is MP in SE even possible?

so, what you people think? is MP even fixable in SE? I know you can play with 2, maybe 4 players, but you have to limit some stuff. but still, something will make you rage soon or later.

For me it seems that this engine just can't work in MP with all the data it have to send to every client, voxel changes, physics, items, players position, and everything. I hope Keen prove me wrong.
You have games like ArmA 3 for example, it was very laggy, and had a lot of desync in the Alpha stage, and after 3-4 years of patches it works in a decent state now. And it is quite impressive, we use to play coop with 30-40 people in a 20x20 km map, with a few squads of 10 soldiers doing stuff in different parts of the map. Of course, this are different games, but don't even think ArmA doesn't have complex physics calculations, like, every single bullet trajectory, bullet speed, ricochet, armor penetration, wind deflection, ballistic, explosion shrapnel, sound speed, 100+ AI, Radio communication with hundreds of channels, and so on. although, ArmA 1 desync was horrible in MP, ArmA 2 desync was also awful.

I see a lot of progress in MP, but at the cost of nerfing a lot of cool physics and effects, like, no more floating ore when mining, no more floating items with collision mesh, no more infinite spinning movement for lose parts in space, no more towing large grid with small grid ship physics, and so on. I mean, this are things I don't really miss, but they was little details that always loved in this game.
Also, SE have "simple" things that always impresses me, but maybe for some people are just insignificant, or can't see how impressive they are, like walking on a moving ship, it was almost impossible in MP a few years ago, but now it just work. or Landing a small ship on a moving large ship without it exploding, melting or start to spin and shake violently when you lock the landing gears, or connector, and more crazy things I don't want to put here now coz TL;DR

 

When they improve the code to handle with multi-thread (Specially the multiplayer dedicated servers) maybe we can play MP widouth issues.

Right now i'ts a shame have 12 cores running idle just because the code don't handle it

 

Sorry to disappoint but the code is already significantly multithreaded. They've even enabled Havok's multithreading for the physics. Problem is, while multithreading helps, it's not a silver bullet. Besides, you can't just dump anything in a thread. Everything needs to work together, and the more you split it apart in threads the harder it gets to control, leading to bugs that are very difficult and frustrating to track.

 

WOW, so this is even worse...
I've read tons of topics when people say that maybe multithread can save the multiplayer, so, if even with Multithread the dedicated servers have this poors results i don't know what they can do about it.

 

My opinion: the generation of new and recurring bugs pushes any kind of overhaul for multiplayer further and further away. The game is rapidly getting stale as there seems to be no progress in multiplayer and actual game play. Graphic tweaking (arguably making things look much WORSE) doesn't make the game better. Eye candy is just candy when we're looking for an entire meal.

 

People don't realize just what kind of a task that is. SE is just too dynamic, too complex and there's hardly any cheats and shortcuts available, cheats and shortcuts that most other games can and do use successfully, because there's hardly any assumptions that can be made about the world. I will be very happy if they can manage to squeeze functional 25 player servers out, assuming reasonable players that don't go overboard with their builds and good server hardware and not those poor virtual servers people usually rent, and assuming that they have someone at Keen who really knows what they're doing. If they're superhuman they might be able to reach 50 but I can't get myself to actually believe that.

 

100% agreed!

 

The number of players on a server is arbitrary. 50 players in a world where there's no real gameplay is just more of the same. SE is a game. But that aspect of it seems to get pushed back further and further. What makes it fun? What makes it enjoyable to play? How will players interact with each other for beneficial purposes (mutual, parasitic, etc.)? How will players interact with the gameworld? What kind of organic strategies will they use to compete other players? That's a complete no-go at this point.

The number of simultaneous players means jack-squat if all they are doing is just coexisting in the same virtual world. I admit that in a sandbox world, this kind of direction is difficult. But it has to be done if the game is going to be something more than a bunch of Space Legos.

 

I agree completely.

People really don't understand how simplistic games like Planetside, Battlefield, ARMA, PUBG are in terms of how they track and convey information compared to what SE does.

SE is really a victim of it's own success in terms of the degree of simulation. But its basically too much simulation for a real MP game.

Also reinforces the need for decent PVE to flesh out the experience.

 

Already dealt with that point - and the gameplay bit is not under discussion here, it's the multiplayer capability. The gameplay bit is obvious.

 

On the topic of recurring bugs, I think they should reel back the weekly updates to bi-weekly at least. At this point in development they seem to be fixing things which the next major undoes because of the shear amount of code changes it tends to brings along with it. Maybe that's down to poor source control. Maybe not. Either way the result is the same. They keep fixing many of the same bugs over the course of weeks and months.

