Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Co-op Fort (single fort, co-op)

14 (25%)

Muilti-Fort (multi forts, allied)

12 (21.4%)

Fort Wars (multi fort, War)

19 (33.9%)

other (explain)

11 (19.6%)

Total Members Voted: 55

[L0rd_ZOD]

Expanding on the "Multiplayer Fortress Mode. Oh yeah, I went there.".
This is to get a better idea of which type of multiplayer to put into DF.

EDIT:
Co-op Fort (single fort, co-op)
Two or more players working on a single fort towards a common goal

Muilti-Fort (multi forts, allied)
Multiple Forts owned by individual players working together to overcome such obstacles like seiges, megabeasts, etc

Fort Wars (multi fort, War)
Multiple Forts owned by individual players, all at war attempting to destory/kill the other players.


ps.FFS don't post readthefaqn00b! this is just a poll.

[¿]

We can only vote for one of those very similar types?

[L0rd_ZOD]

Well if you can think of any additional poll options go for it.

[Draco18s]

Other: None
or
Other: Trading

[L0rd_ZOD]

Other: None
or
Other: Trading

Trading? Care to expand on this?

[Rakeela]

I'm not particularly thrilled at the idea of the game ever gaining any kind of multiplayer...

[Cheeetar]

I'm not particularly thrilled at the idea of the game ever gaining any kind of multiplayer...

Why?

[FoboslC]

Multiplayer Adventure Mode would be epic too.

[Silverionmox]

The kind of multiplayer like emperor: rise of the middle kingdom would be feasible. Sending soldiers and trade caravans to each other is the brunt of the interaction. It would resemble fortress mode very much.

[Draco18s]

Other: None
or
Other: Trading

Trading? Care to expand on this?

I doubt it would ever work, actually, but it was a form of "multiplayer" that was actually semi-reasonable.  Basically you exported goods to a file, which other players could then import and got a caravan with your crap in it.

[SolarShado]

My vote goes for other because there is no "All of the above".

Seriously, any true multiplayer would make this already awesome game even better. Yes, i know it'd be hell to code and so on and so forth.

I just had a vision of the future: "Slaves to Armok: God of Blood: Chapter IV" No idea what it'd be called, but it'd be an MMO to end all MMOs. Player controled forts fill the world, forming entire nations, trading and waging war. Adventurers wander the countryside, raping and pillaging, or helping those in need...

Will it ever happen? Probably not, but if you say you wouldn't play it, I say your lying.

[Sowelu]

I vote 'none'.

The world already has enough mediocre multiplayer games; it needs more awesome singleplayer ones.  If you want to see how this kind of transition tends to go, look up SimCity 2000 Network Edition.  Oh wait.  You can't find it anywhere, because it was one of the worst selling games Maxis ever made.

[LegoLord]

They all sound good, but of course, it will probably never happen because of time restraints and stuff.  How would it even work, for that matter?

[Vaiolis]

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure Toady has stated before that he does not plan to add multiplayer, to this or any other game. It also states under the "Forum games and Roleplaying" section: "The only multiplayer games B12 is likely to have anything to do with."

Aside from that though, I must admit that multiplayer would be pretty cool perhaps for adventure mode, but otherwise I agree with Sowelu. DF is a great game as a singleplayer game, and really has no need for multiplayer.

[tigrex]

I don't want true multiplayer, but I do support the idea of a massively shared world, like a huge bones file in Nethack. 

Basically, I'd like to play on a shared world, find the ruins of other player's forts to explore, find their exploits in legends, etc.  And when I'm done, others could see my progress.