Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Online Multiplayer mode

online network lan multiplayer

  • Please log in to reply
68 replies to this topic

#41
Night Stalker

Night Stalker

    Cynic of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 432 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

 

I know, I do not want a NWN, I only meant persistent worlds. So I asked: Why was not considered?. 
Either way, I do not doubt the final product quality. Just hoping to include that option.

 

 

Pillars of Eternity is supposed to be a modern throwback to the Infinity Engine games. While most of the IE games had a form of Co-op multiplayer, but Obsidian decided that they would only focus on the single-player part games in this outing.

 

I wasn't a fly on the wall of Obsidian's offices, so I cannot say if the idea of persistent worlds ever came up, but as far as I recall, it has never once brought up in any of their official releases or interviews. Perhaps it was brought up, but was nixed before they launched the Kickstarter, since it was not a feature in any of the IE games.

 

Also, the modding support for the game seems that it will be limited to what tools we build ourselves, making it unlikely that we will ever have tools good enough to create the amount of content I imagine is required for a persistent world. Maps are going to be especially hard to create, unless you feel you are able to get by with is already in the game when it ships.


Edited by Night Stalker, 02 August 2014 - 12:51 AM.


#42
Hassat Hunter

Hassat Hunter

    Royal Bug Catcher of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 5992 posts
  • Location:Out there, somewhere...
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

The "persistant world" question makes me wonder...

Did they consider adding a first person mode to it? Did it came up during discussions? What about RTS basebuilding? Nuclear weapons? Platform gameplay?

 

I mean all of that is obviously going to be thought out making a real old-school RPG, right?


  • vv221 likes this

#43
Roby Atadero

Roby Atadero

    Programmer

  • Developers
  • 228 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Proper multiplayer requires quite a bit more money mainly because we would need to bring on network programmers and have a dedicated online QA staff. Also, the total programming dev time would probably increase by around 33% which is quite a bit.


  • Bendu, Bryy, Luridis and 3 others like this

#44
Levok

Levok

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 5 posts
  • Location:Stationed In Germany, US Military
  • Steam:Levok
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

Hello,

 

I think the idea is cool similar to that of Baldurs Gate, however it was fun but could have been better. In later expansions I think it would be cool if there was a designed campaign or story to involve those players as a whole rather than spawn of bhaal being just 1 dude. But hey, either way i wont complain (too much :p). I will be patient and wait for further info.

 

Respectfully,

-Levok 



#45
Kendak

Kendak

    (0) Nub

  • Initiates
  • 1 posts
  • Steam:Kendak

Well ****!

Wow no multiplayer? How to say this sounding as good as possible while not sounding like an ass. I do love a challenge.

I was excited! Now I'm not... the whole thing about BG, IWD, Neverwinter whatever!!
Was that there was an OPTION for it! Would you say that the single player experience was less because of it? Most presumably NO!

One of the more prominant things about those games was that they offered the option to bring a close friend and share an adventure togeather. And if... as said previously in this thread that there are plenty of games for multiplayer. Yes in terms of multiplayer games there are plenty. But in the terms of games such as GB IWD and Neverwinter there is NOT!

I for one cant understand why this isent adressed more, why cant ppl understand that this was one of the reasons these games became such a gem?
Take this away and its another generic single player RPGs. If we instead turn it around... there are plenty of single player games to go around... have fun with those?

I'm deeply dissapointed and any game that tries to come close to those games without multiplayer should stop right there! Dont say your aspiring as much or mention them at all! Not now... not ever! Without actually bringing the option to have a friend tag along.

 

And to be frank... the Kickstarter could be considered a big success compared to alot of kickstarters so adding a goal for multiplayer wouldent have been a big issue if it now was an issue? Because the question about multiplayer has been on the table I assume. To me this sounds more like a lazy option and an easy way out.. omg multiplaya is so hard... (even tho we probably made it with a smaller crew and a smaller budget 10 years ago)



#46
Labadal

Labadal

    Janitor of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 3973 posts
  • Location:Sweden
  • Pillars of Eternity Gold Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

I have played the IE games over and over again but never touched the MP part other than to create a custom party.


  • Quantics likes this

#47
Bryy

Bryy

    Arch-Mage

  • Members.
  • 2748 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Gold Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Proper multiplayer requires quite a bit more money mainly because we would need to bring on network programmers and have a dedicated online QA staff. Also, the total programming dev time would probably increase by around 33% which is quite a bit.

