sparked my interest, but obviously not enough to remember the name of it.

*Edit* Found it. I was thinking of Black Prophecy. I won't link it here because I don't want to advertise for them. But it looks very cool. Beautiful graphics engine actually.

Problem is...it's completely missing the Empire Building and economic complexity of X3. Merge the two, and you'll have the best Space game ever made.

[sazanami]

If it becomes multiplayer, then it isn't X anymore.

[Genoce]

I was just thinking. Would it be possible that if the players cant be in the same universe, there assets can?

Factorys, patrols, UT's, stuff like that?

And the objects get moved/deleted/changed every so often, not in real time?

Would that be more manageable?

[maphys]

Would that be more manageable?

Probably not. What happens when you both go after that 100 yield asteroid at about the same time? Or if GOD adds different stations to the two of them? Or when one person does a load of build missions in a sector you are building a complex in? Or when someone destroys a station you docked at to save?

I won't go back and make the same points that all the other threads have - the summary is: No easy way to do it. And if there were it would have already been done.

M

[AleksMain]

What happens when you both go after that 100 yield asteroid at about the same time?

Someone will be first.

Or if GOD adds different stations to the two of them?

AI must prevent collisions.

Or when one person does a load of build missions in a sector you are building a complex in?

Each player must have his quotes for building purposes (as for other too). Limits can be applied through high price or something else.

Or when someone destroys a station you docked at to save?

Save ? Isn't MMORPG autosave data for it's players for each moment of play-time?

No easy way to do it.

Work is not holiday. And someone must pay for it. Coders can do this game (X-MMORPG), but for proper price.

If someone found sponsors already, call Egosoft.

[maphys]

@Aleks
Missed the point of what I was replying to, I think. The idea was that the assets of each player would be maintained in a universe that was NOT updated all the time. Gameplay would be localised, then the universe synched. It would not be a MMORG. I was trying to point out that this would be difficult because you would have to add lots of arbitrary rules (if player one did this first then refund player two the cost of his stations and ships, then delete the resources they had added to his universe and remove the products made from them....)

M

[Saracen]

Some sort of skirmish type mode would be easy to do, from a gameplay perspective at least.

The universe could contain a skirmish sector. SETA in this sector is disabled. The player hosting the game selects the properties for the skirmish, ie amounts of ships/class allowed, asteroids and other objects on or off etc. When both players are ready, they enter the sector and the fight starts. First to lose all their ships loses the game.

This assumes that both players have already been playing the single player game for a while and have the ships spare to throw at each other, although I suppose you could just add an option to create and kit out ships specifically for the fight.

Just to be clear, this is NOT a request for Egosoft to implement this, it's just one possible way of adding some sort of multiplayer option if they so desired, and had the money, resources, time etc to put into it

As for creating a MMO version, yeah, forget it.

[AleksMain]

@Aleks
Missed the point of what I was replying to, I think. The idea was that the assets of each player would be maintained in a universe that was NOT updated all the time. Gameplay would be localised, then the universe synched. It would not be a MMORG. I was trying to point out that this would be difficult because you would have to add lots of arbitrary rules (if player one did this first then refund player two the cost of his stations and ships, then delete the resources they had added to his universe and remove the products made from them....)

M

In this case must be used Server-Client structure of the program.

Server is the "GOD", client must perform it's orders.

[andrewas]

Not really, most people use SETA to get from point A to B faster, just implement it like how they did it in freelancer (basically giving you a super speed boost, but you can't shoot while in it and being shot at kicks you out of it).

Being able to dogfight other players would be interesting though

Eh? SETA's a time accelerator, not a booster. If you used it, how would your game predict what I'm going to do in advance?

SETA is most often used, and was intended by the developer to be used, as a booster. A way to get the player from A to B without consuming so much real time. Accelerating time and causing event X to happen in less real time is a secondary function, accelerating the entire universe overnight and making profit in less real time is an exploit.

You could replace SETA with a booster and keep its primary function. Some parts of the game would need redesign to account for the lack of time advance, but this is far from an insoluble problem. People who think SETA is a significant problem are missing the opportunity to moan about problems which really are difficult to solve.

[maphys]

In this case must be used Server-Client structure of the program.

It was more the delay in updates I was targeting as the source of more problems than it solved. They were trying, AIUI, to avoid the whole Server-Client thing and have a cheap and cheerful version of it by having both games update one map at fairly sparse intervals but not otherwise be linked. I don't believe this would work well. By the time a S/C architecture had been added then you are part way to the MMO game that has already been dismissed as too expensive to build at risk.

@andreas
A booster is not the same as SETA at all. A booster would let you escape missiles, outrun or dodge slow bullets and so on. It would be a 'get out of jail free' for mid size ships. It would alter the game balance a lot (which is why I always avoided installing the booster script in the bonus pack).

M