Multiplayer support

[LN]

One more thought (since I can't edit my prior post )

It could easily be set up like Civilization games, where you start a park together in a lobby / party.
Only the people who were in the lobby / party group together at the start of the park can build together.
Anyone who joins afterwards is a spectator.

This would ensure that the people who want to build together can always do so, and no one else can ruin your experience.

The original host of the park is the one who holds the save file for the park. When the host loads that park, the person who was a guest, can then load into the park at free will.

Auto save intervals would be a welcome addition as well, but not necessarily required.

I think this still requires a lot (more) of processing from either side of the connection.

Thats exactly why i'm asking. Same for RCT2 and it did, but it took a while

Ah sorry I quoted you and was also reading Spartans post. Sorry about that.

But I think it would just require way to much calculations and the game would be unplayable.

RCT1/2 are also just small games which don't require any beefy setup.

 

[Sparatan117]

why should
- they respond to this if they are not planning to include it

Because you listen to your fan base, if you want your fan base to continue keeping you in business.

- we keep asking for this as it has already been stated they won't.

Squeeky wheel gets fixed.
There are plenty of people out there that aren't on this form that would love to play this game together. In fact, everyone that I've told about this game and shown them the trailer video, asked as their first question "Does it have multiplayer?". Obviously the need is there, and Frontier would be dumb to ignore it.

Besides, I don't think my computer would enjoy the fact that multiple persons are changing the terrain in my park at the same time. I think this game has never been developed in any way to be multiplayer.

Uhm... then don't play multiplayer?

 

[Sparatan117]

I think this still requires a lot (more) of processing from either side of the connection.

Not anymore so than you editing the level by yourself. Think of it as you doing something in two places at once. Granted, there will be a slightly higher tax on the CPU of the host's computer to make the geometry calculations for someone else editing something, and also the shadow / light re-draw, but that might only be like a 5% increase overall. It's no different than you hosting a Minecraft server on your computer.

The only real difference between this and Minecraft, is that minecraft could have the entire world change drastically if someone decides to get over zealous with TNT. This... You'd have to find some way of seriously taxing the CPU with geometry editing. Given the speed at which Geometry changes, I doubt that's possible.

TL;DR if you can run this game, you could host a multiplayer server ( if your internet is fast enough ).

 

[Give Multiplayer Co-op]

There is simply no rational argument against multiplayer.

My suggestion would be to be able to give people either admin rights or simply guest rights.

This means your friends that you trust can help you build the park, while other people can effectively join the spectator view in fps or something. You can password protect yoru game if you don't want random people visiting your park for instance.

Shouldn't be hard, and this function is so blatantly obviously cool that I'm absolutely amazed the developers arent including it.

Look at how much work you can put in this park. Share the workload! It worked fine for anno, for instance. And nobody is forcing you to play the multiplayer bit, you can simply do singleplayer if you dont like it.

But yeah... Literally 1000s of posts from people who want it (it is the most requested feature) , and as is ofcourse obvious by now: frontier completely ignoring their fanbase.

 

[sawcy]

Really would love to be able to build a park with a friend, the idea of visiting other people's parks is also a great idea

 

[Haxel0rd]

+1 for Multiplayer / Co-Op

(have atleast 2 friends who would instantly buy if game support co-op park building).

 

[lilibat]

There is simply no rational argument against multiplayer.

Except a networking layer specifically for that would have to be written. Would there be servers? The server code would have to be written. Would it be peer-peer? The code for that would have to be written. The interface for connecting to a server or a peer. Etc. Etc. Etc. This is not a simple matter at all. That's assuming the engine could handle it at all to begin with.

It doesn't matter if literally every player asked for this if the engine can't handle it or they don't have the resources it can't be done. I know they have multiplayer for ED but that is a completely different kind of game and I don't know if the networking for that would translate.

 

[Haxel0rd]

Except a networking layer specifically for that would have to be written. This is not a simple matter at all.
...if the engine can't handle it or they don't have the resources it can't be done. I know they have multiplayer for ED but that is a completely different kind of game

I almost completely agree with your thoughts,
ED is a different game and it would probably make
more sense to code coop/multiplayer for PC from scratch.
But breaking it down to simple, a basic coop park building
could probably already be archieved with a simple setup:

• add cllient <> server functionality (tcp sockets) whereas one guy is the server, the others connect to it as client.
  This is not that hard, code for basic tcp socket are just a few lines which provides a channel where data can be exchanged between remote hosts.
  The code that evaluates the exchanged data is most likely the more challenging part as it has to be customly fitted to the game engine and game data.
  
