PC Multiplayer Sad State of Affairs

[meganoth]

But it sets a trend. A trend that AAA companies started doing 12 years ago. Now that trend is threatening to infect the games we wanted to support instead of AAA games. Indie companies were supposed to be the answer to developers that ignored consumer feedback by instead listening to it. Like I said, it's  a trend for companies that get big. countless developers have ignored feedback, sometimes even when someone goes out of their way to point it out mathematically. So I hope the TFP next game is just better all the way around.

Indie companies would probably disagree (at least partly). Because if you followed a few kickstarters when kickstarter became a thing it was often about "give us the means to make the game we want, not the publishers". The "we" in that sentence being the developer.

Indie is about creative people developing their ideas without the commercial viewpoint (of the publisher) breathing down their necks and taking the decision from them. They don't just want to replace one despot with another one. I even heard an indie developers say, long after finishing a kickstarter game, that a publisher is much easier to handle than a player community

Even when steam came along a few years after the kickstarter hype with EarlyAccess, they talked about participation of the player, sure, but the minimum participation guaranteed by Steams rules is that you can play the game and tell the developer if you like it or not.

It is completely the developers decision how much he wants to involve the players in their decision making. And large influence was and is very seldom (except for one or two cases that Matt115 will surely list ).

If they have any level of common sense it will be to hyper target the serializer they broke.

If they continue to ignore smarter people on netcode changes it will ultimately destroy TFP. Many even in community are better at netcode honestly they should just post a bounty board. That works great on Chrome. (Bounty is a call to smart people to make some money by fixing or improving on bugs and exploits.) Obviously TFP is not a billion dollar company but they have dedicated and skilled modders. They just need to accept outside help.

I digress though because I don't have the skill to code and it is unfair to throw stones. I just know from observation they have options. I mean I do see what the brothers are doing too - it is ultimately there vision and by their execution they do improve. I recently learned a type of modding by just trail and error execution related to xUI which for me is a huge deal. This will be my last post on the matter - I will probably say more once a21 or a20.5 drops. Happy hunting everyone.

Well, they hired a developer to improve the netcode. But only recently and I'm sure it will take some time until his influence can be felt, even if he is one of the smarter people.

 

[Matt115]

As someone that used to pre pay for games I can tell you that money and technology means absolutely nothing when your game doesn't work on launch or even half a year later as one of the most simple tryed and true genres like FPS. One of the most anticipated multiplayer games of the year had such a horrible launch that half a year later there's talk of going F2P. That game was an example of explicitly not listening to player feedback and only caring about reviews from people that cant even do the simplest of mechanics. And as I see TFP, Wildcard and klei entertainment are growing, others may follow their practices. if a company that was small became a big deal by doing something specific, it would be logical for someone in the same field to follow suit and gain that growth, however little it may be. I understand not listening to nonsensical feedback, but what happens when the people that are actually trying to help you are considered nonsensical feedback? it happens alot.

Mean a lot  that's why zombies in l4d2 have white and black clothes ( you can hear about that in commentary) , Surffering had some big cuts , why a lot of things was scrapped from cyberpunk. BF 2042 is bad game but....  this not as simple as it's looks. This game supposed to be Battle royal only but they change their mind. But shareholders want money right? so - a lot of things can be problematic for devs ( ultima online horses) so -  they listining but they can't do a lot. it's  like  you have 1 $ dollar in 1930 and you see orphans on street ofc you can give one of them this dolar but rest will complain right?

If they have any level of common sense it will be to hyper target the serializer they broke.

If they continue to ignore smarter people on netcode changes it will ultimately destroy TFP. Many even in community are better at netcode honestly they should just post a bounty board. That works great on Chrome. (Bounty is a call to smart people to make some money by fixing or improving on bugs and exploits.) Obviously TFP is not a billion dollar company but they have dedicated and skilled modders. They just need to accept outside help.

I digress though because I don't have the skill to code and it is unfair to throw stones. I just know from observation they have options. I mean I do see what the brothers are doing too - it is ultimately there vision and by their execution they do improve. I recently learned a type of modding by just trail and error execution related to xUI which for me is a huge deal. This will be my last post on the matter - I will probably say more once a21 or a20.5 drops. Happy hunting everyone.

