I don't think Stardock will somehow immediatly tank after the release of Elemental. I think that Stardock has a relatively bright future ahead of them, presently. What I'm opposed to is the thinking that this Status Quo is somehow permanent. It's not. Anything could happen.

It's "unlikely" when you consider the span of 1 year. It's unlikely when you consider the span of maybe 5 years. But beyond that, you're seriously starting to push your luck.

Not that I see how it's somehow more personal than any other major issue. Not offering such a basic and fundamental function in most multiplayer games, especially social games like this (as opposed to the random shoot-'em-up or RTS) is nothing short of mind-blowing.

Addenum:

:)

To expect someone to rework and reprogram the fundamentals of multiplayer in a near-forgotten game when his company have just reformed, tanked or otherwise, is expecting a little much from a single person. No matter who that person is.

Considering how badly P2P has worked out for Demigod, and how "I can't connect in MP to my friend" IS Stardock's problem, yes. They can ensure connections to their own servers far more effectively then between random people on the Internet.

I'd still rather see direct IP and LAN play appear, but I understand where they're coming from.

P2P games have not turned out badly for other games though.  Its just Demigod went about it in a strange way.  The whole reason was trying to reduce lag.   Elemental doesn't have lag (turn based for the win) so server based is fine.   Except hotseat....  I demand hotseat   (its easy for a fan to demand things)

(added note:  I love how the recent dev posts have  caused the forums to explode with activity again.  This should happen more often.  I can't keep up.  I need to deticate some serious forum trolling time next week to make sure I've left a troll-stain in every thread a few times)

It's when you start trying to automate things that you run into problems. Telling two computers to communicate isn't that much of a feat of engineering.

Edit: Alright, 'decades' may be pushing it a bit. But still.

Well, I think that the development team is better informed than you and me to take decissions, so if they took that one after the Demigod problems, it's because they believe it's going to be better for them in the long run. I don't know why you think they would take a decission that is going to make their life harder and that people seem to like less, that's not logical at all.

And I won't enter in the social and personal things, we aren't going to agree there at all

On the modern Internet, there's no guarantee any one system can connect to any other system. That's thanks to fun things like NAT, firewalls, silly ISP "features", traffic shaping, and simply broken antivirus software (which most AV actually is, though they don't like calling it that).

Demigod started off as a fully P2P game. Everybody connects to everybody. For 10 players, 81 connections need to be sucessfully established. If one of them isn't for some reason, things go wrong. Sufficed to say, that didn't go according to plan. They finally wound up (among other things) implementing proxy servers for the people who simply can't establish all these connections.

What I think you're really asking for is a client/server system where the game host acts as the server. That is generally a lot more reliable (9 connections, and only one person who needs to allow inbound connections successfully). If that's the case, I agree. That's a well proven and pretty good system for a game like this.

Direct IP, at least, would be really nice for those of us who find ourselves in no-internet situations.  Just grab a router and a few ethernet cables, run ipconfig to check all the IPs and go.

Quick question: Direct IP gaming is *usually* based on one machine hosting and all the others connecting directly to that computer, right?  At least I only remember having to enter the IP of the host, perhaps the host passes along all the other player IPs so it's fully P2P.

From a software engineer's standpoint I'm curious to know why adding Direct IP as an alternate mode of connection would mean a lot of extra developer/tester hours.  Theoretically only the client code that handles the establishment of the connection and the network I/O calls would *have* to even know or care how you connected to the host.  The challenges that come to mind are:

1) Stardock is actually writing special stuff into the server-side software beyond connection initialization, connection monitoring, mod-checking, input handling, turn-result-outputting, etc, and the game won't work without that extra layer.

2) EWoM itself (the client software) would need hosting code added.

One solution to both would be to just distribute the server software for the host to run, but I'm guessing Stardock has reasons for not having everyone and their brother running Elemental MP Servers on the net.  Perhaps a limited version that only handles one game at once?  That, of course, would require more developer effort to make the modification and make it thoroughly enough that it couldn't just be hacked into the full version again.

(Edit: of course, after Demigod y'all want the MP launch to be flawless, so perhaps the "mini-server" release could come a few months after it hits the shelves so it doesn't mess up the reviews)

Anyway, I can live without Direct IP (honestly I'll miss PBEM more), but I'd like to know why it would be such a bear.  Curious users are a pain, no?

Thanks,

Keith

Also, I expect that most users will be playing on Stardock's servers anyway, so difficulties with other connection setups will be less of a problem.  With Demigod the problem was that the primary way to do multiplayer was busted -- LAN works just fine, for instance.  In this case it sounds like the primary multiplayer technology will be a fairly reliable one, but it would be nice to have user servers as a fallback in case of gremlins, unforseen events, etc.

Man, it's a shame about the bots.... my dream of letting "ARIIA" loose on humanity again just popped. But it's not really that big of a deal: I'd rather have an awesome game with no bots than a mediocre game with them. (Just be sure we don't get a mediocre game without them....... )

I put up a server. My friends ask me "What's your IP?" either externally or internally over a VPN or LAN. They jot it down, badabing, badabom, they go straight into my lobby or game. We play. We cheer. We scream. We weep.

