Should X be Multiplayer? (Poll) I wan't to make egosoft see how many people want this

[fiksal]

not to mention your empires probly wouldnt last the night as our player pirates would use your UT's for $$ and other players would gang up on you,

Well EVE controlls that somehow. But even if that's a danger for a X game, then there are solutions - increase sector security, make that destroying ships right in core sectors carries consequences, if the ship owned by an ally of the sector, for example.

so heres my idea, make there be 3 game modes

1. single player (scriptable, moddable, plot line)
2. LAN (moddable, no scripts in game as ppl would just cheat using script editor)

No, scripts add a lot to X3, so I'd say you should be able to run your scripts in multiplayer too. And this could be something that a server can allow or disallow when game is initially created.

3. for those of u who like massive online battles. a massive war between all races where u choose a side and get a ship for it

A skirmish like mode would be interesting.

[Cycrow]

the longer it takes to make, the less profits the game has.

But if the game is free the impact it has would be greater in the online community and it circulation would grow to a proportion that the problem will not be how to gain money, the problem would now be how to maintain it servers.

your also forgetting one important thing, the money to actually make the game in the first place. You cant include the profit you make from the game when you sell this as you will only have this after the game is produced and not before.

Aos while you'll making the game, you have to either use your own funds that you currently have, or get a bigger company to pay you, ie a publisher.

and there not going to double your funds if they dont beleive it will double your profits, or jsut wont take the risk.

its one reason alot of unique games never get made, simply cause publishers dont want to risk thier money on a game that may or may not sell, so they stick to games that know will sell, hence the large amounts of FPS games

[fiksal]

it definitely wouldn't cost as much to develop as an online server.

The difference in cost would not be sufficient to counter the fact that this would generate approximately zero additional income to cover the cost of development.

Is that so though? Lots of games put accent on their multiplayer. Couldnt Egosoft do something clever and tap into that?

[R.Styles]

Why not see if it's possible to add ONE or a couple of massively HUGE sectors Online, where one gate in your universe will connect to it. you fly through, you appear online, you fly out of it, you go offline. Other people would just fly through the IN/OUT gate and go to their respective universe, thus protecting your assets BUT, if you are stupid or strong enough allow you to build in the online sectors. There would be a moderator presence (AI) which would try and make sure you didn't get destroyed instantly.

But a it's been said, they'd need a dam good reason to make it, and be able to make money & profit from it, and have the money in the first place to make one. Oh Well.

[softweir]

it definitely wouldn't cost as much to develop as an online server.

The difference in cost would not be sufficient to counter the fact that this would generate approximately zero additional income to cover the cost of development.

Is that so though? Lots of games put accent on their multiplayer. Couldnt Egosoft do something clever and tap into that?

Creating an FPS multiplayer is in many ways far easier than creating an X-Universe multiplayer. You only have to worry about the "current map" and the people within it - there are no other sectors from which players may arrive at random intervals.

Also, those games are written from the start with multiplayer in mind, even if they can't get round to finisging the multiplayer interface in time for release. It has been stated that the X game-engine is completely free of multiplayer code and design. To create a multiplayer X game, even a LAN-party version, would require a complete rewrite from the bottom up. This would take many man-years of work by multiplayer and networking specialists, and would cost a fortune which companies the size of EgoSoft don't happen to have lying around in the bank.

As I see it, an X multiplayer will only come about if one of us fans wins a few million in a lottery and decides to hand it over as a charitable donation. But that's my pessimistic take!

[Cycrow]

it definitely wouldn't cost as much to develop as an online server.

The difference in cost would not be sufficient to counter the fact that this would generate approximately zero additional income to cover the cost of development.

Is that so though? Lots of games put accent on their multiplayer. Couldnt Egosoft do something clever and tap into that?

X3 is quite a complex game, so adding multiplayer code into the game take alot of time and effort.

if a game is not designed with multiplayer in mind from the beginning this makes the task 10 times harder to achive.

and realisticlly, how many extra ppl do you think would buy that game if it had lan in that wouldn't have bought it previously ?

im sure alot of ppl playing X3 will like it, but that doesn't bring in any extra money.

and of course, there will have to be changes to the main game to allow it to work, one of which is SETA, a simple removal of it wouldn't really work. So the game has to have this in mind and be redeveloped to work well without all. All of this will cost extra money to achive.

of course, u would also most likly have to hire some new network programmers so you'll usually have to pay them a yearly salary. So if they say took 6 months to make, you cant really jsut hire them for 6 months to finish it and then fire them, u'll have to pay for them for the whole development for the game, especially if when its released theres problems and the networking code needs some bug fixes.

You could of course sub contract them for a limited time, but they usually demand more money.