It will don't destroy TFP for sure. Why? because not everyone play in MP   

Indie companies would probably disagree (at least partly). Because if you followed a few kickstarters when kickstarter became a thing it was often about "give us the means to make the game we want, not the publishers". The "we" in that sentence being the developer.

Indie is about creative people developing their ideas without the commercial viewpoint (of the publisher) breathing down their necks and taking the decision from them. They don't just want to replace one despot with another one. I even heard an indie developers say, long after finishing a kickstarter game, that a publisher is much easier to handle than a player community

Even when steam came along a few years after the kickstarter hype with EarlyAccess, they talked about participation of the player, sure, but the minimum participation guaranteed by Steams rules is that you can play the game and tell the developer if you like it or not.

It is completely the developers decision how much he wants to involve the players in their decision making. And large influence was and is very seldom (except for one or two cases that Matt115 will surely list ).

This depends on publisher. Still some of them are toxic as hell like EA ( i'm writing my Master thesis using game develpment history in my country - most story ended like "... and devs  get f***"  ). 

Newsstand POI ^^ IT'S SOOO PERFECT  AND  I STILL HOPE FOR   FOR SKELETONS ^^ 

AWWWWW IT'S WOULD BE SSSSSSSSSSSSSOOOOOOOOOOOO GOOD AWWWWW

Small fact : charger from l4d2 was created on L4D1 forum and valve decided to add this zombie type

 

[SURVIVE]

Surffering had some big cuts , why a lot of things was scrapped from cyberpunk.

No. The reason so many things were scraped from cyberpunk(or more accurately code was snipped/locked so certain actions can't be executed, I.E. Judy's male interaction storyline is locked to girls even though the code states the opposite is true) is purely political pressure to change a very anticipated game to suit the wants of a minority that can apparently yell louder then the entire gaming community. Don't accept bull@%$# excuses you heard from a source you feel is trusted. Fanatics are unnecessary, blind and annoying.

 

[SURVIVE]

Indie companies would probably disagree (at least partly). Because if you followed a few kickstarters when kickstarter became a thing it was often about "give us the means to make the game we want, not the publishers". The "we" in that sentence being the developer.

Indie is about creative people developing their ideas without the commercial viewpoint (of the publisher) breathing down their necks and taking the decision from them. They don't just want to replace one despot with another one. I even heard an indie developers say, long after finishing a kickstarter game, that a publisher is much easier to handle than a player community

Even when steam came along a few years after the kickstarter hype with EarlyAccess, they talked about participation of the player, sure, but the minimum participation guaranteed by Steams rules is that you can play the game and tell the developer if you like it or not.

It is completely the developers decision how much he wants to involve the players in their decision making. And large influence was and is very seldom (except for one or two cases that Matt115 will surely list ).

So your saying a the morally challenged dev teams should speak for everyone that makes a game? no? well maybe not but If they didn't want feedback we simply wouldn't give it to them in in depth detail. but the problem is that they needed it to mold their game into something people wanted to play, Ergo our precious, mostly ignored feedback. I try not to hold bars with the indie developers because I did that in so many Alphas for AAA games that I feel that pu$$y crap made them the crap they are today. If I sound mad its because I'm compassionate about the companies I invest my time into now. Don't overlook compassion, it is a lifeblood that fuels imaginative creation.

 

[Matt115]

No. The reason so many things were scraped from cyberpunk(or more accurately code was snipped/locked so certain actions can't be executed, I.E. Judy's male interaction storyline is locked to girls even though the code states the opposite is true) is purely political pressure to change a very anticipated game to suit the wants of a minority that can apparently yell louder then the entire gaming community. Don't accept bull@%$# excuses you heard from a source you feel is trusted. Fanatics are unnecessary, blind and annoying.