They could probably save some work by batching the fixes into less-frequent but bigger minor patches. Or perhaps do what Klei do with their games. Release whatever is ready every 6 weeks and give us a preview at least a week before release. Obviously, 6 weeks may not work for Keen, but you get the idea.

Other than that, I agree 100% on gameplay. I really do hope they still have the survival overhaul in the pipe. If not..... management needs a good dose of neurons.

 

How well the server engine handles multiple clients is MOOT unless there's a reason to HAVE 20-50 players on one server. This aircraft can hold 400 passengers... but we didn't put in any seats, bathrooms, or heating systems. But it can hold 400 people!

How can you even discuss a target number without dealing with game play first?

Multiplayer is pretty simple. You spawn, you grind resources, you run out of motive and reasons to build things in a couple of days... get bored... the end. There's no need or advantage to player interactions. Players simply exist in the same game world and that's about the beginning and the end of it. The most exciting part of multiplayer is working around the bugs, currently.

 

Not relevant to this discussion. We already know there's a survival update inbound at some point in the future, pointless to argue this part of it until we see what that update means. Arguing which should be first is equally pointless since there would be as loud voices on one side as the other - as there has been from the beginning.

 

The only sustained motivation in the MP context is blowing up each other's stuff. Kinda a fun motivation but the overal meta makes a pretty lackluster experience.

 

Exactly. Besides trolling each other... there is no point. People add tons of mods in order to get some semblance of game play. However, those mods are not optimized. The more complex mods typically break every few days due to changes. Keen forgot that SE is supposed to be a game that people will want to play and look forward to playing in respect to multiplayer. Player count means nothing in comparison.

 

I have an very nice balanced/stable(with a big book of rules/hints..) hardcore (nothing is free - all hard work .. and many "OMG" ...) Survival server where i would like to have more player. but in the german comunity the most player where i get are not realy hardcore ... more "weicheier" ........... i would be happy to get more andvanced and more survival liking player on my server ... but its look like the most players on SE only like to crush others, build stuff in gigantic sizes and dont like to care over resouces and how to get it .... at best he play "Survival Light" to say ".. hey, i have this build, IN survival mode ... cough,cough..."
So multiplayer IS possible (even with 10 player) - but in the actual state of SE, you musst doing this SELF (set up and manage an server with stuff to explore/danger/challenges) and get an descent player base .....

Regards

 

Thats a no way to play a server like this, specially today while the game are to unstable and with a HUGE buglist.
The point is: the game is not finished yet, why penalize your players with a slow-progression playing something that can disaper from nothing anytime? (Crashed server files for exemple)
Or imagine they launch an update that make your save file useless, so your players lose all their "hard work" to nothing.

Im thinking about all the another people say about the MP meta in SE and i have a question: I'ts not the same thing that is in another games?

Connan exiles i'ts not about destruct your enemies?
Empyreon too, i'ts not about build things to destroy others?
Even ELITE DANGEROUS - that have exploration and another sort of things - in the end i'ts not about destruct anothers?

 

@jonesskill
Sorry - but i have to respectfull dissagree - WE play an server "like this" today and in the past 3 years ....
It is on "you" to set up and manage an server to run stable and with "managable" bugs (rules to avaid the know "problems" ...)
I have NEVER crashed server files (maybe you have the wrong/outdated mods ..) - and we play still on 1.185 and move to 1.186 ONLY if he relase 1.187 (so no altering to 1.186 more ..) and 1.186 runs nice .. so all you described problems have the root on "your" end ..... not every "Player" is an server administrator .....................................................

Regards

 

Full 1X survival with pirates on is actually pretty easy and quick to expand if you engage in piracy. Once you capture a couple of ships you've basically got infinite resources before you know it. If you play coop with some seasoned players you can burn through the game in almost no time and find yourself with a ton of resource and nothing to do.

That's the problem with SE multiplayer. There is absolutely nothing to really do except fight each other and fighting isn't that great because of the way combat works and the overall game mechanics work.

 

Look at my post : https://forums.keenswh.com/threads/...e-future-of-survival.7399776/#post-1287087602
If you doing it "right" then pirates not an "cheap" resource source anymore - as i have said - "you" musst doing it self (setting up the server...)

regards

 

This begs the question then... why can the player and mod base come up with some reasonable challenges for players in multiplayer while the people who are being paid to manage this are not?