[fiksal]

Creating an FPS multiplayer is in many ways far easier than creating an X-Universe multiplayer. You only have to worry about the "current map" and the people within it - there are no other sectors from which players may arrive at random intervals.

Also, those games are written from the start with multiplayer in mind, even if they can't get round to finisging the multiplayer interface in time for release.

I agree that Egosoft may not have coded X3 with multiplayer in mind, but doesnt mean they dont have something in works.
And I do agree, that the X3 will not be a multiplayer game ever. It probably will be a brand new game, that they will design with multiplayer in mind.

This would take many man-years of work by multiplayer and networking specialists, and would cost a fortune which companies the size of EgoSoft don't happen to have lying around in the bank.

That doesnt address if the game "should have" multiplayer, and more addresses if Egosoft "can do it".
So I dont know and I dont disagree here with anything in particular.

and realisticlly, how many extra ppl do you think would buy that game if it had lan in that wouldn't have bought it previously ?

Yep, that's a good question. Of course by saying that X should have multiplayer option, I only speak for myself and no-one else.
I imagine over 80% people here (who enjoyed X3) will buy the multiplayer version of X, if it features the same (and improved) gameplay (probably bundled with singleplayer version).
As far as multiplayer goes, I think the game could attract the similiar crowd as in EVE and other MMOs. Perhaps the polished combat system will attract space combat junkies (recent games like Star Wars come to mind).
So I think Egosoft could gain more fans, but I wouldnt know.

[Cycrow]

well i think the point is about a LAN game rather than an Online game.

a LAN game will still cost alot to produce with very little gain.

i mean, a lan version of X wouldn't be anything like Eve, so i dont think alot of eve players would want to play it. If it was an online game, then maybe they would, but not just for a Lan game.

an online game can generate money because of the pay monthly, but a lan game would have to rely solely on the selling of the game.

say it cost £100'000 to add lan capabilities to game, would it really make an extra £100'000 profit. As esentially it'll be a simlar game. How many ppl do you think will be willing to buy it that wouldn't have even thought about the non lan version

[fiksal]

say it cost £100'000 to add lan capabilities to game, would it really make an extra £100'000 profit. As esentially it'll be a simlar game. How many ppl do you think will be willing to buy it that wouldn't have even thought about the non lan version

None would. Keeping the gameplay the same will not gain people who didnt like the game in the first place.

That's true, an online game has bigger potential to make up its cost, than a mutliplayer one.

Hmm... so, as far as Eve goes, why do people play it?

Do people play it because it's one universe with lots of people in it?
Or because people like to play with their friends? Or perhaps people just like to socialize.

If it's mainly because of the first one, then X-multiplayer will not gain many players from Eve.
If it's the other two... there's a possibility that it might (depending on how limiting the multiplayer is, of course)

So from all that, do you think that if Egosoft ever releases the Online version, they should totally change the gameplay so they can bring onboard all the MMO junkies?

[g04tn4d0]

I would love to have standard TCP/IP client/server multiplayer capabilities; like Freelancer. We could play with a few friends.

But in no way would I ever want X to become an MMO. That crowd is mainly populated by complete retards. They would easily ruin the fun factor.

Plus, EgoSoft is still experiementing with their single-player version. It's not like they would find it easier to think up universal rules for an MMO version.

[Jankes]

He means multiplayer like at a LAN. Not Online.
This way only you and your friends have to play.

That's my opinion too. Online X4 would be ridiculous.

LAN - YES
online - NO

[esd]

I imagine over 80% people here (who enjoyed X3) will buy the multiplayer version of X, if it features the same (and improved) gameplay (probably bundled with singleplayer version).

But as has already been said, any multiplayer functionality whatsoever would require a complete redesign of the gameplay mechanics, and so it couldn't feature "the same (and improved) gameplay" - To do so would literally mean coding two games, one for single-player and one for the LAN-multi.

[fiksal]

But as has already been said, any multiplayer functionality whatsoever would require a complete redesign of the gameplay mechanics, and so it couldn't feature "the same (and improved) gameplay" - To do so would literally mean coding two games, one for single-player and one for the LAN-multi.

Hm. Somehow I imagine that as far as redesign of the gameplay goes it shouldnt be too much, because multiplayer doesnt need to have the kind of balancing rules that MMO must have, and it doesnt need to support hundreds of players on the same server.
The only major problems I see right now are the SETA, small size of the sectors, and perhaps missions.

[Xenon_Slayer]

I would love to see a small scale online universe. Me and a friend playing in our own universe but with two players in two different locations. You could be anything buisness partners, or enemies at war. I perfer to know who I am playing with. When one person is offline there stuff is invincible to the other players attacks.

