Suggestion on Multiversing the game

[Zep]

Idea - lets create some differing timelines on our shards....

 

Example would be some people miss Galaxy City, so we pick one server and put it to a state where the Meteor/Invasion did not happen. Same rules/powers/everything else.

 

Some timelines show Atlas Destroyed so create a shard - maybe same as above with a destroyed Atlas and Galaxy taking it's place.

 

Create a shard with no Council -- the coup never happened (or hasnt happened yet).

 

With 5 servers of course we would likely need 2-3 'Main' timelines limiting what we could do, still it would be very in Comic Book concepts to have alternate dimensions with similar but different Paragon Cities.

 

It would be really neat but very far off in terms of work if Pretoria could be flushed out to have content to a higher level and also be it's own shard.

 

Now for part 2. With all these shards expand Portal Corp and allow characters to move freely between. After a log out/off reset to the home server (unless a sever move token is used). This would allow cross server play. The Secret World does something like this already.

 

Of course doing this would cost money and time to flesh out and build. If things with NCS are every fixed it would be awesome (IMO).

 

Maybe even do a shard where Redside is in the city and Blue on the Isles -- but that would carry a ton of work fixing the quest lines.       

[PaxArcana]

/JRanger

 

Doing this would essentially mean maintaining multiple versions of the code, which would multiply the workload of maintaining and bugfixing the game.

[Xaeon]

Mkay so how do you plan on coding all this and expanding the servers to fit not just one shard; but at least three for each timeline? (A PvP, a PvE, and a Role Playing server) Without breaking the bank and stretching the dev team's manpower? Unofficial volunteers can do a lot; as has been seen in many modding communities where huge volunteer teams basically tear a game apart and build something much more expansive than the original developers ever imagined the game could be while taking them in directions said devs never figured the engine could be used for; but right now we don't have Hearts of Iron IV: The New Order or Red Alert 2: Almost Perfect Yuri's Revenge: Mental Omega sized volunteer teams (the former mod has a dev team literally ten times larger than the actual base game's professional team).  And if we ever did get teams with that much manpower I'd rather they focus on building on a single timeline.

[Zep]

/JRanger

 

Doing this would essentially mean maintaining multiple versions of the code, which would multiply the workload of maintaining and bugfixing the game.

 

No - it wouldnt.

 

Different versions of some zones - yes, that is the assets and art. The game engine would be exactly the same.

[Hyperstrike]

/JRanger

 

Doing this would essentially mean maintaining multiple versions of the code, which would multiply the workload of maintaining and bugfixing the game.

 

No - it wouldnt.

 

Different versions of some zones - yes, that is the assets and art. The game engine would be exactly the same.

 

STANDARD CODE RANT.

 

Do you know what goes into a zone server?

Have you looked at the code?

Do you know how that ties back to the rest of the game?

Do you know how art assets are handled by the game?

 

 

Translation:  Yes.  It would.

[Primantis]

Interesting idea! But I am pretty sure this would cause the foorls to disappear :C

[Six-Six]

As cool as it may sound, I think a multi-verse will open a huge can of worms for both devs and story issues. I don't understand code myself, but take a look at the comics. DC has retconned its entire universe twice in a major way with Rebirth and New 52 just to try to get the mulit-verse under control. Marvel's also done it and regretted it. I mean, yeah it's very tempting to full Schrodinger. You just need a hell of a damn good writing team (both for continuity and code) to get it to work. =)

[Hyperstrike]

As cool as it may sound, I think a multi-verse will open a huge can of worms for both devs and story issues. I don't understand code myself, but take a look at the comics. DC has retconned its entire universe twice in a major way with Rebirth and New 52 just to try to get the mulit-verse under control. Marvel's also done it and regretted it. I mean, yeah it's very tempting to full Schrodinger. You just need a hell of a damn good writing team (both for continuity and code) to get it to work. =)

 

Additionally, there's already a multiverse.

 

Praetoria is one such realm.

 

The world of the Psychic Clockwork is another.

 

There's a bunch of them peppered throughout the late game.

[Electronuts]

I love the idea of using Portal Corp to change servers in game.

[Six-Six]

Pretoroia is part of my point. I think the devs and story peeps did a hell of a job. I personally like the story-telling on gold side better. But as of now it's limited to lvl 20 (?). It's easy to paint yourself in a corner with a multiverse continuity, which is counter-intuitive to the concept of the multi-verse. I don't know, maybe I'm just old fashioned. I mean, I like non-linear story lines as much as the next guy, but to me multi-verse and time-travel (cough Flashpoint) is a seemingly easy way out of a story that has dire consequences when you try to connect the dots to the prime universe -- simply because of its nature of branching out at every decision/choice point. I can't even imagine what a bag of wet noodles that must be for the devs.