... Nope. traveling by metro but not as fast travel,  climbing on walls using blades isn't political thing but just forced by making on old gen too

So your saying a the morally challenged dev teams should speak for everyone that makes a game? no? well maybe not but If they didn't want feedback we simply wouldn't give it to them in in depth detail. but the problem is that they needed it to mold their game into something people wanted to play, Ergo our precious, mostly ignored feedback. I try not to hold bars with the indie developers because I did that in so many Alphas for AAA games that I feel that pu$$y crap made them the crap they are today. If I sound mad its because I'm compassionate about the companies I invest my time into now. Don't overlook compassion, it is a lifeblood that fuels imaginative creation.

unfortunatly you are wrong. People still playing in cod - cod warzone  KONG VS GODZILLA event show that no matter what devs would done people will stll buying cringy skins  so people will play even in ♥♥♥♥♥ game if this game will be popular

 

[SURVIVE]

... Nope. traveling by metro but not as fast travel,  climbing on walls using blades isn't political thing but just forced by making on old gen too

unfortunatly you are wrong. People still playing in cod - cod warzone  KONG VS GODZILLA event show that no matter what devs would done people will stll buying cringy skins  so people will play even in ♥♥♥♥♥ game if this game will be popular

I wasn't saying they aren't popular, I'm saying they are garbage games trying to appease an audience of investors bent on a stupid ass deadline. Like every bad decision in a triple A game is mostly caused by investors DESPERATE to see that portfolio rise 1%. Indie game don't do that for the most part. secondly, what choice do they give people? None. every new cod is just a reskin of the sandbox without anything being fixed IN the sandbox. which is why you can hack aim assist, score streaks and exploit the bad meshing for thru the wall kills. So if your given a choice to eat @%$# or eat delicious cake, you would choose the cake right? Not that we are given one.

 

[Matt115]

I wasn't saying they aren't popular, I'm saying they are garbage games trying to appease an audience of investors bent on a stupid ass deadline. Like every bad decision in a triple A game is mostly caused by investors DESPERATE to see that portfolio rise 1%. Indie game don't do that for the most part. secondly, what choice do they give people? None. every new cod is just a reskin of the sandbox without anything being fixed IN the sandbox. which is why you can hack aim assist, score streaks and exploit the bad meshing for thru the wall kills. So if your given a choice to eat @%$# or eat delicious cake, you would choose the cake right? Not that we are given one.

Well i have to agree about investors. Well they forced to released CP earlier. But about indie games : Honestly.... you don't have choice  because well money, time, technology and people --> custom cod zombies maps with high quality  (2-3 years of making) per year we were getting 4-6 maps in cod. so...  COD zombie devs use tons of assets from SP and MP. This same thing with NZA - they reused assets + money. So... there is no chance for game similiar to NZA or cod zombie because of this reason. 

Just  saw how many props is on typical NZA map, then models of zombie etc.

So - why risk loose a lot  by making similiar game to NZA ( well remember you have strong rival) when is is much safer make another walking simulator. 

People like Dr.Discrespect can make CoD MP like game because... he have at least 3,5 mln of dollars. Typical indie studio don't have such big number of money + bigger risk because they have family , credits etc.

 Well most indie games are not such indie game anymore - guys who makes Biding of issac make good game but they had money because they made few games before.

You can say " yeah but TFP could make let say  WW2 zombie game with big maps". 

That's true but .... why  risk soo much to something like that? i knew few indie games that... were never finished or  don't sell to good because they had so big competition. 

Why  buy Iron harvest when you have COH2 and more and more.

I don't know which game you would to play but i'm sure that nobody will make game that i would to play - why? 

Try to imagine make game betwen grimdark of a plague tale, steam punk setting , making base similiar to Chernobylite and stealth like Thief. 

I will give you describtion - as 16 yo orphan you wake up in steampunk england and you have to survive - find food, water, stealth between robots. zombies, monsters. You are young and weak so you don't chance to kill robot in melee. Setting is dark with realitic graphic in  outlast  or  The forest style -  hanging rotting corpses, you character most of time going barefoot in ragged clothes ,  you can see occult symbols on walls drawn with blood. High difficulty and pretty slow gameplay - you want make table in you shelter bring wood and nails - but you have only two hands so this will take a while. climb on wall ,use slingshot.

Ask any developer about make game using this and i'm sure  nobody will do it - most of them will say they are not interested or it's too risky for them. 

Not because idea is bad - i think people love thief or hitman. But they will be cautions about buy this game in early access. I know i will not convice you about that but maybe @meganoth can give you a view why it's so risky

I have a question to you : You are active in this topic and you are here almost from beggining of 7dtd. So you know a little bit about making games right?

