Savegames for multiplayer --- In RTS never done before! Why?

Re: Savegames for multiplayer --- In RTS never done before!

I'm not saying it's impossible I'm saying it's something to take into account ;-)

On serialization, while I'm not a game developer (oh, how I would love to be) but a mere backend developer, taking snapshots doesn't have to be all bad it's a matter of implementation I suppose. Nowadays there are systems available that don't mix state and time which means you don't have to worry about concurrent changes.
Or at seed generation time you could copy the seed/input so you don't have to pause the system to write the seed but take the time to write the seed when it's generated, not when a snapshot is made. Again, I'm not in the know when it comes to game engines and stuff. But this sort of problems is not exclusive to the game domain, this happens in a lot of different domains, too.

Re: Savegames for multiplayer --- In RTS never done before!

I am very happy to see that a few people have discussed this topic.
I admit that I did not know about multiplayer saving in the games mentioned above.

I am really happy that UBER confirmed this feature in the first few replies, but still leaves out the question if it will only be possible through game servers and therefore no local file would exist, which means that epic multiplayer is only possible trough internet and good matches can not be replayed in LAN-Parties, which would be too bad.

I am only suggesting that this would maximise options in playing since the game is more mulitplayer focused and unfortunately there will be no SP campaign where pre-build structures are found and I am very glad to read about the idea that with saving multiplayer and reassigning AIs little campaigns could be easily build probably if you can assign a new AI at the beginning but is only allowed to build structures or something like that and after a certain point is (reload) starts to be aggressive.
I am sure technically that is not easy (although I am not a game developer) but the possibilities are immense.

Hacking (or real cheating) will always be possible, but you do not have to play with people who obviously cheat in LAN games and playing through severs I don´t think cheating will decrease just if it is not so easy.

I added a poll cause polls are always an easy way to calculate opinions,
although I was sure that most people would like the idea there are a few,
who do not like it and if a few do not like it, there is a post which are outlining
the disadvantages which can be solved before it becomes effective.

Re: Savegames for multiplayer --- In RTS never done before!

I should have been more specific. "Rewind" isn't strictly necessary (or even important, although it might be kind of fun to watch). "Skip backwards" is really what's wanted here.

"Oooh, that was a cool fight! I'll skip back thirty seconds and watch it again from a different angle!"

Super extra bonus points for being able to do this in a live battle, not just in replays.

Re: Savegames for multiplayer --- In RTS never done before!

Being able to replay a battle would be a very impressive feature.
It could be a contest even for people how to best continue the savegame.

Re: Savegames for multiplayer --- In RTS never done before!

We won't be recording games by saving the inputs. It's not robust across versions. Think about it more as a recording of what's going over the network to clients but as "virtual" client that gets everything.

Re: Savegames for multiplayer --- In RTS never done before!

This would be the sh*t!


No, seriously, there is definitely a lot of cool stuff that you could do with that at hand.

Re: Savegames for multiplayer --- In RTS never done before!

That would be AMAZING. multiplayer saves have been done before but I cant think of a game that allowed the players to continue from any point in a replay.

Re: Savegames for multiplayer --- In RTS never done before!

I had no idea this could be possible, it would be amazing!
And gamer girlfriends around the world would approve this feature
Go Uber!

Re: Savegames for multiplayer --- In RTS never done before!

Very user friendly would be a rejoin option after somebody crashed/dc-ed
Imagine some seton's game in FA where somebody would crash after 40 minutes of gametime.

Instead of his base and units just exploding, the player can reconnect after he has restarted his pc. (game may be paused/AI can take over/team member can temporarily take over/units and base invulnerable statues untill reconnect/something else.)

Re: Savegames for multiplayer --- In RTS never done before!

I believe this is a function that isn't worth the effort. Yes of course if you open a poll every users will cast yes as the vote (especially the non-programmers)

But looking the problem from the software house point of view this function is completely a waste of time that could go towards many other critical section of the game (gameplay, balance etc)

If you look at other TOP rts game (StarCraft 2 someone?) of course this feature will never get implemented there. The making of a good RTS title is somewhat hard to produce, why do you want to make stuff even harder without so much benefits?

Also I am reading somewhere of 12h long game... Are you kidding me? If you want play simcity go ahead. But for a real RTS game (that maybe can become an eSport game) matches can't last longer than 30-40min.

I hope you make the right decision from the business point of view too (eSports etc).

Re: Savegames for multiplayer --- In RTS never done before!

I would love to see multiplayer saves. Its a great thing to have between friends, especially in games like these. I'd also vote for the replay/savegame feature just for the fact that it hasn't been done before to my knowledge. Strides forward are always nice to see.

Re: Savegames for multiplayer --- In RTS never done before!

I am unsure of the specific challenges a feature like this would involve but judging from some of the posts I have seen it looks as though it is being seriously considered and at the very least tried out.
http://forums.uberent.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=38054&start=20

I think this is a bit of a simplistic view that accounts for one style of gameplay. This game certainly doesn't appear to be aiming to be an esport in the same niche that Starcraft is. It is a fundamentally different kind of RTS and thus has different design goals associated with it.

There will of course be matches that as a result of the map size and type will last between 30 and 40 minutes; however both TA and SupCom allowed for more flexability in game length and features suggested so far suggests that longer games are just as important in their design ethic, features like:

Mega-games (40 player event matches)
Joining games mid-way (saves/mega-games/etc):
Scalability (huge maps and LOD depending on computer power):
Shared unit control
http://forums.uberent.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=34022

I think it would be a mistake to make this game using only a starcraft style esports design ethic, as it would miss out on many things that define the niche that games like this occupy. This save/replay fusion concept may not work out, but I would argue that it is a feature that would really add to the kind of game that Uber seem to be aiming for.

To be clear I am not saying that competitive play should not be central to design. I think that competitive play is very important and that that trying too hard to appeal to causal play during development can ruin a game (especially for an RTS). I just dont think that designing specifically for short starcraft esport type games is the only way to do things.