Print

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

[Jayfrin]

ok bear in mind this will not be able to happen soon im jsut saying it would be interesting im NOT expectign Toady to implement it

If we could some how generate a big world and have it as an optional online option on the main menu where you could build a fortress or adventure and fortresses could have people trade with each other and send out caravans and even adventureers could come and go to the trade depot of a forteress and trade stuff...

[Torak]

Jesus christ..

[herrbdog]

Now now, it's a geniune suggestion.

P'haps a multipalyer could sorta work like Emperor: Rise of the Middle Kingdom. All the cities on the map played at the same time, but if someone got ahead (cause others were pausing to give orders, or their puter was just faster) then they would be slowed by the server until cities that were behind could catch up. You could trade with others and send armies too.

This is a LONG way off, if even on the horizon, but an idea.

[Deathworks]

Hi!

Well, I wouldn't be a user of that, but anyway, here are my thoughts:

Basically, I believe it would be possible to derive such a version. At least if restricted to fortress mode, having individual machines handle individual fortresses and one host synchronizing things between fortresses seems theoretically feasible.

However, in order to get playability, you would probably have to put up with a few compromises:

* No pause feature. The game could not stop just because you wish to designate an area or browse through some info screens.

* Common frame rate. Time needs to be in sync between all fortresses. Thus, all fortresses must have the same actual frame rate. If the fortresses run locally combined via a host, the slowest member of the chain dictates the frame rate.

Adventure mode would open a new can of worms, though, since you are bound to have two or more computers effectively accessing the same site at the same time (for example, one adventurer in an active fortress). In fortress mode, you can disallow having two fortresses sharing a location, but with adventurers, this seems much more difficult.

Well, at least that is how I perceive this idea.

Deathworks

[viskaslietuvai]

I think this is incredibly unlikely. If I recall correctly, I heard Toady say in an interview that he specifically wanted to AVOID any type of MMO stuff. And honestly I don't really blame him. Dealing with the constant bug reports PLUS the complaints of cheating or people messing up other people's forts would be too much for one person to deal with.

Besides all that, I've always thought of DF as the MMO that is single player. You have a persistent world with a wealth of characters and no set goals. It's a gigantic sandbox and the other kids aren't allowed. If you want to share constructions and fight other people, get WoW or Second Life or something. I don't know. I never liked MMOs, so I'm not the person to ask.

[RedWick]

An interesting idea, but probably well outside the intended scope of DF.  I think the closest we'll get to multi-player is sending save games to each other.

[Lord Licorice]

Hell, I'd be happy with just a community world.  None of this server synchronization junk, but just the ability to save individual regions for sending to other players, created by a yearly auto-save.  You and the other players could then populate a world with individual concurrent fortresses, which would each be treated exactly like NPC fortresses.

Everything else would be just... painful to implement.  If you want some idea of how awful a roguelike multiplayer game can be, go find the online Angband and see how long it takes you before you give up in frustration. This Spore-like model is better, where there's no real interaction between players except what happens with their creations. And yes, just like Spore, if you invade and destroy another player's fortress during your playtime, it's not going to matter to that other player because in *his* game he blew up *your* fort.

tl;dr: Offload DF-mode regions to separate save files for inserting into a community world.

[Cthulhu]

I just looked up Angband, it actually looks kind of cool, what's wrong with it?

[Jayfrin]

I said i didnt want it inplemented not sayign it sohuld be not sayign itd be good im jsut throwing it out there for discussion

[Jayfrin]

look into the game Spore and how it multiplays itd be intreesting t osee DF in that way but ANYWAYS i im NOT saying it SHOULD be done

[Flok Speargrabber]

You can click the 'edit' button so you don't have to doublepost.

Also, this game isn't Spore.

[Draco18s]

quote:Originally posted by Muffles:
<STRONG>I just looked up Angband, it actually looks kind of cool, what's wrong with it?</STRONG>

Not Angband.  MAngband (Multi-player Angband). http://www.thangorodrim.net/mangband.html

[Cthulhu]

Well what's wrong with MAngband?

And Jayfrin, you're so defensive, there's nothing wrong with desiring something, you don't have to cover for yourself.

[Lord Licorice]

quote:Originally posted by Muffles:
<STRONG>Well what's wrong with MAngband?</STRONG>

A roguelike that you cannot pause under any circumstances is rather difficult to play, let alone enjoy.  Even such basic acts as casting a spell or shooting an arrow require reflexes and accuracy best reserved for Counter-Strike.  Cool idea, unfortunate execution... mostly because the idea is only cool in theory, but just isn't feasible in practice.

[gurra_geban]

i must say i would love ANY online version of DF...
i mean, look at the possibilities, not the problems

i think it would be cool if we just could trade and visit other forts in adventure. we could all play for as long as we wanted, and if you played more your fortress would probably be cooler than others, but since the game isnt so competetive, thats not a problem. maybe we could have a system for invading others as well, but with some sort of trial time period of protection when you start up.
adventurers could visit your fort even when you were offline, but then your dwarves would just be standing still. when both adventurer and fort player would be online they could chat and the fort player could perhaps give the adventurer a quest ("I want 5 giant tiger pets, go tame some for me on the tropical side of this realm. ok, ok. you can have some adamant weapons then, but only after ok")
it would NEVER be perfect because ppl just cant devote their lives entirely to a game (well maybe koreans). still i think it all would be worth it, as long as players would have oversight with the world being slightly unrealistic, and messages like "Torak hasn't been online for 5 days now, cancel the invasion force? Y/N".

This suggestion has a whole heap of epic whup-ass. Either way, it's nice to imagine DF as a multiplayer game, because it would be the summit of all awesomeness

EDIT:

quote: i im NOT saying it SHOULD be done

yes jayfrin, it SHOULD be done ^^

[ February 25, 2008: Message edited by: gurra_geban ]