Print

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

[waldo]

i probably do underestimate how much it takes to make an mmo, but at the same time i don't need you to shoot me down the second that i even bring up the idea.

sure the game's content would stagnate but name one mmo that hasn't over it's time, i mean even WoW is stagnating and people are moving on. but at least this way it would have a chance for the players to create something new and then show it off to the world in a way that isn't a recorded video.

at some point no matter what toady does this game will become too big for just him, i would rather see him implement a bigger set-up at a stage where it won't be too much trouble for him in the long run. i mean as is how many suggestions that are original, and aren't already in the plan, are actually implemented into the game.

even if the game doesn't morph to be an mmo or even multiplayer compatible it will stagnate sooner or later, then what's going to happen? make another chapter? it'll be extremely hard to top this as is.

[Dakk]

A DF based MUD could probably work nicely, and i'm looking forward to one. But i don't wanna see DF tainted by the MMO rage.

[Phantom]

I wonder what griefers and elf lovers and hardcore WoW players would do in an DF mmo...
!
oh god no...

[tsen]

$## DAMNIT MOTHER@%ER STOLE MY ADAMANTINESONG!

Dude, let's go farm some gold and chill out.

NO, I'M GOING TO FIND YOU AND I'M GOING TO F$#$ING KILL YOU!

...

[HatfieldCW]

I really like the idea of dispatching trade caravans and/or military groups and having them turn up at another player's fort the next season or year.

[Phelix]

I think a lot of games would work as an MMO. DF would be hard but plausible..... (and highly entertaining) at this point however I dont think its really applicable, not until elves, goblins, humans, kobolds are playable & you can launch attacks on peoples sites.

I also dont think it would be tainted by WoW players, a lot of them wouldnt be hardcore enough for DF and considering DFs learning curve.....

It would also be one of the "you leave and your fortress is still going" type games which would be completely unapproachable by casuals, considering how many bad things can happen while you are gone.....

I think it has potential (a lot of games do) too make an incredible MMO experiance, but would be very hard and probably require an incredible computer and have too play similar too ten six (instead of an open world you can explore, it would be everyone on their own individual plots, and they communicate through messengers etc, or through attacks)

Honestly I like it how it is...

[HatfieldCW]

I'd be inclined to have the game run in a pseudo-turn-based format.  Let each player's fort run through an entire season over the course of a real week, being paused and restarted as they play.  Any interaction between forts would take place with a substantial delay, so at the end of a "turn" you'd have war parties departing, trade caravans embarking, migrants or hired help headed for other forts, etc.  Over the course of the next season, these groups would reach their desitnation.

So I get fifteen soldiers and send them out against the local kobold camp the slaughter the populace and claim their...novelty...crafts... and I also send a twelve-dwarf trade caravan, with four wagons, to a buddy's fort, loaded with the bauxite and wood he needs, with instruction to buy only flux stone, sand and glass from him, no more gypsum mugs and narrow socks.

They head out toward the end of the season, and some time in the next season or two (depending on distance) they arrive at their destination, and the target player deal with them.  A season or two later, they get back home, with spoils, slaves, casualties, treaties, news of map features and an update on the place they visited.

[Rowanas]

Indeed, a play-by-mail style setup would be best if this ever happened

[profit]

Thread rises from the ashes to assail the right thinking people of the world again.

Sigh....

Opinion still remains, Reasons still stand.

MMODF = Terrible idea.
NETWORKED DF = Unlikely, and probably a poor use of dev time. Not easy and people who say it is have probably never coded a real world network app in their life. Using the windows Message API to spam nabs on your subnet doesn't count.
SPORE MODEL DF = Terrible idea, unless you like cock and vagina fortress.
PBEM DF = OK idea, but should have its own thread not be in this mash.

Anyone cares for detailed reasons, they are stated way earlier in the thread.. and restated probably 10 times.

[Iden]

If I may re-reference a relevant idea for just a moment

[Kruniac]

Sounds like a good idea to me. Hundreds (if not thousands) of players trying to magma flood the world? That's the entire point of DF!

[Dakira]

I think a localized world would be better than a globally persistent one.
 
As much as I would love to see DF become multiplayer, I really don't see it happening on an MMO scale. (Or at all currently, but don't get me wrong. I really like the idea of a multiplayer DF.) Perhaps on a LAN-esque scale treated in much the same way as an RTS that you an save and return to at a later time (I.E: Sins of a Solar Empire).
One of my biggest concerns for a DF MMO would be players who are dormant for too long. Their fortresses get dusty and unkempt compared to the player who has spent months on their Super Epic Magma Cannon Mark IV. Suddenly, from halfway across the world, there comes a amorphous ball of liquid earth dripping minor fireballs over the course of it's path leaving scars and dead forests.

That magma things sounds really cool actually, but still... I don't agree with a globally persistent world for more than the previously mentioned reason.

[Idiom]

Real time MMO?

Run the actual game on a powerful server somewhere.
Connect via your computer that is now essentially a dumb terminal.
Send input and receive a stream of ASCII which does not take up hardly any bandwidth.

[Kruniac]

I think a localized world would be better than a globally persistent one.
 
As much as I would love to see DF become multiplayer, I really don't see it happening on an MMO scale. (Or at all currently, but don't get me wrong. I really like the idea of a multiplayer DF.) Perhaps on a LAN-esque scale treated in much the same way as an RTS that you an save and return to at a later time (I.E: Sins of a Solar Empire).
One of my biggest concerns for a DF MMO would be players who are dormant for too long. Their fortresses get dusty and unkempt compared to the player who has spent months on their Super Epic Magma Cannon Mark IV. Suddenly, from halfway across the world, there comes a amorphous ball of liquid earth dripping minor fireballs over the course of it's path leaving scars and dead forests.

That magma things sounds really cool actually, but still... I don't agree with a globally persistent world for more than the previously mentioned reason.

Two things here.

1: A persistant world is the only thing that would fit DF - letting players affect their world and build civilizations.

2: If a player is dormant, then he/she didn't really care enough about the fortress. You get what you give.

[tsen]

Heh, which would utterly doom it as an MMO since DF by nature is brutal. Casual players would come back after having a life and their fortress would be a smoking blood smeared ruin. As much fun as losing and re-surviving the first year is, that would basically kill 60+% of the possible customer base that would be paying for the server fees.