So : do you think my idea would be  accepted by any game studio? Or it would be too risky? I ask about that because it will be more objective. I don't mean if you like this idea i just ask if there would be any real chance to be accepted.

 

[SURVIVE]

So : do you think my idea would be  accepted by any game studio? Or it would be too risky? I ask about that because it will be more objective. I don't mean if you like this idea i just ask if there would be any real chance to be accepted.

Fortunately, it doesn't matter what I or anyone else thinks, It's up to you. I personally REFUSE to compromise with my work, but then that's just me and I don't need investors. Technically no one does anymore, as long as you know how to properly invest your wealth. Investors can suck nut.

 

[meganoth]

Fortunately, it doesn't matter what I or anyone else thinks, It's up to you. I personally REFUSE to compromise with my work, but then that's just me and I don't need investors. Technically no one does anymore, as long as you know how to properly invest your wealth. Investors can suck nut.

Ok. IF you really don't compromise with your work, then assuming you were developing your own game you would surely stick to your vision, right? If some greedy investors won't make you change your game to something you don't want then you surely won't compromise your vision, your ideas to what players are suggesting if those ideas don't fit your vision.

And that was all I was saying. If someone develops a game he wants to make his own game, what he envisioned, and not what some players want on the forum. Opinions are cheap, every forum poster has one about any feature of the game and often those opinions are contrary to other opinions. 

But for the typical forum poster this looks like the developer is deaf to suggestions. For example he might say: "Hey, I don't like farming like it is now. And look there are already 5 guys that say the same. Why aren't you changing it?".  "Hey, I don't like the humor in the game. I want it more realistic". "Hey, I play multiplayer, please focus all your attention on that" ...

As a developer you can't make everyone happy. And you develop games to make first and foremost yourself happy about what you created.

 

[meganoth]

Well i have to agree about investors. Well they forced to released CP earlier. But about indie games : Honestly.... you don't have choice  because well money, time, technology and people --> custom cod zombies maps with high quality  (2-3 years of making) per year we were getting 4-6 maps in cod. so...  COD zombie devs use tons of assets from SP and MP. This same thing with NZA - they reused assets + money. So... there is no chance for game similiar to NZA or cod zombie because of this reason. 

Just  saw how many props is on typical NZA map, then models of zombie etc.

So - why risk loose a lot  by making similiar game to NZA ( well remember you have strong rival) when is is much safer make another walking simulator. 

People like Dr.Discrespect can make CoD MP like game because... he have at least 3,5 mln of dollars. Typical indie studio don't have such big number of money + bigger risk because they have family , credits etc.

 Well most indie games are not such indie game anymore - guys who makes Biding of issac make good game but they had money because they made few games before.

You can say " yeah but TFP could make let say  WW2 zombie game with big maps". 

That's true but .... why  risk soo much to something like that? i knew few indie games that... were never finished or  don't sell to good because they had so big competition. 

Why  buy Iron harvest when you have COH2 and more and more.

I don't know which game you would to play but i'm sure that nobody will make game that i would to play - why? 

Try to imagine make game betwen grimdark of a plague tale, steam punk setting , making base similiar to Chernobylite and stealth like Thief. 

I will give you describtion - as 16 yo orphan you wake up in steampunk england and you have to survive - find food, water, stealth between robots. zombies, monsters. You are young and weak so you don't chance to kill robot in melee. Setting is dark with realitic graphic in  outlast  or  The forest style -  hanging rotting corpses, you character most of time going barefoot in ragged clothes ,  you can see occult symbols on walls drawn with blood. High difficulty and pretty slow gameplay - you want make table in you shelter bring wood and nails - but you have only two hands so this will take a while. climb on wall ,use slingshot.

Ask any developer about make game using this and i'm sure  nobody will do it - most of them will say they are not interested or it's too risky for them. 

Not because idea is bad - i think people love thief or hitman. But they will be cautions about buy this game in early access. I know i will not convice you about that but maybe @meganoth can give you a view why it's so risky

I have a question to you : You are active in this topic and you are here almost from beggining of 7dtd. So you know a little bit about making games right?

So : do you think my idea would be  accepted by any game studio? Or it would be too risky? I ask about that because it will be more objective. I don't mean if you like this idea i just ask if there would be any real chance to be accepted.