 

Obviously, multiplayer in SE is possible, since people do it. The trouble is, it's an underdeveloped aspect of SE. The bigger trouble is, there are a lot of underdeveloped aspects to SE. And, it's not entirely clear which of them Keen plans to develop further, or how much, and what the tradeoffs might be.

 

This is more or less right .... (both posts..)
I spend month in fine tuning the survival aspect - correct the many vanilla survival errors - correct and rebalance many mods (musst first teach me to the modding and scripting - good i mod games from Homeworld 1 times ....) .... write rules to avoid most times problems with the "all know-all time" problems rotors/pistons/wheels ....and it is still partly a mess with suddenly changes in the "patches" and Hotfixes ... (not to say the extra work to hold all mods up-to-date and consistent ..)
I think the game gameplay is aiming for simply causal enginerring players, where like to build "fast" and crush fast , or build gigantic "cool" things ....
The player base where like to build more realistic and play survival more like "real" survival is very tiny ...

Regards

 

It should not be down to the community to create the core gameplay mechanics through mods or whatever, it should be the sole focus of the game. If you guys feel that this game is lacking the mechanics to keep you entertained, then I actually have to agree. I spend most of my time in creative mode because the survival part doesn't actually feel like a survival game - there's nothing really to keep me engaged as a player and coming back.

In preparation for my next paragraph, I just want to say, I completely acknowledge this game is still in a development state. I have clocked 1100 hours of gameplay since SE was released through early access and I pretty much screamed with joy when they announced they would be adding multiplayer. However, since MP and planets, this game has taken a near vertical nosedive, in my honest opinion I feel like this game has had soo many unfinished concepts bolted on that make the game feel like it's still in it's concept phase. There are also in game items which I feel should have gotten more time and effort than they currently have had - for instance pistons and rotors have had rather nasty workarounds rather than fixes to their mechanics, the same could probably be said for wheels too. The block limit issue really drove me nuts, and the fact that I can't have more than 3 large red ships in game before it whinges at me for having "too many blocks in game" is just ridiculous. I also feel that the visual update was more of a headache for the entire player base than anything else, AAA graphics does not make a game fun to play, the gameplay makes the game fun to play. I honestly cannot fathom the course in which keen is taking on this, however I can tell you that if they do not start listening to their player base - they'll lose them.

 

Generally I agree with most of your statements here. Except one. Honestly, if you don't understand the reasoning for the "too many blocks" issue you should not be let anywhere near a multiplayer server, because you'd be the opposite of those I spoke of earlier, the "reasonable players that don't go overboard with their builds". You need to realize just how huge this game is, complexity wise, in comparison to most other multiplayer games out there. How much goes on for each player at any one time. Just by its very nature of this kind of fully open, fully destructible construction game where everything is dynamic and the play area is a whopping 6.6 AU in... I forget if it was diameter or radius. Not that this play area actually works right at the moment (read: unfinished / broken concept), but still. Making big builds in single player, knock yourself out. Build up to Havok's limits (which is beyond Keen's control by the way). In multiplayer, it doesn't matter how good Keens devs are, you can never expect to build gargantuans there and not feel the repercussions. It's simply not realistic.

 

My issue is that the devs already knew the hard limits, then they added multiplayer and then they made the world as big as it possibly could ever be - if I'm correct in saying, the overhead alone in physics calculations should have set off at least one light bulb for a map that size with lots of blocks and potentially players, especially by the point they released the larger map because the screenshots people had been posting featured some rather large ass ships. In that regard, why should I not be let near a multiplayer server I mean I'm playing the game as it was intended right or am I wrong? We never knew about this block limit beforehand and we had no reason to - if we had, this would be a completely different conversation. It only cropped up as an issue due to performance-related problems created by, what in my mind are, half-baked feature releases.

 

I worry that Keen drew the wrong lesson from the planets expansion.

Everyone points out that Space Engineers has great potential. But welcome to Existentialism 101: freedom causes anxiety, because to choose one thing, means to reject something else. You can't realize all potentiality, and you can't avoid choosing. Eventually, refusing to choose means choosing nothing.

 

I may be going out on a limb here, but didn't DayZ start out as an Arma3 mod? And Arma3 has come into its own as well. There are multiple mods that play like a whole other game than the core as well. This may not be an optimal path, but it's there.

 

Minecraft is another exemple.
But, we need a stable base (Server) to start modding and add features,
Right now servers barely handle with the game core features, imagine then add a mod like a "Faction Wars";
Too poor, we need to pray to keen hire some people really good in multiplayer so maybe we have a base to work with.

 

I am confident servers will become more stable, either by coding improvements or, eventually, hardware improvements. Technology is ever improving.