 

Now, to contradict myself, it would be interesting if your choices in the game affect your character development (like in Pretoria where you choose to be Loyalist for Power or Loyalist for Protection) AND THEN be able to portal to a specific decision point that you made earlier with the repercussions appearing gradually. It's like doing an Ouro flashback with the results affecting your character development.

[jack_nomind]

/JRanger

 

Doing this would essentially mean maintaining multiple versions of the code, which would multiply the workload of maintaining and bugfixing the game.

 

No - it wouldnt.

 

Different versions of some zones - yes, that is the assets and art. The game engine would be exactly the same.

 

STANDARD CODE RANT.

 

Do you know what goes into a zone server?

Have you looked at the code?

Do you know how that ties back to the rest of the game?

Do you know how art assets are handled by the game?

 

 

Translation:  Yes.  It would.

 

Yes, I know what goes into hosting a zone.

Yes, I've looked at the code.

Yes, I know how it ties back to the rest of the game.

I sort of know how art assets are handled.  That's overly broad.

 

The gist of the OP's suggestion doesn't require maintaining different versions of the code base, nor unique servers.

 

It just requires renaming every zone with an identifier or coordinate system (Atlas_616?) and making a lot more zones.  Connections to those zones can be handled by conditional switches so you *could* have one server be only "one" reality (in bad psuedocode, 'if servername="Stupidworld" all connections to zone "1" connect to map named "Atlas_Stupidworld"'), but that seems kind of boring.  It'd be way cooler to handle the map movement by an attribute set on individual characters.

 

FWIW I actually disagree with this idea.  It's just too much work, doing something like making a "no Council" reality requires dropping or redesigning a ton of TFs.  I just also hate the "can't do it, it's impossible because code is evil magic" response.  That's almost never true.

 

[Rylas]

Sounds like the perfect opportunity to...

 

RUN YOUR OWN SERVER!

 

But it sounds way to troublesome for Homecoming.

[Profit]

As cool as it may sound, I think a multi-verse will open a huge can of worms for both devs and story issues. I don't understand code myself, but take a look at the comics. DC has retconned its entire universe twice in a major way with Rebirth and New 52 just to try to get the mulit-verse under control. Marvel's also done it and regretted it. I mean, yeah it's very tempting to full Schrodinger. You just need a hell of a damn good writing team (both for continuity and code) to get it to work. =)

 

To be fair, they only had to retcon because both rebirth and new52 are crap writing and the multiverse was brought back in the hackiest way possible. DC had the multiverse under control. It was fine. Then they epically and beautifully destroyed it in a massive act of awesome storytelling. And that singular universe was fine and had some epic story telling. Then we got the crap we have now.

[Hyperstrike]

 

 

 

 

Yes, I know what goes into hosting a zone.

Yes, I've looked at the code.

Yes, I know how it ties back to the rest of the game.

I sort of know how art assets are handled.  That's overly broad.

 

The gist of the OP's suggestion doesn't require maintaining different versions of the code base, nor unique servers.

 

And I quote:

 

No - it wouldnt.

 

Different versions of some zones - yes, that is the assets and art. The game engine would be exactly the same.

 

It just requires renaming every zone with an identifier or coordinate system (Atlas_616?) and making a lot more zones.  Connections to those zones can be handled by conditional switches so you *could* have one server be only "one" reality (in bad psuedocode, 'if servername="Stupidworld" all connections to zone "1" connect to map named "Atlas_Stupidworld"'), but that seems kind of boring.  It'd be way cooler to handle the map movement by an attribute set on individual characters.

 

Except that zone instances ALREADY use a numbering system.

 

Again, in essence, you're looking at a non-trivial tweak.

 

FWIW I actually disagree with this idea.  It's just too much work, doing something like making a "no Council" reality requires dropping or redesigning a ton of TFs.  I just also hate the "can't do it, it's impossible because code is evil magic" response.  That's almost never true.

 

 

Standard Code Rant is not "code is evil magic".

SCR is Don't try to tell people something should be "easy" or "trivial".  ESPECIALLY if you've never actually looked at the code.There's a "double especially" caveat.  But it really isn't necessary to elucidate it.

 

[PaxArcana]

I just also hate the "can't do it, it's impossible because code is evil magic" response.  That's almost never true.

 

Seeing as I was the first person in this thread to bring up the codebase, please hold still while I hit you repeatedly with this large, half-frozen dead carp:

 

*THWAKK* *THWAKK* *THWAKK*

 

... because, "code is evil magic" is no part of what I brought up.  I brought up the simple, inescapable truth that in order to do this, you would have to have multiple versions of the in-game code.  No, not just some art assets, but actual code - the hooks at Trams and the TUNNEL thingie, for example - to allow you to go to Galaxy City.  You'd have to have difference in contacts, so that you could be introduced to a Galaxy City contact by an Atlas Park contact, for another example.