I wish there were more straightforward answers like this. All too often you see Kickstarter comments or otherwise where the dev just plays off the ignorance of the player by playing along that its "just bad". 

 

I am also boggled why you never see this explanation in a KS campaign: "The extra money is going towards multiplayer because that's where the extra money is going to. We won't spend existing funds on multiplayer. This is why it is a stretch goal".

 

But apparently, the mere existence of a multiplayer option makes the product bad or "corrupt" (as if corruption is something akin to demonic possession). I know people that look at Dragon Age 3, in all its berth and scope, and still go "they could have done more without multiplayer".


  • Luridis likes this

#48
Luridis

Luridis

    Nightfall of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 551 posts
  • Location:Dallas, TX
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Well ****!

Wow no multiplayer? How to say this sounding as good as possible while not sounding like an ass. I do love a challenge.

 

Nope, you definitely came across that way. Perhaps it's the borderline temper-tantrum feel it has.

 

I was excited! Now I'm not... the whole thing about BG, IWD, Neverwinter whatever!!

 

Yea, there's the tantrum I mentioned.

 

 

Was that there was an OPTION for it! Would you say that the single player experience was less because of it? Most presumably NO!

 

As the developer who posted above you noted, a multiplayer component would require network programmers and additional QA personnel. Those would take money away from mechanics, story, world, companions, etc. The option was weighed early on and I think even popped on the forum for the backers to offer input. The response was an overwhelming no.

 

 

One of the more prominant things about those games was that they offered the option to bring a close friend and share an adventure togeather. And if... as said previously in this thread that there are plenty of games for multiplayer. Yes in terms of multiplayer games there are plenty. But in the terms of games such as GB IWD and Neverwinter there is NOT!

 

Divinity: Original Sin has what you're looking for and it's a great game.

 

 

I for one cant understand why this isent adressed more, why cant ppl understand that this was one of the reasons these games became such a gem? Take this away and its another generic single player RPGs. If we instead turn it around... there are plenty of single player games to go around... have fun with those?

 

I'm in beta, I do not feel it is generic. It feels very much like a modernized successor to IE games.

 

 

I'm deeply dissapointed and any game that tries to come close to those games without multiplayer should stop right there! Dont say your aspiring as much or mention them at all! Not now... not ever! Without actually bringing the option to have a friend tag along.

 

It's unfortunate that you're disappointed, but tough cookies. Me an 73,985 people disagree with you. We put our money where our mouth is and provided the funding for the game, a game that doesn't include multiplayer.

 

 

And to be frank... the Kickstarter could be considered a big success compared to alot of kickstarters so adding a goal for multiplayer wouldent have been a big issue if it now was an issue? Because the question about multiplayer has been on the table I assume. To me this sounds more like a lazy option and an easy way out..

 

As I mentioned above, I believe we were asked for input and the result was a resounding no. If we were not asked, I think me and a lot of others have made it pretty clear by now that Obsidian made the correct decision.

 

Calling the developers Lazy is pretty insulting by the way. Studios have to make decisions on which features to add based on the funds available for development and content. Saying they didn't add multiplayer because they're "lazy" is like saying the game isn't twice as long for the same reason.

 

 

omg multiplaya is so hard... (even tho we probably made it with a smaller crew and a smaller budget 10 years ago)

 

You're right... It's absolutely trivial, otherwise they might write whole textbooks on the subject... oh wait.

 

http://amzn.com/0470018577


  • MReed, Bryy and Lord Wafflebum like this

#49
Bester

Bester

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 800 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

By the way, multiplayer can be modded in. It's just that not a lot of people played IE games in multiplayer, it's a single player game, so I'm not sure somebody would be willing to go through all the trouble.



#50
lordkim

lordkim

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 94 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

By the way, multiplayer can be modded in. It's just that not a lot of people played IE games in multiplayer, it's a single player game, so I'm not sure somebody would be willing to go through all the trouble.

What im seeing in BG EE , BG EE 2, and IWD EE; theres a lot of multiplaying going on.. Think that some people after finishing the game in single mode, have lot of fun playing with others in multiplayer, it makes the game a lot different to play... just my opinion.



#51
Luckmann

Luckmann

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3497 posts
  • Location:The Scanian Flatlands

By the way, multiplayer can be modded in. It's just that not a lot of people played IE games in multiplayer, it's a single player game, so I'm not sure somebody would be willing to go through all the trouble.

