Official TES MultiplayerCo-op Thread

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 12:39 am

Official Multiplayer Thread



The issue of multiplayer has been a hot one on the forums since they were created. It tends to draw a lot of frustration and, unfortunately, flaming. In an effort to help keep things civil on the forums, we have decided to restrict the discussion of multiplayer (or topics pertaining to multiplayer) in the Elder Scrolls section to this one thread. When this thread hits 200 posts, it will be locked and a new thread opened to continue the discussion. Any new multiplayer threads created in this forum, or old multiplayer threads brought back to the top, will be locked and directed here - this includes polls!

A few reminders:

  • All of the forum rules still apply; flaming will not be tolerated, nor will insults directed toward specific users. This does not mean that you have to agree with everyone's opinion, but you must still respect them and their opinions enough to respond civilly.
  • Multiplayer comes in many shapes and sizes: MMORPGs, arena-style combat, cooperative, etc. and it can be very helpful to be specific if you do not intend to discuss multiplayer simply in abstract terms. This obviously isn't a requirement; it is simply a suggestion to help limit confusion and misunderstanding.
  • If someone does post a multiplayer thread in TES General or elsewhere, simply direct them here and report the thread to the moderators. And please, do this civilly, yelling and insulting people (especially new users) because they do not know about this thread serves no constructive purpose, and will likely result in a warning.
  • The moderators are not privy to information that hasn't been released to the public.
Also, please realize that adding multiplayer to Skyrim at this time is simply not feasible. Skyrim has been streamlined for single-player and adding multiplayer would require re-writing large portions of the engine. The devs would much rather spend their time and energy expanding on what they already have, a great single-player RPG, rather than re-doing what they've already finished.

So please, no requests to have multiplayer added with an expansion. Or at least if you're going to discuss this realize that it is not an option.

Finally, multiplayer code requires a ton of effort. For example, it took two people several months to add multiplayer to Soldier of Fortune 2, a game made with an engine specifically designed for multiplayer (Quake 3). Many people seem to feel that a developer can purchase some network code and slap it on with a week's worth of work, but this just isn't the case.



http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1239188-official-tes-multiplayerco-op-thread/
User avatar
ImmaTakeYour
 
Posts: 3383
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:45 pm

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 10:17 am

Some random ideas:

Flag quests with “multi” or “single” tags so while in multi-player mode, certain quests will not be available or cannot be advanced or completed until you leave multiplayer mode. (Mostly for main quest related stuff, for the sake of lore.)

Re-code the difficulty slider to dynamically adjust to a multimode. Scale difficulty higher based on an algorithm yielding an appropriate equivalent based on the number of people in your current multiplayer party. Allow all members to agree on a shared difficulty level prior to entering the world.

DLC multiplayer-specific “instanced” dungeons, quest campaigns, and associated factions/lore. Specific “join points” that allow you to activate an object to enter a “lobby” or waiting mode. Web app allows you to check if your “friends” are online. (Could use Steam user accounts…) *


How to handle mods:

Since Steam is going to be keeping track of mod status anyway, might as well incorporate a system to check for mods that both/all users do or do not presently have, or that all have but not at the same version.

The way I envision this is a combination of how Wrye Bain handles mod installers, combined with a series of dynamically populated lists with different functions, and the core idea that you can have numerous profiles for combinations of mods specific to the public "room" you join automatically enabled/installed or disabled/uninstalled when you join.

Play single player, have a default mod profile enabled/installed. Join a specific configured "room," automatically install/enable that content. Join another room configured differently, automatically synch that content. Unique mod profiles are stored in sub-folders on each user's game install, in folders named for the rooms who's mod configuration they represent.

All users looking to group up would have to join a specific “room” off the lobby. Anyone can start a “room” and send the name or an invite to their friends. Once all have joined the room (everyone has clicked the “ready” button), the system then begins evaluation of a database “frame” queried from each member, which essentially contains information about any mods each have installed which contain references or ID’s that all will need to have available to function properly in that room. Rooms start at vanilla then build as each member uses the below elaborated "lists" to bring them to the same version then "verify" them for their profile in that room. When all members in the room have verified a mod, it is set as enabled by default for that room.

Then the lists that are populated…

Each user will see several lists dynamically populated based on their team members' and the room's mod status. (Could be minimized with creative color coding.) First, a version mismatch list. This populates when all users have a certain mod, but different members are at different version levels. Anyone not at the latest version will receive a link to update or disable here. If the mod is already "verified" for the room it will be in red, otherwise, orange.

