never ending ns2 game
BJHBnade_spammer
Join Date: 2005-02-25 Member: 42431Members
Join Date: 2005-02-25 Member: 42431Members
<div class="IPBDescription">something to think about</div>ok u will call me insane for even thinking about this and it might not even be possible, but how about possibly supporting a never ending game mode?
yes the server would always be on the same level. the map would need to be huge, and there would need to be some way to keep score so returning players don't loose progress.
I'm sure this would take a long time to possibly write code for something like this and it is not something that can be done at this time.
but i would still like someone to look into this either devs or the community.
and tell me if this is even possible.
Thanks
yes the server would always be on the same level. the map would need to be huge, and there would need to be some way to keep score so returning players don't loose progress.
I'm sure this would take a long time to possibly write code for something like this and it is not something that can be done at this time.
but i would still like someone to look into this either devs or the community.
and tell me if this is even possible.
Thanks
Comments
The problem I foresee is this: aliens in NS1 combat mode love the timer. It allows them to win by holding out. I've rarely see marines win after time runs out. Thus, aliens tend to vote not to extend. So, if there were two combat modes and one didn't have a timer, more people would probably play the one with the timer.
would need alot of testing
once the lua code for ns2 comes out someone let me know if this is possible or how it might be done.
unless someone knows how to do this now? not sure if there is some stuff that might not work.
using something like draco suggested
mods is there any way that you guys could make a new forum for mod/ideas/suggestions
this might fit better into there
Thanks
So you gotta think up some sort of intermediate reward that wouldn't take more than half an hour to get, and would have an overall impact without outright deciding the game.
another way this could be done sortive lika a tournament style
start out with small maps tallying up each won match and eventually getting to the really big map carrying points over to the final map depending how each team did
first one is more of what looking for though but both are hopefully feasable
Lets say there are 5 areas or levels in it.
(Alien Home Hive) L1 <-> L2 <-> L3(Campaign Start level) <-> L4 <-> L5 (Marine colony front)
If the Marines win the first game then it goes to L2 which will be a bit more in favor for the Aliens just like L4 would be for the Marines. And the map for L1 and L5 would be moderately difficult for the attacking side because they will be at a greater disadvantage. This way the game could potentially persist for a long time and feel epic at either the end of the match or the end of the champaign.
-L3 will need to be very balanced for both sides
<!--quoteo(post=1761696:date=Mar 29 2010, 09:38 PM:name=Razor)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Razor @ Mar 29 2010, 09:38 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1761696"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->or it could be like a tug of war campaign...
Lets say there are 5 areas or levels in it.
(Alien Home Hive) L1 <-> L2 <-> L3(Campaign Start level) <-> L4 <-> L5 (Marine colony front)
If the Marines win the first game then it goes to L2 which will be a bit more in favor for the Aliens just like L4 would be for the Marines. And the map for L1 and L5 would be moderately difficult for the attacking side because they will be at a greater disadvantage. This way the game could potentially persist for a long time and feel epic at either the end of the match or the end of the champaign.
-L3 will need to be very balanced for both sides<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Lets say there are 5 areas or levels in it.
(Alien Home Hive) L1 <-> L2 <-> L3(Campaign Start level) <-> L4 <-> L5 (Marine colony front)
If the Marines win the first game then it goes to L2 which will be a bit more in favor for the Aliens just like L4 would be for the Marines. And the map for L1 and L5 would be moderately difficult for the attacking side because they will be at a greater disadvantage. This way the game could potentially persist for a long time and feel epic at either the end of the match or the end of the champaign.
-L3 will need to be very balanced for both sides<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sounds like a good campaign idea. The maps at the extreme ends of the tug of war diagram would still have to be winnable, of course, just heavily favoring one side. Otherwise we'd get a superior team putting the worse team on the ropes every other game, but the "Home Hive" or "Colony Front" is simply impossible to lose, so the inferior team would never lose.
On the other end of the spectrum, a MMO version of NS would rock! Many gameplay mechanics would need to be re-written, but something like Planetside, Global Agenda, or World War II Online, would be awesome with an NS feel. A single persistent world with many small-scale battles.
And when you finally grabbed the brass ring, you were the king of the ###### WORLD. A never-ending game has no goals, and artificially prolonging the game to FORCE it is ridiculous. Said mod I'm talking about played, literally, like a game of chess. Your opening moves could decide the game and it wasn't uncommon to checkmate in just a few 'moves'.
This mod was so amazingly brilliant (and yet so devilishly simple) that here I am, nine goddamn years later or something, that I, hater of all games, can still firmly call it the most awesome thing since the guitar solo. And if you asked me to name anything that was even remotely close to it, the best I could do would be Planetside, only without the dumb bits. Also this mod had such an awesome impact on me that I forgot what my point was and just gushed about it the second I thought of it.