• Once you have a basic client <> server functionality (people can open a park and 4 cams fly individually across the park),
  the above mentioned "custom code" part has to be written next. So mainly, it's about objects and their position in the world.
  Clients built stuff, and could ping the server every 10 seconds with a block of data that cointains the Object ID of every placed item,
  including their belonging position coordinates. Same applies for game setting XY, the setting + value could be included in that ping
  message to the server. Server then broadcasts this to the other players.
  
• Of course there are several other blocks of code have to be touched, like GUI integration, maybe an api that handles incoming object broadcastings, etc.
  But again i think this is not something that would take months.

Atleast thats how i would start out if i were a game dev.
Seing the coop map editor in a game called Golf-It working wonderfull, i think it is absolutely archievable.
(Afaik, Golf-It and it's coop map editor was developed by one single- or two guys only). Frontier devs
already proved as extremly talented and dedicated to their game code, i think they could defo do it.

Cheers

 

[LN]

It will be interesting to see how you keep thousands of guests, thoughts, animations etc. synchronized between two (or more) working stations.
Seems like an difficult job.

 

[Haxel0rd]

It will be interesting to see how you keep thousands of guests, thoughts, animations etc. synchronized between two (or more) working stations.
Seems like an difficult job.

Good point, but guests could be client sided,
unless those that trigger events like damaged trashcans & co.

 

[LN]

Good point, but guests could be client sided,
unless those that trigger events like damaged trashcans & co.

But then, there is a change that a ride on my side has a full queue and the ride on your side doesn't?

Or have you have massive lines at shops and i don't.

You get messages of peeps finding the queues to long, while mine would be saying the queue is quick.

There is a whole lot of things that can be mentioned that could cause difficulties if it can't be synchronized.

Just to say, I'm not against multiplayer but I can understand why it's not there.

 

[Haxel0rd]

But then, there is a change that a ride on my side has a full queue and the ride on your side doesn't?
Or have you have massive lines at shops and i don't. You get messages of peeps finding the queues to long, while mine would be saying the queue is quick.
There is a whole lot of things that can be mentioned that could cause difficulties if it can't be synchronized.
Just to say, I'm not against multiplayer but I can understand why it's not there.

Again a good point,
i also see and understand why it's not there yet, and that especially a complex game like Planet Coaster
a multiplayer/coop system would be more challenging to code, than for regular games. But in the end
it stays a coding problem that could be solved with the right code.

Solution to your mentioned problem:
Any shop or ride has to sync it's settings, add a variable for "queued guests",
which is just an integer that defines how many people are queuing. So in your
queue there could be "Bob" while in your friends queue is "Alice".


Unless i have overseen any other deeper problem, i'd still say the following
approach could solve the "dont sync to many stuff" problem:
Guests and thoughts = client sided
Park + Rides + settings = server sided

For Park employees;
client sided, but events like repairing a ride or fixing a trashcan is server sided.
So if a trashcan breaks, server broadcasts info to players. There are two options now:
1) trashcan turns back into fixed state for all players as soon as -one- player has archieved the fix
2) server waits until all participating players have broadcastet "trashcan got fixed" and turns trashcan back to fixed state.

See there are problems to be solved, but they ain't impossible to handle - especially from Frontier devs who have approved of stable and quality code so far.
Coding is always about solving problems, no matter what they add to the game.

These are just sugestions i still love the game already, the work Frontier has done there is already supreme.
I just think coop could bring a lot more players in.

Cheers.

 

[LN]

Again a good point,
i also see and understand why it's not there yet, and that especially a complex game like Planet Coaster
a multiplayer/coop system would be more challenging to code, than for regular games. But in the end
it stays a coding problem that could be solved with the right code.

Solution to your mentioned problem:
Any shop or ride has to sync it's settings, add a variable for "queued guests",
which is just an integer that defines how many people are queuing. So in your
queue there could be "Bob" while in your friends queue is "Alice".


Unless i have overseen any other deeper problem, i'd still say the following
approach could solve the "dont sync to many stuff" problem:
Guests and thoughts = client sided
Park + Rides + settings = server sided

For Park employees;
client sided, but events like repairing a ride or fixing a trashcan is server sided.
So if a trashcan breaks, server broadcasts info to players. There are two options now:
1) trashcan turns back into fixed state for all players as soon as -one- player has archieved the fix
2) server waits until all participating players have broadcastet "trashcan got fixed" and turns trashcan back to fixed state.

See there are problems to be solved, but they ain't impossible to handle - especially from Frontier devs who have approved of stable and quality code so far.
Coding is always about solving problems, no matter what they add to the game.

These are just sugestions i still love the game already, the work Frontier has done there is already supreme.
I just think coop could bring a lot more players in.

Cheers.

Good feedback! [up]