A second list will populate for each user containing necessary mods (mods with dependent content/ID’s) that other members have that they do not. Again, they will have the option to either install or disable these for the current room. All mods selected and installed in this way will be specific to this room. Each user may only have a certain number of “rooms” active under their name (to cut down on the server space required.

The key idea here is that mods can be installed/uninstalled enabled/disabled dynamically. You can keep a “profile” of mod selections to enable/install in single player mode, have that dynamically switch to a certain “room” profile (I think other applications call these “shards” or “rings” but w/e). Also, rooms would have an "open" mode, where group mods are actively evaluated, and a "locked" mode where only requirements to install mods already "verified" for that room, or disable ones that are not, will be presented. The room moderator gets to decide when to put the room in learning mode.


Multiplayer lore:

* Possible scenarios for multiplayer-specific content could involve a larger arching story of the Psijic order being interested in the “Dragonborn” bloodlines, working to evolve this expression in an alternate dimension of Tamriel, where time is a variable.

Much like Chrono Trigger, having multiple “eras” or instances of the same locations or content at different stages of the lore, tying together potentially actions taken in a larger causality, with the possibility that actions taken in certain multi-mode-only "dimensions" can impact the world even when returning to single mode.

This opens up the potential for a system of accomplishments, as "epic" adventures in a party through time could effect more grandiose changes on the single player experience for those characters! Same goes for quest content. Certain accomplishments in more difficult multi-player campaigns will have the potential to unlock certain questlines in single player mode that would not otherwise be available, and certain NPC's having dialogue options enabled they otherwise wouldn't have.

The idea of the ascended Ancients in the Stargate Universe could prove a fruitful concept to explore, as well as a possible alternate explanation for the “disappearance” of the Dwemer and what Lorkhan’s heart REALLY was.
User avatar
Donald Richards
 
Posts: 3378
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 3:59 am

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 12:32 pm

This would be really, really sick, and this could be accomplished in more then just a couple ways.

Perhaps introducing a free roam capability? Where either both characters must stay in the vicinity of one another, (just in case the game itself couldn't handle two areas of the world being generated at the exact same time, or loading at the exact same time.)
)
Or you could have it completely wide open, and both players could be in different locations of Skyrim at any time, and have the game load two seporate worlds. This could be a free roam option, where either both of the characters would have to activate a quest or any quest of their choice, or the second player could be much like a follower or a hired gun (arrow shooter/bandit kinda deal), which they wouldn't have to activate any quest and would be there just to fight and assist in anyway the main individual, or fool around, (Such a way was used similar to the game Saints-Row 2, where the character wouldn't be shown in any cut scenes, and was just another goon, so to say?)

Or even another way which would be really cool to use, is sorta like a mixture between Oblivions Arena area, crossed with Black-ops Nazi Zombies, or gears of war's Horde, in which, two players would be tossed into a Gladiators arena, with no items at all, and would have survive waves of characters.
Enemies like bandits, wolves and what have you. The two players would start with nothing, and could Collect items from fallen creatures and enemies, or would earn gold, or credits which they could use in between waves, to buy weapons and use the arenas armoury at their disposal, such as buying iron ingots and then creating weapons or upgrading armours, and maybe eventually been able to make potions and poisons, or enchanting weapons.


There are tons of ways to make a multiplayer realistic in Skyrim, or rather a Co-op mode in which to play in. People might say however, that it would take away from what Skyrim was originally founded on, a single player Rpg. This isn't all that true, it would still be a solid Rpg, but with the 'Option' of having a friend tackle dragons and explore strange caves and cities. But thats just my opinion, and really it doesn't matter to most haha.
User avatar
W E I R D
 
Posts: 3496
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 10:08 am

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 7:19 am

Perhaps introducing a free roam capability? Where either both characters must stay in the vicinity of one another, (just in case the game itself couldn't handle two areas of the world being generated at the exact same time, or loading at the exact same time.)

With the dynamic mod list loading/unloading, the rest shouldn't be too difficult. The game already has a certain “domain” of things actually active in the world. NPC’s and such outside the loaded cell/content don’t process in single player mode, so it would be as simple as keeping a “ping” going between members in the “instance” to basically check their distance from each other and if they were in the same cell ID.

If they were, THEN updates would sync the ID state of content either was interacting with in realtime. (As an aside, there are already “someone is already using that” type checks in the single player game, so some tweaks to that, i.e. if someone is already grabbing something, should be an easy enough addition.)

Otherwise, any changes made by any team member in that room would be stored in a floating “change cache” that would function as a mod to the "room" for parsing on cell loads and get synched from the server to all members the next time any of the group encountered that content (or when there were available threads/cycles.)