A large MMOG is a little more of a stretch. It would be a fast paced, high risk game where your good work could be gone in a few minutes of heavy fighting. The only thing to keep the peace would be a few super beings called Moderators and Admins

[Apocholypse]

I'd prefer that it stay single player. I just don't want to have to deal with idiots in a game as complicated as X3.

Here here, i think they'd be to many hard feelings if X were multi-player

I think it would be nice to do multi player, but I wouldn't give it up for single. If both were available, well, that be something quite different... Single is however more important to me..

[fud]

Pretty much my thoughts as well. My one big turn off with MMO-type games, are the ones that never log off, sleep, eat, s**t, etc. They pride themselves on killing new players.


Kinda like the WOW episode of South Park, well, exactly like it.

[esd]

Hm. Somehow I imagine that as far as redesign of the gameplay goes it shouldnt be too much, because multiplayer doesnt need to have the kind of balancing rules that MMO must have, and it doesnt need to support hundreds of players on the same server.

Then you're imagining very wrongly. Exactly the same initial hurdles would have to be overcome.

The only major problems I see right now are the SETA, small size of the sectors, and perhaps missions.

Yeah... just SETA only is an extremely major problem. Go back and read what Nanook had to say on the subject, he was bang on the money.

[Nanook]

After further thought, we'd also have to get rid of the jumpdrive. Why? Well, just think about how that would fit into a game with several players. How much fun would it be to have an opposing player simply jump around to all your stations and blow them up with virtual impunity? How could you possibly protect them without being there yourself? You can hardly expect the AI to defeat a human opponent. The only fair thing to do would be to eliminate the jumpdrive completely.

No jumpdrive basically means no UT's. And even without jumpdrives, there's nothing to really prevent another player from simply flying around blowing up your assets while you were elsewhere. So you have all these freighters flying around supplying your factories and selling your products. Not for long!! You simply have no real means of protecting any of your AI-controlled assets against opposing players. So what do you do? The only solution is to go the way EVE Online did, and that's only have one player-flown ship in space at a time, and no player-owned, AI-controlled ships at all. Is this really what we want?

No, I simply can't see the current game being made multiplayer at all. If Egosoft produced a multiplayer game, it certainly wouldn't be an X-Universe game.

[fiksal]

Then you're imagining very wrongly. Exactly the same initial hurdles would have to be overcome.

That might be.

So aside from addition of the network code (which will force Egosoft to rewrite a lot of code - no question about that), what other design changes do you foresee, that will destroy the current gameplay completely?

I read through Nanook's post about SETA, and here's what I thought - what's the purpose of SETA in X3 anyway?
If it's to make the flying between sectors easier, well, why not use the alternative ways, that already exist in the game, rather than messing with ships' speeds and weapons' ranges.

(And if there's no good way and I am wrong, then a medal to everyone who's against a multiplayer game)

So let's see what we got:

A jumpdrive - that allows you to jump from anywhere in the sector to a new sector. Worth noting that UTs also somehow can jump into the middle of sector (or so it seems; I might not be right about that).

A docking device - never used, but appearantly instantly teleports your ship.

Seems like might be enough so far. Let's say the X++ universe is set in a further future where jumpdrives and docking devices are more common. If that doesnt violate X's storylines, then it seems like a step towards the solution of the SETA problem, without changing ship's and weapon's stats.


You dont need to convince me that X-online/multiplayer is a lot of work, or that there are might be financial problems, but I do not believe that one could not make such game, that would feature best elements of X3's gameplay and still be online.

P.S.
By "you" I dont mean anyone personally.

[fiksal]

After further thought, we'd also have to get rid of the jumpdrive. Why? Well, just think about how that would fit into a game with several players. How much fun would it be to have an opposing player simply jump around to all your stations and blow them up with virtual impunity? How could you possibly protect them without being there yourself? You can hardly expect the AI to defeat a human opponent. The only fair thing to do would be to eliminate the jumpdrive completely.

Very interesting, considering that you can do that same thing in the game right now. But we arent opposed to the jump drive in the game now, because AI doesnt do that. Which means we cant really have smarter AI in X3, because it really will screw up our game because of the jump drive.

Seems to me jump drives are unfair advantage right now too then, if to follow same logic, I see no reason to remove them.

I'd like to also point out the "fairness" of games. This is something that MMO has to REALLY work out, a multiplayer game does not have to have those rules.
There are ways you can get around that problem.

there's nothing to really prevent another player from simply flying around blowing up your assets while you were elsewhere.

And what prevents any other enemy ship in X3 from attacking any of your ships?

and no player-owned, AI-controlled ships at all. Is this really what we want?

That's not the only solution.