Not to be confused with the LAN-lobby system, that have failed me oh so many times in oh so many games. Most recently Titan Quest. The "I can't see your game"-syndrome, but if you reconfigure everything to connect directly to an IP, it works flawlessly.

I'm still remembered, even after all these long months! I feel loved  

More on topic though, I'm not so worried about the loss of the bots. I'm a little nervous about changes to the economic model, but at the same time I find it hard to be worried about vague changes to a system whose details we never really knew. I just hope things don't stray too far from the original idea, which I really like.

I would also like confirmation about whether or not LAN/hotseat games will be possible. I read the same meaning as Annatar did in Frogboy's post, but Landisaurus has sown the seeds of doubt and I can't find my herbicide...

When I went on a sort of hiatus, did EVERYONE leave at the same time? I'm away for well over a bloody month, and when I get back, people are acting like it's the second coming, and how the forum is suddently active again.

Did all of us disappear and then suddently decide, despite there not being anything hugely significant in Elemental-dom, to show up at the same time?

Haha, I dunno. I've been gone for 3 months though, and largely because I've been traveling in remote parts of the world - and I only recently returned to civilization. But just based on times tamps while catching up on dev posts, it does look like the past couple months have been pretty inactive. It is nice to see most of the same people still (or again) trolling the forums, plus some new faces.

It's funny having this conversation in a thread about the developers "getting back to Elemental" though

Some of us never left.

Anyway, there are a lot of nice ideas threads I would like to see some official comments on to be honest. Again we are lacking a lot of first hand info and many are concerned about picking a system without knowing many details of the package - food for thought.

Brad, candid posts like your OP, and the way you treat your customers with respect, are the reasons I am such a huge fan of Stardock. I bought gal civ II and the expansions, SIN, and demigod - but elemental is the game I have been waiting for since shortly after I first played MOM. I jiz**d in my pants a little when I found out Stardock would be the ones to make this game. I have not had this much anticipation for a game in years. Take your time and do it right

One request - if you do decide to do multiplayer (and imo a game like this is more suited for single player anyway, but I would def give the multiplayer a try) I hope you will go with the simultaneous turn approach. Where both players play out their turn at the same time, and the next turn starts once both players have clicked on 'next turn'.

*shrug*   I don't think I've really pursued it beyond my initial comment, and SD hasn't really said anything that would change my interpretation.  But we'll see.    Frogboy DID say early beta would be all online, so it doesn't really matter for some time.  

I think his post about multiplayer not being hosted on the user's machine at all was just a responce to Demigod related stress.    I know when I am tired of working on something and I go somewhere to say "enough, I'm not doing this again" or in Frogboy's case " After Demigod, I don't want to hear the words "Port" or "socket" again "    I'd expect a more thought out post about multiplayer when beta 2 (the one that focuses on the multiplayer and networking aspects) comes closer.

Welcome back, btw Pigeonx2.  As luckmann suggested, it seems like everybody took a break at the same time.   I've had few people to harrass (mostly GW Swicord, but lack of dev updates hasn't produced much disussion)   Its great to see it back on track.

Yes, that's my preferred method as well. It works over LAN. It works over WAN at the office where LAN-lobby fails due to switches/routers blocking the broadcasts. It works over the Internet. Hell, it works in really bizzare setups where half the people playing are on a LAN, and two friends from the Internet join in. Only the host needs to be visible to everybody.

Very early on, you said something about a special 'beta offer' for those not using credit cards - making the beta available through PayPal for a limited time. Is this still the plan?

This is irrational and ridiculous. What for ? If you truly don't care about multiplayer, why limit it to your servers ? Why not allow players to run modded servers ? If you don't intend to spend time on polishing the multiplayer part of the game, it would make perfect sense to let players take care of it. By allowing running servers, especially modded servers themselves. For some reason this smells of multiplayer DRM to me. Are you afraid that  pirates may provide a better service than you ? If you force all traffic to go through your servers, don't complain if the game gets pirated Demigod-style, and your servers bite more than they can chew.

I'm starting to think all this anti-DRM talk by Stardock employees is just a PR stunt. Smoke and mirrors until they invent some DRM they think they can get away with. And this "we don't care about multiplayer" talk of theirs sounds a lot like those "It's not about Steam vs Impulse, but Impulse is so awesome !"  propaganda threads in off-topic forum. Two-faced.

I know people who have been hoping to mod Elemental until it resembles something like Dominions 4 and play it in multiplayer. Time to find another game...

Did you pay attention to the fiasco that was the demigod launch? This has nothing to do with DRM or Steam vs Impusle or anything like that. It has to do with ease of use and ease of implementation.  If Stardock hosts all the games on thier servers then everybody should be able to play if they can connect to the internet. There's no port forwarding, or wierd comp settings, or anything else to prevent users from connecting. It saves them a lot of pain.

For the love of god. "My niche isn't being support, let me throw a tantrum."