<i>THAT SAID</i>, NS is just too 'small' to do this. People are going to get INCREDIBLY BORED of fighting over Cargo Room for two hours. Your maps would have to be of an UNREALISTICALLY massive size (SPACE HULK) to keep it interesting. I don't see even the most ambitious indoor-based FPS managing that, much less a mapper to manage it all D:
As mentioned, fighting over stale locations for hours isn't for everyone and I'd rather keep it out of the official game, but I think such gameplay is pretty easy to achieve through modding even if isn't officially supported.
This isn't really "never ending games" so much as it "just really slow gameplay and long game."
Oh yeah. Rereading the OP, I think my post is a bit off topic. I first thought it was more about those 10 hr games 1.0 had.
I guess you could make some extremely powerful and invulnerable stationary defence to create nearly endless games though. A bit like DoD spawn protection on some maps, just instakilling everything it sees. Combine that with some res model adjustments that allow both teams to be effective even if they lose all the map control and you've got an eternal game already.
After that it would boil down to the mappers to create some huge maps and maybe some more tweaking to add the sense of battle raging back and forth around the map. As long as the server client is stable, I can't see why it couldn't be done with relatively small amount of work compared to most mod projects. I doubt it would be completely balanced or opmimized or anything like that, but that's probably not the main point of those games anyway.
This would require an existing infrastructure to be in-place by the devs unless the creator of the modification were to set up a permanent stats server which would be authed to all servers running the modification. Unlocks would further that satisfaction need to play an incredibly long game.
Alternatively, a similar gametype based in one very large map or a series of smaller maps might be a better strategy but with the difference of having a Defender and an Attacker, exactly like the Rush gametype in Bad Company. Attackers start at one spawn point and the Defenders start at their first base. The attackers have to destroy that base to move on to the next base, and so on and so fourth. Defenders can definitely push back the Attackers but it would only prevent the Attackers from hitting their base, rather then being able to push the Attackers back to their own base and destroying it instead. The Victory aspect comes from either successfully defending your base (Defender) or destroying all of the bases (Attacker).
Short of any of that, I don't think there would be any incentive to actually play the game for an extended period of time. And if score was being saved for each player, you wouldn't need a Database like mySQL or SQL Server, a simple file on the Servers hard drive can do that very nicely.
Nah, haven't you ever played on the marine team for a 3hour+ game.... those games were pretty fun to be in most of the time (they WOULD NOT REACH THAT TIME if it wasn't fun/challenging/interesting for both teams). Don't confuse this with your average ns-classic maps that ends with the entire marine team staying in marine start (because leaving ms would result in instant death to the fade that "doesn't die" who patrols the entire map in under 20 seconds).
So i want to say that this game mode can be about the marine team "turtling", perhaps lasting as long as possible... playing defensively, which is one of the leading causes for games lasting for several hours... i.e. the aliens can't wipe out the marines, but the marines can wipe out the aliens. Example: relocating to the bunker in ns_cerbsiege, and defending the bunker... so when the siege timer is up, the commander can bacon a full loaded assault of squad of heavies + jetpackers to the marine start to battle in the siege room (whose entrance is in ms). Anyone that dies respawns in the bunker, and gets re-equipped for the future attacks. (now that was one hell of a game i played in on the [IAM] clan server, a long time ago lol, and yes we, the marine team did eventually win :)
Obviously from that example, the key to this game mode working is the commander CANNOT be compromised by loosing resource towers... so he'll have to get "automatic" res at some interval (maybe the multiplier is how much territory is captured?). Also the map should mean that the marine start is relatively well defended (castle defense or something similar). Should we call such maps "siege" maps also? or alien sieges? :P
Note: my idea implies a harder to win map... not so much a never-ending game mode.
Anyway, I would really like to understand what the hell you are saying sometimes, and I am afraid I am going to need some help. I'll attempt to write out my comprehensions here, and you (or anyone else) please correct and enlighten me where I do not grok in fullness.
<!--quoteo(post=1762580:date=Apr 4 2010, 01:37 AM:name=FocusedWolf)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FocusedWolf @ Apr 4 2010, 01:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1762580"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Nah, haven't you ever played on the marine team for a 3hour+ game.... those games were pretty fun to be in most of the time (they WOULD NOT REACH THAT TIME if it wasn't fun/challenging/interesting for both teams). Don't confuse this with your average ns-classic maps that ends with the entire marine team staying in marine start (because leaving ms would result in instant death to the fade that "doesn't die" who patrols the entire map in under 20 seconds).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think Dalin believes that it is hard to make a never-ending mode interesting if there is nothing to fight for. Sort of like playing poker for nothing. With infinite chips. You disagree, I gather. You say games are allowed to grow long if they are fun. (Not that they are fun because they are long, which is interesting).
Then you say aliens are overpowered, the fade especially. And that after having lost the game, being bottled up in MS is no fun.
<!--quoteo(post=1762580:date=Apr 4 2010, 01:37 AM:name=FocusedWolf)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FocusedWolf @ Apr 4 2010, 01:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1762580"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So i want to say that this game mode can be about the marine team "turtling", perhaps lasting as long as possible... playing defensively, which is one of the leading causes for games lasting for several hours... i.e. the aliens can't wipe out the marines, but the marines can wipe out the aliens.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I thought I just read that turtling in marine base was no fun? Please, I must be missing a subtle point here. And please elaborate on "wipe out" - surely, wiping out the aliens would win the game for the marines, effectively ending it? Would that not encourage marines to sometimes play offensively?