 

You probably know best, but the way I've understood it, Multiplayer would require a lot of work. I realize that you probably realize that too, since you say "go through all the trouble", but saying "[it] can be modded in" makes it sound so easy.

 

Otherwise, I'd be all for a co-op mode.


  • lordkim likes this

#52
Noer

Noer

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 37 posts

Proper multiplayer requires quite a bit more money mainly because we would need to bring on network programmers and have a dedicated online QA staff. Also, the total programming dev time would probably increase by around 33% which is quite a bit.

 

I just wish the multiplayer topic remains open for futher development,,, along with game editor like in Neverwinter Nights series.

It's a 4 milion dollars game after all. It's sentenced to success.


  • lordkim likes this

#53
Quadrone

Quadrone

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 362 posts
  • Location:Germany
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

 

Proper multiplayer requires quite a bit more money mainly because we would need to bring on network programmers and have a dedicated online QA staff. Also, the total programming dev time would probably increase by around 33% which is quite a bit.

 

I just wish the multiplayer topic remains open for futher development,,, along with game editor like in Neverwinter Nights series.
 

 

Seriously? Not even mentioning the amount of work that would require, suffice to say that is not possible with 2D backgrounds.

 

 

It's a 4 milion dollars game after all. It's sentenced to success.

 

How so? Are you saying 4 million is a lot of money?



#54
Noer

Noer

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 37 posts

Unity is 3D, I guess (but I don't know) most models are made in 3D and projected 2D or 2,5D so to say.
 

For me 4 million dollars is a lot of money but I am just a student.
Just looked up the bugdet for GTA V which was estimated to be like 265 milions US dollars and ended in "Grand Theft Auto V broke industry sales records and became the fastest-selling entertainment product in history, earning US $800 million in its first day and US $1 billion in its first three days." (source: http://en.wikipedia....d_Theft_Auto_V)

 

So it seems like 4 mil is not a lot of money in game development industry.

 

Still two years development is 167000 $ for each month to share for salaries and static costs and other things. I don't know the number of people involved in the project.

 

I hope they will invest in some advertisment now on Twitch, Facebook or somewhere ; p



#55
middydj

middydj

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 50 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

I for one am glad they focused on SP only.  Could care less about MP.



#56
Luckmann

Luckmann

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3497 posts
  • Location:The Scanian Flatlands

I for one am glad they focused on SP only.  Could care less about MP.



  • Nakia, Osvir, Suhiir and 2 others like this

#57
Prasse

Prasse

    (0) Nub

  • Initiates
  • 2 posts
  • Steam:Prasse
  • PSN Portable ID:TheOnePrasse
  • Xbox Gamertag:TheOnePrasse
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Relly wierd to see how much ppl hate Co-Op =/. For me BG and ICW have always been about the shared experience. I never played em through on my own. Guess a lot of you guys don't have friends who are really into these kind of games. I play a lot of tabletop rpg and with the same guys play a lot of co-op rpg. Saddened that there's no love for adding it, because my guess is that it won't be present in the second one with all the negativity towards it.


  • gogocactus likes this

#58
Hassat Hunter

Hassat Hunter

    Royal Bug Catcher of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 5992 posts
  • Location:Out there, somewhere...
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

Co-op is rather simple... pick a chair, put your friend on it, and play on!

[No purchases required. Fun probably happening. No money-returns if heavy argumentation about game-path ensures. Note: Playing with actual people in the room can be more hazardous than over the internet, where they can't punch you...]


  • PrimeJunta and gogocactus like this

#59
Sanquiz

Sanquiz

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 162 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

It's nice to see that the game don't have multplayer, some games have to be modified to make it work in a multiplayer enviroment and those modifications not always are good for singleplayer gamers like myself.



#60
Vlaid

Vlaid

    (0) Nub

  • Initiates
  • 2 posts

All I have ever wanted from games like this is a true successor to Neverwinter Nights. Not for some hokey online experience through the Single Player campaign but for a true shared, roleplay persistent world.

 

To this day I still play a Persistent World Story server from NWN. I and many of us who still play in these last vestiges of true RP communities would kill for a truly moddable NWN successor that gets back to a persistent world you can mold to your liking as DMs and Admins.

 

Not all Multiplayer has to be garbage ME3/DA:I distractions that "water down" the single player. Such thinking is very narrow and closed minded and frankly shows a lack of experience of the amazing stories you can have in the PW story servers







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: online, network, lan, multiplayer

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users