How many folks won't buy if they can't host a local game? Sure, there's folks that would like and use that ability, but how many would actually go so far as to not buy Elemental? It's not worth the $ to support that ultra-niche group. If your in that tiny niche where this is a make or break feature then good luck and let us know if you can actually find anything remotely like Elemental that also supports this niche feature.

Seriously, let us know. While your niche isn't like to be our niche, I'm sure folks here would be interested in any TBS game in the Elemental vein. I don't expect you'll find much though.

It's a knee-jerk reaction on their part because Demigod uses a P2P connection model and the initial release was a fiasco of connection problems.  Several of us are trying to get them to change their minds on that in order to let LAN play happen among other things.

Of course, rational arguments will go farther for that then an insane rant about how this is really about DRM. It's got nothing to do with DRM.

So this means no hotseat, and no play by email? Then it means I won't buy this game.

I still play the original Age of Wonders, and have for years. In making my own maps and scenarios, I usually playtest it by having a 1 man hotseat game, going through all factions. Much faster and more controlable than going through each side individually, and if any race can't compete then I know to tweak their starting location.

While I no longer play PBEM like I did, it still is the most viable MP option you have. For a turn based game like this, it's the easiest way to get players from across the globe into a long-term game without huge scheduling conflicts. A TBS without PBEM may as well not exist. Considering that a hotseat game only requires adding the ability to have multiple human-controlled factions on the map (something already in the game if there's to be any sort of MP), there's no reason to leave it out. Since PBEM is just hotseat with the saves sent over the internet via email, there's no reason to leave that out. It's not very difficult to force a save-and-exit on turn end.

The next thing, if going with a 'MP only on our servers' approach, is to not offer a map editor at all; and restrict the players' ability to modify the game. In this type of game (well, nearly every type of game actually), the ability to create new scenarios and maps; and perhaps artifacts and units, is one of the things that extends the life of the game well into decades of constant play. Look at Doom. Call of Duty: UO. Neverwinter Nights. Doom is still sold new, and has new maps coming out regularly, and has since the early 1990's. Call of Duty: United Offensive has almost 1,000 servers running, many with zombie mods, modern weapons, and custom maps everywhere. It hasn't been sold new in years. NWN has new modules being made, more being updated, etc...

As such, I fully expect Stardock to take the complete backwards approach to modding like they have with MP hosting and insane prevention of hotseat and PBEM gaming.

I joined this forum just to sound off on this issue. I was looking forward to Elemental; as AoW is getting long in the tooth, mostly because it's soo hard to add in new units and things. But this MP hosting issue will keep me from purchasing this game at all. I might not find anything else, then again I might. But I only give my hard-earned money to companies who earn it.

It may, but it may not. There's some confusion going around as to whether he meant all multiplayer games would be hosted on Stardock's server, or whether he just meant all internet multiplayer games (and leaving LAN/hotseat in). To me, the latter makes more sense as none of the multiplayer problems SD had had to do with LAN games (afaik), and hotseat is pretty much a given in TBS...

Uh huh, right... How many people who buy a TBS game actually go and play PBEM games? That's right, almost none. That's not to say I wouldn't like to see it make it in, but the statement that a TBS game without it may as well not exist is the single most silly thing that's been said in this thread so far, and extreme hyperbole isn't going to get you anywhere.

Where multiplayer games are hosted as absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the existence or non-existence of editors and mods. Stardock has already explicitly stated that we will be getting many editors, including scenario/map editors, item editors, unit editors, spell editors - basically, expect editors up the wazzoo.

I'm not sure if you were saying that hosting on their servers would mean no editors, or saying that SD's likely next step is to retract what they said about editors/modding. Quite frankly, either statement is silly. Basically, stop whining about imagined and exaggerated fears. You'd serve yourself much better if you asked relevant questions to find out whether you have anything to be afraid of in the first place.

I suggest you moderate your assumptions until you have clarification.  I think you've gone and jumped to the wrong conclusions.

What they learned from Demigod.  People are morons.  In a less politically incorrect statement, people have screwball isp's run by idiots, don't know how to use their routers, have routers designed by idiots, don't know how to use their firewalls, etcetera.

P2P gave them so many headaches with Demigod because everyone with a moron factor had a connection problem.  Server-client will still give them headaches, less headaches, but headaches still.  With server client, the idiot factor usually only matters for the host.  They also caused themselves more headaches by trying to stupid proof the system and preventing even the people that know what they're doing from having fool proof connectivity.  Basically, you can't win.  There are going to be connection problems, and people are going to blame you for them even if it's their own fault.

Enter server hosting by them.  Assuming they aren't morons, no more moron factor in hosting.  There are oddball issues that will still nail the occasional user, issues I've never actually heard explained with any satisfaction, but they will largely eliminate them.

This wouldn't mean they're hosting all the content, it would mean you start a game and their server manages your connection and puts you together, instead of having one of you be the host.  I believe that's the method Battlenet uses.  They could restrict you to only using their servers to play multiplayer, but they wouldn't have to.