The traffic is just plain text file data so no major bandwidth requirement for a company like Bethesda, and no significant performance hit just changing positional data, stats, and container contents. Some other basic checks like synching weather, timescale, and the like would also have virtually no performance impact.

Anything changed by a player in multi-mode would get flagged for sync to the room they were signed in to. Rooms would have limits to the number who could use it at once, but again, I believe that number would be more arbitrary than based on any real performance hit if handled this way. Even if a player went offline before another member encountered what they changed, the room would keep the flags of things being changed by them while in multimode in virtual realtime. Sort of like how your character's position and status in an MMO is maintained on the server even if you lose your net connection.

Anything they had touched when they go offline has been continually synched to the server for that room as a dynamically loaded “mod” in itself while they were playing. This would also allow tracking statistics within the room of who changed how much of what, as each "contributor" to the room would have their own subfolder of "mod" data maintained as historical record even after it was synched.

So, you could literally “go your separate ways” within a room, then go offline, then later come back and encounter things that others of your companions changed or interacted with or “set up” in the world, whether they are logged on when you actually encounter it or not. Also, moderators of the room could choose to initiate a reset to baseline for their rooms, essentially the equivalent of starting a new save or character in single mode, resetting everything back to vanilla and the base mod profile for that room. Any other members who subsequently logged in would have their base character values copied to a new "room save" profile to reflect this.

There would be separate save formats of course for multi vs. single player, with the ability to import basic character appearance back and forth manually. Saves would be specific to rooms. Setting up a save for a room would be a lot like copying a character to a test realm, only since the room starts from scratch and builds, you would only import the basics (facegen, race data, etc.)

Multi mode content which had the sort of “arcing” causality as I touched on in my previous post, would receive a special flag to separate it from the rest of that user’s running “room profile,” and that specific content would be, unlike other content, available to load as a standalone mod in single player mode, to enable that “unlocked” aspect of the vanilla game.

This could be subtle or grandiose depending on how motivated Beth feels to go off with creating it. ;)

I hear a lot of people say this would be against the spirit of TES, but I honestly don’t see it that way. TES has always been about creating worlds, and specifically, building on experiences of the community’s creative vision to expand those worlds. Something like this wouldn’t be against TES, it would be a HUGE step forward in what TES at its heart TRULY represents: The dynamic and interactive creation and exploration of virtual worlds, and new forms of human expression, creation, and communication.

I believe communication is at the heart of what the modding community represents. The fear, of course, is that it wouldn’t live up to expectations. But then there will always be those who automatically reject something outside of their known experience. ;)

As Captain Picard once said, “I don’t see why you have to lose anything, just by adding a convenience.” This would add more than a convenience, it brings a whole new dimension of role playing possibilities to the table. I think it would be an AWESOME idea.

Oh, and speaking of communication, some form of console-based (or equivalent) chat functionality within TES would REALLY help me get that Morrowind book-reading dialogue mojo back on! Something about voice chat was always a little immersion breaking for me when playing RP.

I’d say 70% of my time spent in MMO’s was either parked in trade chat or in one of the global channels. But if you’re gonna do that, make sure you snag the open source spellcheck-as-you-go functionality to go with it!

*sigh*

Wish my programming skills were a little more well-rounded. Somehow coding database apps in Perl with basic networking conceptual knowledge just doesn't seem like the sort of help they'd need on a project like this. I am pretty good with a flow chart though, and brainstorming is one of my specialties, so I'm happy to offer some ideas, FWIW. =)
User avatar
Tiff Clark
 
Posts: 3297
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 2:23 am

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 2:06 pm

Whilst I wouldn't like an MMORPG experience akin to WoW, adding four player or even just two player co-operative play like in Dead Island would be a nice touch personally. However, I doubt that this will ever happen.
User avatar
Melissa De Thomasis
 
Posts: 3412
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:52 pm

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 11:46 am

A TES MMO = Vanguard...
User avatar
Amanda savory
 
Posts: 3332
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 10:37 am

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 5:02 am

Whilst I wouldn't like an MMORPG experience akin to WoW, adding four player or even just two player co-operative play like in Dead Island would be a nice touch personally. However, I doubt that this will ever happen.

The option for limited co-op is, in my mind, the only appropriate way to incorporate multiplay into TES games.

Even then, it would have to be severely limited in how it is done. By that, i mean, it would have to keep with the theme of TES games.

The pervading theme is that there are heroes. Singular individuals who work behind the general stage of history, bringing about radical change and regularly changing the world. How they change the world is really an illusion fo choice, since theres really only ever one outcome. You couldn't NOT stop Dagoth Ur. You couldn't let Dagon ransak Nirn. How you go about stopping things is secondary to the fact that you do.

