Single player please :|
" their answer to that since closed beta has heen "security". it's folly to try to control the client side, it's a battle they can't win. also network protocols aren't safe, they basically have to treat every client whichbconnects to their servers like a customised bot trying to simmulate player behaviour. that really made sense to me but naturally comes with alot of disadvantages cause it makes the gameplay experience dependent on a good server connection. making the client abundant only leaves the server as the sole target for hacking attempts. somebody who gets their hands on the server code ONCE can cause them to having to redesign their whole security infrastructure cause the code would lay that open. having an offline client, they would have to open their server code by giving it to the clients cause they're just dumb terminals otherwise. it would have to be modified in a way that it doesn't contain any security stuff nor any code that would shows the way the game server code communicates with the master servers. modified clients being able to make the game servers sent false data to the master servers would be fatal. but that's all common knowledge ggg already stated in interviews. age and treachery will triumph over youth and skill! Last edited by vio#1992 on Jun 1, 2019, 5:38:42 PM
| |
|
You guys are floating a bit from my original proposal. I dont want users to be able to run private servers to which multiple people can connect; not at all. Online is good as is, with GGG servers handling everything.
Offline single player should be that, offline. You, your saves in your computer, none else able to access your single player game from outside simply because there'd be no networking code at all. If a cheater cheats who cares, it's restricted to his offline saves which are totally disconnected from the online game. It'd be like SSF with the only difference being you don't depend on the internet. As for the "huge" complexity of calculations you're talking about, processors are made exactly for that man; if you think doing the damage calculation locally when you hit a pack of 20 mobs would slow your computer down, then your computer shouldn't even be able to run 1997 Age of Empires when more than 40 units are fighting. Which would be absurd. Most of a game's requirements come from showing game state and handling user interaction. Game mechanics are a minor part unless we're talking realistic physics engines, which poe certainly doesn't have. Last edited by Itasil_#4538 on Jun 1, 2019, 6:40:35 PM
|
|
" ^ This. I have stopped buying points to spend because of this. GGG/PoE may appear to be doing well now, but so was Blizzard/WoW at one time, and look how far WoW has fallen over the years. Please allow not only an offline mode, but also allow me to copy my existing characters and stash from Standard to that offline mode. |
|
" For free, I guess, too, right? -salutes- At your service, my lord. Carry on my waypoint son, there'll be peace when maps are done.
Lay your portal gem to rest, don't you die no more. 'Cause it's a bitter sweet symphony this league. Try to make maps meet, you're a slave to the meta, then you leave. |
|
" " enough reasons given in here. keeping your playerbase together is everything for an online arpg game. this game simply is not sustainable via offline client. you cant show off your mtxs to your offline friends. that would be another reason to not to buy any shit while playing single player. + most of the single player offline games depends on sales to access. this causes pirating* the clients in less than a week via torrent sites. so thats out of the window. Can you give me a reason to go offline single player with this game? but a solid one. " yea nah. not happening. Trust your mind and strengthen your abilities! Last edited by MrsDeath_#3960 on Jun 2, 2019, 2:46:24 PM
|
|
" People also like to have their character look good in offline-games. Not as much but it's still existing. A solution for that is to tie the MTX bought online to the single-client as well... and the other way around. This gives extra incentive. Also how are you coming to the realization that it wouldn't be sustainable? As said, there's an example for a game which has done exactly that and actually gotten MORE interaction because of it rather then less. " Once again, doing so for instance via steam-only is a solution, this is already a decent measure against piracy. Also a second option you can tie the offline-client to the login-server. Connecting your account with it unlocks the option to play, the game then is only able to be started through steam and also needs a valid token in combination. This token is persistent so you can use it in offline-mode for steam, checks automatically though whenever there's a viable internet connection. Around 99% of piracy-issues are gone then. Also, even if pirated it's no issue for GGG, after all their game is F2P by design already which causes all sales of the single-player-client to be pure profit. " -Sustaining