<!--quoteo(post=1762580:date=Apr 4 2010, 01:37 AM:name=FocusedWolf)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FocusedWolf @ Apr 4 2010, 01:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1762580"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Example: relocating to the bunker in ns_cerbsiege, and defending the bunker... so when the siege timer is up, the commander can bacon a full loaded assault of squad of heavies + jetpackers to the marine start to battle in the siege room (whose entrance is in ms). Anyone that dies respawns in the bunker, and gets re-equipped for the future attacks. (now that was one hell of a game i played in on the [IAM] clan server, a long time ago lol, and yes we, the marine team did eventually win :)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Er, yes. I never played ns_cerbsiege. I love a good story though. I am not entirely sure how this example relates to a never-ending game mode. In particular one where the marines are always playing defensively?
<!--quoteo(post=1762580:date=Apr 4 2010, 01:37 AM:name=FocusedWolf)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FocusedWolf @ Apr 4 2010, 01:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1762580"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Obviously from that example, the key to this game mode working is the commander CANNOT be compromised by loosing resource towers... so he'll have to get "automatic" res at some interval (maybe the multiplier is how much territory is captured?). Also the map should mean that the marine start is relatively well defended (castle defense or something similar). Should we call such maps "siege" maps also? or alien sieges? :P<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Obviously.
This had me puzzled at first, but looking at some of the things above I'll venture a guess: "Turtling in base with a little gun is boring. Marines should have free res so they all have excellent lewt. Turtling in base with a big gun is fun!"<!--coloro:#808080--><span style="color:#808080"><!--/coloro-->*<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->.
I very much support scaling res flow after how much territory a team controls. I could swear that's how it's done in NS1, I think it's working out pretty well.
Name it "Siege Mod". Then the maps are siege maps.
<!--quoteo(post=1762580:date=Apr 4 2010, 01:37 AM:name=FocusedWolf)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FocusedWolf @ Apr 4 2010, 01:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1762580"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Note: my idea implies a harder to win map... not so much a never-ending game mode.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If I understand "wiping out", your idea implies a game mode that can only be won by marines. And I don't see why your idea would take particularly long. Giving marines lots of res would shorten a game considerably?
Again, I don't intend to be condescending. I just really didn't understand... anything. I am sorry if this derails the topic.
<!--coloro:#808080--><span style="color:#808080"><!--/coloro-->* I added that last line, I felt it was not too much of a stretch. <!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
You got a point there :P
I think it was more so that people didn't want to stop playing NS so instead of leaving the server, they just stayed and played like zombies xD
The current love of my multiplayer life is Mechwarrior: Living Legends and I play on servers where the rounds are 100 minutes long. Anything less feels too short. However it's important to point out that MWLL is a very slow game. It can take a Heavy or Assault chassis several minutes to get to the front lines.
That said, long games provide a sense of continuity. Rather than the game ending and everyone leaving / new people joining, everything starting over and all mixed up again, you keep the same players and establish a sort of camaraderie with them. You know what happened from beginning to end, and most importantly, how quickly a round is and how fast the action is is typically inversely proportional to the amount of teamwork and flexibility the game offers. A 15 minute NS2 game makes me picture everyone running around in a cluster###### more than happy to do their own thing.
It really felt like it was much too short and many of my friends just blatantly threw the game away, and rightly so after months that I picked it up again the length of a game now lasts for around 45-55min. It's so much more satisfying, even if it's a loosing game you get to play with the same people long enough to have something to talk about after it is done simply because you had more at stake and you get to know the people better. Also the option to concede a game does outweigh the length since if it's really f*cked up at the very start it could only last as short as 5min. (this should be considered for NS2 honestly).
There it is 5v5, I can imagine 16v16 (wasn't it?) in NS2 to end in ~20min and also at the same time bring RTS to the FPS could use a <i>bit </i>more time than that.
It could be a "golden sweet-spot" for FPS-games but honestly NS2 isn't FPS and certainly doesn't mimic Modern Warfare 2 or the like; it's a FPS/RTS.
Basically, time is an indicator about how dumb a stalemate is. It doesn't mean a game can't be back and forth for the entire time, in which case it'd be okay, but I just don't want the game to be long for the sake of being long. It needs to be longer for a meaningful reason (close games), not just because the game's made into a stalemate and a slow advance for the better team.
This is true. For a long game to be fun, it has to <i>feel</i> like victory is a realistic objective even when it is not. People are looking for a perpetual state of back-and-forth midgame, not a hopeless stalemate.
Well, maybe not a perpetual back-and-forth. Wildly swinging control is not a good thing. However, a solid tense give-and-take is awesome.
A tense pseudo-stalemate.... not so fun.
And I hope it's obvious to all that stretching gameplay for the purely for the sake of longer games = bad idea. There had better be a good reason and lots of action involved in that extra time to make it worth it.