(You didn't ask me, but I'd like to answer this as well)

In my opinion you have a misconception about game development. It is not about risk, any game development is a a high risk venture, except for continuations of successful franchises which are low risk.

The best game can crash silently because it isn't the right time or a slighty better game released a week earlier or the game simply didn't catch the attention of players.

But publishers or generally producers of games are not looking for ideas. Ideas are cheap, you are not the only one who can produce them.

Publishers are looking for the whole package, a developer who they judge to be able to do what he proposes together with an idea that seems to have a chance in the market. No publisher will give you money and a development team just because they think your idea is good.

If you want to work as a pure game designer without programming skills, your only chance (if there is a chance at all) would be to take a job as junior game designer at a bigger developer, but it probably is nearly impossible to get that job without anything to show (like a degree in that subject or participation in some mod development).

Everything IMHO!

 

[Matt115]

Fortunately, it doesn't matter what I or anyone else thinks, It's up to you. I personally REFUSE to compromise with my work, but then that's just me and I don't need investors. Technically no one does anymore, as long as you know how to properly invest your wealth. Investors can suck nut.

Most game company now are PLC so investors mean a lot

(You didn't ask me, but I'd like to answer this as well)

In my opinion you have a misconception about game development. It is not about risk, any game development is a a high risk venture, except for continuations of successful franchises which are low risk.

The best game can crash silently because it isn't the right time or a slighty better game released a week earlier or the game simply didn't catch the attention of players.

But publishers or generally producers of games are not looking for ideas. Ideas are cheap, you are not the only one who can produce them.

Publishers are looking for the whole package, a developer who they judge to be able to do what he proposes together with an idea that seems to have a chance in the market. No publisher will give you money and a development team just because they think your idea is good.

If you want to work as a pure game designer without programming skills, your only chance (if there is a chance at all) would be to take a job as junior game designer at a bigger developer, but it probably is nearly impossible to get that job without anything to show (like a degree in that subject or participation in some mod development).

Everything IMHO!

Well i asked you 

My point was : SURVIVE have some ... let say ideas for 7dtd.  Probably more players - so i started example why this TFP decided to limit number of players too 8. 

He wrote something like " people buying bad games so devs don't care about feedback"

I give example of my idea and similiar game will not happend - because it'  would be too risky. So TFP will not increase offical number up to 50 players  because technical stuff.

Honestly some types of game are less risky - FPS is safer that RTS,  anime Visual Novel is less risky that stealth focused game, it's more easier to make 5 VS 5 MP game that 200 vs 200 MP game etc. 

Well another option is being Esport player. I'm not joking - guy who played a lot of in CS , BF etc  is suggesting how shooting system , balance should looks like , what is wrong about maps etc. And  Mr. Disrespect have similiar situation - he don't have  programming skill but he have experience so he can be good advicer and tester.

And... if you are rly good writer you can be hired to write scenary to game if game is story based

 

[SURVIVE]

As a developer you can't make everyone happy. And you develop games to make first and foremost yourself happy about what you created.

Well I guess Mad Mole would be the only one to answer that question at some point in the future. Would be interesting and educational to actually hear all the things TFP had to deal with from beginning to end since it's one the longest game projects to date thats been using the same sandbox mechanics besides Call of Duty.

 

[meganoth]

Honestly some types of game are less risky - FPS is safer that RTS, 

Not as much as you seem to be thinking. While the RTS genre has less players it also has less competition. While a new big FPS is coming out every few months. And you don't know what the market will be in 3-7 years when the game you start to develop today will be released. If you are one of the big names with a successful franchise there is much less risk, even a bad game will be bought. But the smaller the shop and the more congestion in that market niche the more you depend on details, for example which rival games get released at the same time and whether you got some influential people talking about your game.

And... if you are rly good writer you can be hired to write scenary to game if game is story based

Which has not much to do with your question. That writer usually has a body of work already that establishes him as a good writer. Or he can show experience with game development. The same goes for a game designer.

When I assume that you have no connection to the games industry and are not a know author or game designer, then that is all I need to know to predict that you will not get hired as a game designer no matter what game idea you are proposing. Again, game ideas are cheap to create, everyone is a hobby game designer if he thinks 10 minutes about a concept.

