Print

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

[XSI]

There are actually several ways for dwarf fort to work in multiplayer, but sadly, most of them mean ages of coding.

And the ones that do not mean ages of coding, are already known as the successiongames.

I must admit, dwarf fortress like savage would be pretty awesome though, even when there's no invasion, ambushes, or other direct issues happening, I'd take over the hammerer, one of the few ones that do not take magma baths on arriving.

Having a player noble mandate you make 6 adamantine dresses would probably be kind of a bad thing.

[Greiger]

I wouldn't give you a magma bath....

I would just lock you in your room dropping food and booze through a hatch in the ceiling once a year.

If yer good I might even throw your favorite farm animal down there. I threw a lone cow down there once and now my hammerer's room is filled with calves.  It's a disturbing thought but at least he's entertaining himself.

[XSI]

(...)food and booze through a hatch in the ceiling once a year.

May I suggest a well in the room instead? Why waste perfectly good booze on nobles?

[IceDragon_XxX]

Well player nobles wouldn't do the same things as drone nobles, they'd chat with the liaisons and do the trading, maybe some other things.

Mostly what I see players playing as would be Military, the rest of the game would get repetitive fast. Of course they could actually do other things, but I figure they'd mostly wander around and do quests, random quests that the nobles give out, help defend against the sieges, lead armies to  the enemies lair and that kinda stuff.

Hell, even for variety throw in some major classes, like warrior, ranger, mystic, that kinda stuff

[waldoknoesen]

Hehe, while I do agree that this game is an excellent single player game, I would like to add that the game could play decently as a multi-player co-op game.

Ever play SAVAGE? That game was an extremely good multi-player game (well, when playing with friends). One player would take over the base setup, while the other players would take orders, go collect resources, help build, attack the enemy, or just goof around.

All players would play in a first/third person view, (btw, the vision I'm having right now about this is after DF gets funded and pops into the 3 dimensional realm, no matter how unlikely it is), whereas the leader, (whom the players vote as their leader) gets a map that they can use to set the area where the digging will take place, then can designate it from the map.

When I say map, I mean it would act like how DF acts now, top down, able to highlight areas for digging and the like.

Players can choose to do whatever they wanted, chopping down wood, mining, fishing, hunting, whatever you could do in the game. If the player wanted to take a break but everyone else didn't want to, they could set themselves to a drone state and go "afk" or log out and even shut down the game, the character would turn into one of the drone dwarfs, and do various jobs/tasks.

Speaking of drone dwarfs, there would still be a couple in the beginning to help mine and farm and that kind of stuff, you would set what kind of jobs they would do and in what order.

There is other stuff to say, but nothing I'd like to add right at this moment, >.>

This man has an excellent vision of the DF future...

[Puck]

Hehe, while I do agree that this game is an excellent single player game, I would like to add that the game could play decently as a multi-player co-op game.

Ever play SAVAGE? That game was an extremely good multi-player game (well, when playing with friends). One player would take over the base setup, while the other players would take orders, go collect resources, help build, attack the enemy, or just goof around.

All players would play in a first/third person view, (btw, the vision I'm having right now about this is after DF gets funded and pops into the 3 dimensional realm, no matter how unlikely it is), whereas the leader, (whom the players vote as their leader) gets a map that they can use to set the area where the digging will take place, then can designate it from the map.

When I say map, I mean it would act like how DF acts now, top down, able to highlight areas for digging and the like.

Players can choose to do whatever they wanted, chopping down wood, mining, fishing, hunting, whatever you could do in the game. If the player wanted to take a break but everyone else didn't want to, they could set themselves to a drone state and go "afk" or log out and even shut down the game, the character would turn into one of the drone dwarfs, and do various jobs/tasks.

Speaking of drone dwarfs, there would still be a couple in the beginning to help mine and farm and that kind of stuff, you would set what kind of jobs they would do and in what order.

There is other stuff to say, but nothing I'd like to add right at this moment, >.>

um....

http://www.s2games.com/savage/downloads.php same thing? because....

[IceDragon_XxX]

um....

http://www.s2games.com/savage/downloads.php same thing? because....

Yeah, that's the game I was talking about, although I bought it when it first came out, >.> didn't know it became free.

And because what? Sorry, I'm a bit dense online... lol

[Megaman]

if the other players were in adventure mode DF would be MUCH slower. people playing fortress will have to wait for their adventuring friends to finish reading combat reports, thus ending in massive RL tantrum spirals.

[Fault]

This man has an excellent vision of the DF future...

I agree! I mean, the average PC or console gamer is about as strange and violent as the average dwarf, and throwing them all into the same fortress to do tasks would create that cabin-feveresque claustrophobia that drives things like strange moods, tantrum spirals, and mandates!
And player nobles are just a nightmare to think about.. but remember: losing is fun.

[QuakeIV]

(...)food and booze through a hatch in the ceiling once a year.

May I suggest a well in the room instead? Why waste perfectly good booze on nobles?

[Phantom]

(...)food and booze through a hatch in the ceiling once a year.

May I suggest a well in the room instead? Why waste perfectly good booze on nobles?

SUCCESS ON DERAILMENT!
Now, multiplayer, one half of me says HECK NO! and the other says HELL YES!

[Neruz]

Multiplayer would be awesome, doubly so if you could go full-on multiplayer with different people running fortresses all over the world.

But i suspect properly doing MP would first require the game to be in a much more finished state; including world-traversal. I wouldn't hold my breath.

[Grendus]

I'm against multiplayer unless it's done in such a way that:

1. Toady is not held responsible for the content, and
2. Players are not forced to play multiplayer, but rather have the option.

There are some suggestions, such as having players host the worlds instead of a central server (kind of like how battle.net serves as a connection hub and players connect to other computers through it), but most suggestions would kill the current game.

[Neruz]

Ovbiously it would be an option; DF is already fully functional in SP, why would adding MP stop it working in SP?

[QuakeIV]

Ovbiously it would be an option; DF is already fully functional in SP, why would adding MP stop it working in SP?

SP would be fine, but the game as it is doesent have all the features fleshed out to allow multiplayer yet.

Essentially, the game still has no world travel, no army arc, no sen ding of caravans, and theres still no way in hell it would be compatible with a network unless extensively modified.