As such, the only co-op system i could see would be similar to Fable. That is, the second/thrid/fourth player(s) are little more than companions. More intelegent, of course, but all secondary to the core figure of the story. They are bound by his/her moral choices and overall direction, and act more as extra swords than driving character elements. This, of course, isn't particularly attractive if your not the focus of the story.

If individual personality and a true party dynamic were to be implemented, it would have to be done in such a way that said Companions are there anyway, even without someone playing them. As the characters in TES games become historic figures, history remembering that 4 heroes brought down the Ascendant Sload God-King when you remeber doing it yourself kinda kills the cohesive nature of the games.

And MMO, in my mind, is right out. I have yet to play SWtOR yet, but the general dynamic of MMO's is one of ambiguity and minimal individual acomplishment. When you have a story driven MMO, and someone needs to get a 'boss kill' they are almost exclusively done by non-PC's. Take WoW for instance. With the possible exception of Nefarion, not a single lore-related figure has been put down by PC's. Arthas, C'thun, Yogg'Saron, Illidan, Deathwing, Ragnaros. Everyones been taken out by in-universe heroes such as Thrall, Garrosh, Tyrion, Varrian etc. Well, in TES games, you ARE one of those heroic figures, and as such the ability to act as a driving story character is highly diminished by the MMO dynamic.
User avatar
Janeth Valenzuela Castelo
 
Posts: 3411
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 3:03 am

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 2:16 am

I really don't understand about the reactions people get when a co-op mode has been suggested , all of them claim that there would have to be MAJOR time spent on implanting a co-op mode into the game and that this would ruin the lore and gameplay since less time will be spent on them.

Most of the people who say this are just too ignorant or they just don't want to hear us out, they just want their own ideas to be forced. Adding a co-op type of style would not ruin or harm this game because implanting a co-op would not take that much time and it certainly would not take the fun out of the game play ( there are many people who support the idea, so if you don't like it you wont be playing co-op, just dont flame the people who like it) because having a friend instead of a follower that gets infront of you when you try to attack and disappears when you run a little bit more fun.

When it comes to the story line there are many things that can be done about it, if there must be ONE hero to save the world then yes, your friend could be a companion that does not get the advantages of some quests but rather a helper that is by your side.

But as we see in Skyrim your not the only one who saves the world, all of the heroes in Sovngarde help you against Alduin so i can't see how a sidekick can hurt in this game, it would add a whole new level of excitement into it.

Though there should be a limit of distance which you and your partner should be able to go apart from, lets say you can't go more then 50 metres apart from each other. When it comes to entering load screens (dungeons/caverns etc....) you and your friend need to be 3 metres next to each other for the load screen to initiate.

I don't see why there is a bunch of fuss about co-op ruining the game, people need to open their eyes.
User avatar
Lucie H
 
Posts: 3276
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 11:46 pm

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 3:50 pm



Finally, multiplayer code requires a ton of effort. For example, it took two people several months to add multiplayer to Soldier of Fortune 2, a game made with an engine specifically designed for multiplayer (Quake 3). Many people seem to feel that a developer can purchase some network code and slap it on with a week's worth of work, but this just isn't the case.



http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1239188-official-tes-multiplayerco-op-thread/



yupp things that sems simple in theory aint always that easy to implent. it needs masive coding to do
User avatar
Claire Jackson
 
Posts: 3422
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:38 pm

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 8:59 am

to get the MP to work in game to be natural part it have to be a hub in form off a town ir some cind off instans you enter and se youre fendsand work fron ther.

and no way that uou hawe to do MP stuffs to unlock singelplay stuffs,
User avatar
naome duncan
 
Posts: 3459
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:36 am

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 12:29 pm

yes offcorse i doen ever ever wana se a WOW style MMO made ever again in any game world .....

a muly play in fallout and TES hawe to be far away from the "WOW- lawbook- standard" as it is to day and and not an BF3 shoota game.

it hawe to be a nich that fits hove the game is to day
User avatar
Sierra Ritsuka
 
Posts: 3506
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:56 am

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 7:43 am

If they can get the first person real-time gameplay of Elder Scrolls into an MMO, be my guest. Otherwise, it's just going to be another boring WOWfest.
User avatar
Jessica White
 
Posts: 3419
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 5:03 am

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 12:11 am

If they can get the first person real-time gameplay of Elder Scrolls into an MMO, be my guest. Otherwise, it's just going to be another boring WOWfest.