 

[Matt115]

Not as much as you seem to be thinking. While the RTS genre has less players it also has less competition. While a new big FPS is coming out every few months. And you don't know what the market will be in 3-7 years when the game you start to develop today will be released. If you are one of the big names with a successful franchise there is much less risk, even a bad game will be bought. But the smaller the shop and the more congestion in that market niche the more you depend on details, for example which rival games get released at the same time and whether you got some influential people talking about your game.

And less players mean less money --> bigger competition of older games because some players still prefere to play in older RTS because is finished so is read to mastering ( coh2 will not get new dlc so there is stable "ways" of playing while iron harvest getting new dlc mean change a lot in PVP).  And honestly more people will be cheap FPS like enemy front or Sniper warrior 3 that cheap RTS

Which has not much to do with your question. That writer usually has a body of work already that establishes him as a good writer. Or he can show experience with game development. The same goes for a game designer.

When I assume that you have no connection to the games industry and are not a know author or game designer, then that is all I need to know to predict that you will not get hired as a game designer no matter what game idea you are proposing. Again, game ideas are cheap to create, everyone is a hobby game designer if he thinks 10 minutes about a concept.

Well i focused more to convice SURVIVE why some things cannot be done .

BTW  there is a chance that i will be in game industry but as i accountant  so i will not making games but still this same industry XD

Well I guess Mad Mole would be the only one to answer that question at some point in the future. Would be interesting and educational to actually hear all the things TFP had to deal with from beginning to end since it's one the longest game projects to date thats been using the same sandbox mechanics besides Call of Duty.

Em.... Gmod, project zomboid, dwarf forstress ,  MC ( still getting updates)... so there is few of them

 

[Grandpa Minion]

Not long ago, even as recent as 19.2, average servers could host up to 50 players with little issue. 19.3 came, and knocked that down to about 35. 20.4 came, and for whatever reason, it feels like anything above 16 is muddy waters

 

You are definately right about that. A19 and prior we could get 40+ players on a server- Now in a20 we are lucky to get 25 on without the server crashing. Has anyone figured out why this is? I personally think its just another way of them wanting to kill multiplayer.

 

[Howlune]

You are definately right about that. A19 and prior we could get 40+ players on a server- Now in a20 we are lucky to get 25 on without the server crashing. Has anyone figured out why this is? I personally think its just another way of them wanting to kill multiplayer.

I dont think its them wanting to *kill* multiplayer, they just have different priorities and large population was never something they have beholden themselves to, unfortunately. And despite all the big servers dying off because of it, the game remains at 15k+ currently playing on steam, so theres no alarms going off for them anytime soon.

 

[Grandpa Minion]

I dont think its them wanting to *kill* multiplayer, they just have different priorities and large population was never something they have beholden themselves to, unfortunately. And despite all the big servers dying off because of it, the game remains at 15k+ currently playing on steam, so theres no alarms going off for them anytime soon.

dont kid yourself. Guaranteed those 35000 players from 5 months ago most of them where multiserver players! I mean anyone with common sense would tell you- losing half of your population base is not good. "maybe we should look into why?"

 

[Boidster]

Guaranteed those 35000 players from 5 months ago most of them where multiserver players! I mean anyone with common sense would tell you- losing half of your population base is not good.

I do not think those numbers mean what you think they mean. The game got a surge for A20 (December '21) and has since reverted to the mean. ~30K active players is kinda where 7D2D lives most of the time. There is no massive exodus from the game.

 

[Fanatical_Meat]

I do not think those numbers mean what you think they mean. The game got a surge for A20 (December '21) and has since reverted to the mean. ~30K active players is kinda where 7D2D lives most of the time. There is no massive exodus from the game.

View attachment 24977

Regardless whomever was playing who now is not playing, still bought the damn  game. Them deciding to no longer play does not cost anyone income because 7D2D is a one time purchase. There are no subscription fees or server hosting fees.

 

[RyanX]

I do not think those numbers mean what you think they mean. The game got a surge for A20 (December '21) and has since reverted to the mean. ~30K active players is kinda where 7D2D lives most of the time. There is no massive exodus from the game.

View attachment 24977

It also shows that this last update really didn't do anything to increase interest in 7D2D.  People just logged on to see what they did for a bit then were like "meh".