I'm tired of being alone.

[ManicManiac]

22 hours ago, theisaactrain said:

Split screen multiplayer..?

Still the same problem with the "time compression" mechanics (as I described in my previous post).  Specifically both players would still need to be synchronized with respect to the time of day (this is where the time compression becomes a problem).

I will leave a reference to my previous comments further explaining what I'm very briefly summarizing/reiterating.

Multi-player is just kind of a no-go, because the use of time compression is built into the foundations of the game.
 

 

 

On 2/16/2020 at 10:03 AM, ManicManiac said:

The idea has certainly been proposed and discussed very often and in a variety of ways... however, almost none of them never really consider what I think is the main problem.

The mechanics of this game in particular make Coop/Multiplayer kind of a "no go."  Simply put... the thing that would be the biggest challenge is the fact that there are many mechanics (that help form the foundation of the game play) that utilize "time compression."  When you have situations that mess with "time" it becomes a problem with multiple players interacting in the same space.

For example... if you have two players and one is out chopping wood (that compresses 45 min - 1 hour of time) then the other player either has to also accelerate or they get "out of sync" so to speak.

If one is spending 5 hours fishing (that is normally compressed), what happens then?  Does the fishing then go in real time... does the other person suddenly "pause" while time speeds up?

In other words, because this game is incorporating mechanics that compress time (sleeping, "passing time"/"wait 'till ready", harvesting, fishing, breaking things down, using the forge, crafting, milling, and so on) then you can't really have two or more players interacting and still keep them synchronized in terms of the time of day... you'd have to force everything to happen in "normal game time" - which for some long tasks, I think, would really suck.

I hope my examples help to illustrate why I don't think coop/multiplayer would work in this game just from the standpoint of fundamental mechanics.

 

Edited February 10, 2021 by ManicManiac

[Rose of Madmen]

@HINTERLAND

We INSIST!! 

[Pyroxene]

On 2/5/2021 at 8:34 AM, AdamvR said:

Thanks @Pyroxene! This is kind of the direction where I intended to turn the discussion towards...

After giving it some thought myself [I would recommend others as well to do the same before/instead of reacting too quickly] I think I identified a couple of constraints, within which a multiplayer version could actually work* (see note below). I'm listing these as thought-starters or framework for others, rather than ultimate solutions.

Disclosure: In my mind, this is a completely PvE game, as I never play PvP, cannot think with that hat on. Those who do, are welcome to weigh in...

Time: 
Multiplayer games in general usually have a problem pausing the server (as far as I understand), thus the simulation should rather need to run in a constant pace. Time skipping is not entirely unheard of though (i.e., if both (all) players decide to go to sleep, it can happen, but otherwise not really). I believe, time skipping would need to be replaced with some other mechanics for most of the activities that use it now. Likely, a day would be shorter IRL, something one can likely adjust when setting up the game (probably in the range that it currently takes IRL combining the active/skipped times) for a simple sake of argument we could take 24 mins for 24 hours.

Resource Management: 
A key concept of the game that every decision has a cost, and that is what you are weighing constantly. The primary ones with time-skip activities are stamina/calories and risk/danger (to be ambushed by wildlife or weather). I believe these should strictly be maintained in one form or another

Examples:

- wood-cutting, harvesting; these activities should take some, but less time - so you do not have to wait for minutes IRL, only a couple seconds. To keep it balanced, they would likely cost the same (or more) fatigue/calories - thus the amount of breakdown you can do in one day would still be limited to the ~same amount. Less time spent on them however, may reduce the danger component, which could be compensated by such breakdown causing noise, which attracts hostile wildlife similarly to smell, maybe even encouraging them to speed towards you... (and could also repel deer/rabbits - probably even extending the time they need to respawn)
- cooking: would probably be managed similarly as now: you spend real time setting it up, then can go away and do something else until it cooks, and need to come back before it burns. no time skipping here
- reading, mending, simpler crafting (the ones without workbench/forge): these should take some time, IRL, but probably less than now (while costing the same/more in fatigue and calories). Probably not black out the world, but blur it (similarly to the current time skipping), so you can to some extent see ("from your eye's corner") what is happening around, or keep an eye on your fishing line. You can always break these activities with partial advance kept. (maybe with some penalty for not letting them finish in one go)
- fishing: could require more interaction/be a minigame (to be more exciting to spend the time with); or you could do certain activities in parallel (such as read, mend - see above) - risking that you miss on the moment to catch. Another alternative could be to add more hooks on a line, and leave it in for the night (similarly to snare mechanic) which gives you a "random" number of fish the next day.
- rest/recovering fatigue. This is the trickiest probably, and I would likely not completely eliminate the need for actually spending time on it (i.e. please do not add magic potions). I'M not sure I have the best solution here, so curious of others' thoughts. As an example, I'd likely manage it in a combination of two activities: for those situations, when you want to get some extra fatigue back during the day we could perhaps add "power naps", that only take a few seconds, but blacks you out, and while giving you some fatigue back, no additional healing (so you do not rely on them solely). In addition, we may want to keep having to sleep that takes time, on which you will need to coordinate with your buddy, as time only gets sped up, if both (all) of you do that at the same time. (there are such examples in other games). This could be rewarded by additional condition regeneration.
- permadeath: I would keep it. If your buddy dies, you are left alone in that world. full stop. maybe with some possibility to administer the adrenaline shot on each other, when they are in very bad condition/have a couple seconds after they pass out. (maybe do a form of CPR which has a chance to succeed, strongly dependent on fatigue level - which you do lose extremely fast while performing it.)
for thought starters...

Please, share what you think/how you'd do them in your ideal multiplayer TLD.

*for concerns about effort & resources: these are of course absolutely valid. (and yes, I also prefer the current Hinterland team focuses on adding to the current game - although, I'm not sure if you noticed: the game keeps getting bigger and we only had payed for it once - years ago. Perhaps Raph&co also needs to pay rent and such...?). But, there are examples when it could be solved (i.e. Don't Starve had to be completely rewritten from scratch to allow multiplayer, with some concepts addressed entirely differently. Don't Starve Together became and remained a standalone game, yet, some could argue it has even outgrown the original and many ideas from it made back to the single player version). If there is a viable (and exciting) concept about a multiplayer game that takes place in the TLD universe - kickstarter could easily be used to both test the idea for whether there are enough people who would want that happen - and come up with the funds to help make it happen... So, I do not at all see it to be impossible, from this perspective.

Yes, I agree.

You can't rule out that there will be a sequel to the Long Dark that features multiplayer.

Those who doesn't like multiplayer or think it won't work because of time skipping can just ignore the sequel, when and if it comes out. It is as simple as that.