the game even if the servers become too expensive. -Pro-consumer behavior which leads to positive publicity. -The ability for people to play the game even with very bad connection. Feedback from single-player-users. -Modding, this leads to several unique ways to adjust the game, some of them easily saving hundreds of hours of time = resources which can be put into other endeavors. -Extra income for GGG needing very little effort -The usage as a sort of 'test-server', opt-in for experimental-branch which allows them to create leagues which aren't completely broken. Surely many more, those just came to mind in the time while I wrote the post. " Has happened with hundreds of other 'online only' games and will sooner or later happen with PoE. I prefer to keep the money I spent for something permanent (or important) rather then throwing it out the window for some solely time-based thing... especially if I have NO CLUE on how long that might be. Pay2play on the other hand... why not? I'm fine with a subscription, this at least tells me 'You have the right to play the game for x time' versus the model PoE offers which is 'oh, well, not running good anymore, bye-bye everyone, oh... and all the stuff you bought PERMANENTLY? Though luck!' It's a pure anti-consumer choice to create such a system and never give access while also not intending to give access at any given time in the future. I'm generally pro-consumer, stuff gets created for the enjoyment and use of the consumer, not as a pure means for money from the dev... this philosophy is detrimental and the cause of faaaar too many problems world-wide, especially rampant in some industries (like the gaming-industry). GGG balance is like getting a pizza which is burnt on the sides, raw in the middle and misses the most of the toppings.
Then upon sending it back you get a raw side, burnt middle and enough toppings to drench everything in grease. Everything fixed but still broken. |
|
|
Wish you had more to say than a whole bunch of assumptions, Kulze. Anyone can make those and stick by them like they are written on a golden tablet, but unfortunately, doesn't make them fact or even true.
Your argument that you keep saying that offline single-player would be very little effort for GGG, I'd like to hear why you think that, because you keep saying it, but not why you think that and honestly, I can't even think of a single (no pun intended) reason it would be little effort at all. I think you overestimate the cost of having a game online. While significant, it's still but a fraction of the entire production cost of a game like Path of Exile. Carry on my waypoint son, there'll be peace when maps are done.
Lay your portal gem to rest, don't you die no more. 'Cause it's a bitter sweet symphony this league. Try to make maps meet, you're a slave to the meta, then you leave. |
|
" Well, we have 2 parts of the game, the server and the client. In general multiplayer-code is a hard thing to manage, a lot of things to take into account. Ping, making sure packets are handled properly, how the server-code interacts with the client-code properly and so on and so on. On the other hand creating a single-player experience is simply the following: You take the zone-creation (which is a fairly simple mechanic) and put that one locally, since it's just a small part of code with the hard parts (the graphics) managed by the client-side it's a small burden on the CPU and RAM only, not even something to mention. The same goes for the creation of loot, this is nothing more then a random number generator tied to a database which decides the outcome, also fairly straight-forward. The only actual burden on the system is the AI (which is fairly simple in PoE with the exception of some very specific mobs) pathing and some of the mechanics (as those need to be calculated every frame). The biggest burden would be poison-stacks definitely, as well as combined stacks of several mechanics interacting with each other, though as we're not limited by bandwith as we would be with the online-only concept that's also not a major concern. As for how a 'quick-fix' mechanic for that would work: The server-side code is handled locally as well as the client-side code. Those interact with each other via the network still, namely by using 127.0.0.1 which is the local-host, basically you're routing all the data which is now routed over the net from client to server purely through your own machine. This way is also the one way which has the least safety-features attached. A more intricate way is to actually unravel those mechanics (this would be resource-intensive) and implement the server-side code directly into the client. It's a more solid option but some things are handled different, hence it wouldn't be as viable (still very though) for feedback-concerns regarding the online-only portion. " It's already produced, the only thing which has to be changed is how client and server interact, namely the server-code being a part of the client itself, or creating 2 separate