Agreed, it's been done to some degree in some lesser known MMOs like Mortal Online and Darkfall (the latter of which is basically Morrowind online with more dynamic content). Mortal Online's combat is tough though, first-person melee with a lots of options and very similar to Mount-and-Blade. It would be possible but it inherently makes the game very "hardcoe" especially if open-PVP and open-Looting is on.
User avatar
Anthony Rand
 
Posts: 3439
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 5:02 am

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 3:07 am

Guys, did you already https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiFiAPOcCig?
I would like to see what those people is able to do when developers tools are released.
User avatar
CRuzIta LUVz grlz
 
Posts: 3388
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 11:44 am

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 11:41 am

a yes nice start
User avatar
Liv Staff
 
Posts: 3473
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 10:51 pm

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 1:11 am

As soon as people start getting closer to a better co-op mod, you can bet the cheap f2p game devs will be all over Skyrim's engine and style. (well to some degree a few already are) Serves Beth right.
User avatar
NIloufar Emporio
 
Posts: 3366
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:18 pm

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 1:57 am

I see Bethesda patching/breaking the ability for this in the future, Wouldn't multiplayer somehow violate TOS rights or something like that? Also, if this was going to be done and Bethesda wanted to do it (which they probably don't) I definitely see this getting broken.
User avatar
Jessica Raven
 
Posts: 3409
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 4:33 am

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 10:55 am

I just hope if multiplayer is done, its done right.

I would not want multiplayer to be the main focus, it just seems it would take away from some of the single player aspects of the game.

The only way i see this as "better", is if multiplayer was limited, and didn't become a huge aspect of the game.
User avatar
Steph
 
Posts: 3469
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2006 7:44 am

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 1:10 pm

Hasnt someone been working on an PC exclusive multiplayer mod for Skyrim already? I believe I saw a post about it a few weeks ago. So far its just a bunch of naked people stiff as a board (as in not visual movent of the arms or legs) walking around and hoping. They have managed to create a chatting system so far. With friends lists and all so uhm yeah...
User avatar
maria Dwyer
 
Posts: 3422
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:24 am

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 4:33 am

Again, I want to stress that multiplayer does not mean MMO. When discussing the negative aspects of multiplayer, don't use WoW, SWTOR etc. as examples. Those are MMOs, and that's not what people are asking for when asking for multiplayer.
User avatar
Lexy Dick
 
Posts: 3459
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:15 pm

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 11:05 am

Again, I want to stress that multiplayer does not mean MMO. When discussing the negative aspects of multiplayer, don't use WoW, SWTOR etc. as examples. Those are MMOs, and that's not what people are asking for when asking for multiplayer.

yes and even if after fallout online come and a mmo in TES world will come it must be no wear close to the to day wow way off mmo
User avatar
Ria dell
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 4:03 pm

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 2:25 pm

As for me, I want a multiplayer were the maps and locations are loaded without quests and all NPCs are killable. Limited to four player private lobbies. The equipment each player has is loaded from their singleplayer save of choice. The players then explore the world, kill dragons, terrorize cities, or fight each other. Nothing in the multiplayer world is saved so players can't boost skills or easily collect rarities for their singleplayer saves. Their singleplayer saves won't be affected at all.

Super simple, endlessly fun.

EDIT: Think of the way that Borderlands works online, but without matchmaking or quests. Although, multiplayer only quests would be fun.
User avatar
Nicholas
 
Posts: 3454
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 12:05 am

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 8:06 am

just make it like blizzard does have both have a single player option and a multiplayer option but to say its wrong or bad or shouldnt be done is just ignorant and rude . I myself would love co-op/multiplayer the idea of having a smart companion that you can tell good tactics and such to and they could scale enemies to be harder where 2 people or more is needed
User avatar
Sammygirl500
 
Posts: 3511
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 4:46 pm

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 7:52 am

Indeed, adding multiplayer after the release of the game its not an option. However the next game released by Bethesda (because every Bethesda game is awesome) could add a coperative option like Neverwinter Nights (I, personally had a lot of fun playing with a friend doing the campign than playing by myself). Another multiplayer style does not seems likely for this kind of rpg.
User avatar
Stephanie Valentine
 
Posts: 3281
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 2:09 pm

Post » Thu May 03, 2012 1:06 pm

Id be okay with Co-Op but any kid of PvP would be horrible I think. I really dont want skills to be nerfed and buffed because sometime I like the ability to be a god sometimes.
I also think the time Beth would have to invest would make the rest of the game lacking in some areas. Single player has its own problems, why add multiplayer to make it worse?
User avatar
Daniel Brown
 
Posts: 3463
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 11:21 am

Next

Return to The Elder Scrolls Series Discussion