instances which interact with each other locally. You don't have to re-invent the wheel again, it's by FAR easier to create a offline-solution for an online-only thing rather then the other way around, network-code as mentioned is the biggest concern for any multiplayer, often forcing several things along the line to be sacrificed for it... or taking fairly uncommon measures to make sure all things work fine. A great example for this is Factorio, they created a single-player game and afterwards made it multiplayer-compatible. The issues where massive. My other example which did it the other way around was as mentioned 'Wurm Unlimited'. It took them a few months to create a single-player option, the majority of time was used to create an interface for users to adjust literally EVERYTHING the server had, this needed time. In the case of PoE we don't need to adjust the core-settings though. Simply porting it without allowing changes on the server-side code is easy as you won't need to create an UI for it, the interaction is already made, the framework is there, the mechanics are fully integrated. The biggest part of work would be to re-write the code for which server would be used, this is simply re-routed to the local one without the common login-client to make sure everything is fine, character-data is stored locally as well. It's not as if the server itself runs on a friggin mac, the servers of GGG are either linux or Windows... most likely windows as it is by far easier to maintain since they won't need to learn two different OS in that case. And even with a linux... you just can attach a freeware simulator for the OS as a makeshift-measure worst-case which gets loaded with it. GGG balance is like getting a pizza which is burnt on the sides, raw in the middle and misses the most of the toppings.
Then upon sending it back you get a raw side, burnt middle and enough toppings to drench everything in grease. Everything fixed but still broken. |
|
" because of piracy and cheats. they destroy offline games and this would surely effect an offline client of poe. you suggested steam down there. dont pretend naive. i know you know games that are pirated despite being on only steam access. heres the thing with poe going offline. poe is already a fairly well known game. if anyone already have decided to play poe we need to assume they have fairly competent connections. so its not the connection that is giving players a cold feet from playing the game. its mostly the story and the content. what difference would it make for those people to poe to go offline single player? beside that its bizarre to think in this day and age one can have connection problems. so i cant see anyone choosing single player mode or simply playing poe because single player mode. online always weights heavier if i put them in a scale. " 1- as i said about mtxs doesnt matter offline. no one would give a dime to buy mtx for single player mode. 2- how more pro ggg can be? single player client would hurt and disconnect their online crowd further more. 3- i wrote an answer to this on top. its bizarre to assume someone has a high ping to a degree they cant play softcore. 4- more like losing your online crowd for not having these featured in online client. 5-might end up losing them money eventually. 2x different standalone clients 2x work to update them. 6- creating teast leagues wont bring any money. " i cant see it happening with poe in anytime soon. as long as chris does not implement an ah or something destroys the servers completely poe would survive for 5 more years.pay 2 play would ruin this game, pay 2 win would ruin it too if it ever comes to that. its hard to predict further more but it seems like they have plans for years to come. maybe just maybe after that. nothing lasts forever but i play the same mmorpg game to this day i did 15-14 years ago so why not? Trust your mind and strengthen your abilities! Last edited by MrsDeath_#3960 on Jun 3, 2019, 2:26:11 PM
|
|
" Fairly competent but still not safe from sudden lag spikes that stop the time in your client, and then you're suddenly dead when the packet that was lost from the server is re-sent. " It's not bizzarre for me. Connection speeds have grown higher and higher over time. Packet loss hasn't reduced over time. And guess which of the two affect more online games which need to reliably send small packets? " People pay money for DLCs that give them skins in an offline game. People pay for the stupidiest of things. " Single player client would only see SSF players; anyone who wants to trade wouldn't use single player client. Anyone with connection issues that still wants to enjoy the game, can play it reliably. " You talk as if dying because of a lag spike in softcore isn't frustrating. You entered the last portal? You was in lab? Long linear map? Re-walk across the entire thing once again because you lagged once! It's surely enjoyable! " Already answered in point 2 " Copy paste is not 2x work. " Oh finally a point that makes sense, thanks. |
|