 

Resulting in you now having two versions of the server code to maintain.

 

And that's just for GC.  To add back in ONE single zone.

 

If you have five different possible changes, mix-and-match-able in all permutations?  2^5 versions of the codebase to maintain.  (That's thirty-two, in case you're not good doing exponents in your head.)

 

...

 

And what happens if, for example, the dev team updates how the Trains work?  Double the versions means double the effort, and thus, double the time.

 

That is why my response was, and is, and ever shall be: /JRanger

[jack_nomind]

I brought up the simple, inescapable truth that in order to do this, you would have to have multiple versions of the in-game code.  No, not just some art assets, but actual code - the hooks at Trams and the TUNNEL thingie, for example - to allow you to go to Galaxy City. 

 

I... just explained why that's not necessary, any more than you need to spool up a new server to create a mission prompt at the tram, or to have the game list Hero zones from Ouro to Heroes and Villain zones to Villains.  I suppose that would get in the way of --

 

*THWAKK* *THWAKK* *THWAKK*

 

Well, nice talking at you.  Feel free to check out ourodev someday.

 

Standard Code Rant is not "code is evil magic".

 

It shouldn't be!  But somehow its use has devolved to cruise control for cool level of rhetorical dogmatism here.  The game does conditional doors all the time. 

 

Hacking this in badly would be relatively easy by bloating the game's static maps and adding in X number of new "types" of player.  (Right now, the map controller can only easily tell the difference between Primal Heroes, Primal Villains, and Praetorians.)  But the bad hack version would perceptibly slow down every map change in the game.  Hacking it in well would change quite a few files, like making staticMapInfo.c support looking at a new dynamic player attribute... but the fact that I'm the one actually discussing the code here should suggest it's worth re-evaluating your position.  Stop using SCR as a blunt object.

[Burnt Toast]

No thanks. We already have things that unofficially differentiate the servers... we do not need more division of them.

[Zep]

Running into Trolls in COH is somehow worse then elsewhere - IMO - I am guessing due to the community otherwise being so polite and respectful the few counter examples stand out like red paint on pure white snow or sudden unexpected dissonance during a live classical concert. 

 

Lets keep in mind this was presented as something to think about and a possible idea. Not as "DO IT NOW."

 

The need some people have to go around calling other peoples thoughts and ideas dumb (presumable due to low self esteem or some other iniquity) has always been hard for me to understand. https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=%2Fjranger

 

Lets all try and respect diversity of view points and respect each other. Practical, feasible, or not, we should respect each others ideas and personal dignity.

 

 

 

 

[Burnt Toast]

Conversely..some people are way too thin skinned. I actually take /jranger as just  lazy reply that is like saying "Hard pass." I have never associated any ill will towards the poster when people reply with that....

 

You may suggest 10 super amazing awesome ideas... and all ten may be shot down.... it is the nature of the beast. You are dealing with a game that has been around for 15 years... changes are not always welcomed when dealing with players who are accustomed and like the status quo. I find most ideas are simply too complicated..bring nothing of merit to the game..and frankly would make it more boring/too easy. My main objection to yours is that I think it owuld divide the playerbase even further.

 

 

 

Running into Trolls in COH is somehow worse then elsewhere - IMO - I am guessing due to the community otherwise being so polite and respectful the few counter examples stand out like red paint on pure white snow or sudden unexpected dissonance during a live classical concert. 

 

Lets keep in mind this was presented as something to think about and a possible idea. Not as "DO IT NOW."

 

The need some people have to go around calling other peoples thoughts and ideas dumb (presumable due to low self esteem or some other iniquity) has always been hard for me to understand. https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=%2Fjranger

 

Lets all try and respect diversity of view points and respect each other. Practical, feasible, or not, we should respect each others ideas and personal dignity.

[Hyperstrike]

Running into Trolls in COH is somehow worse then elsewhere

 

Sorry, but disagreeing with you != "trolling".

 

Simply going /jranger with no explanation or counter-argument is non-productive, and essentially trolling.But that is NOT what happened here.

 

But putting /jranger, with an actual explanation is not a /jranger.  It's simply a colorful way of saying I disagree before providing the counter-argument.

 

If it helps any, you're not REQUIRED to agree.

 

 

 

[Hyperstrike]

Conversely..some people are way too thin skinned. I actually take /jranger as just  lazy reply that is like saying "Hard pass." I have never associated any ill will towards the poster when people reply with that....

 

You may suggest 10 super amazing awesome ideas... and all ten may be shot down.... it is the nature of the beast. You are dealing with a game that has been around for 15 years... changes are not always welcomed when dealing with players who are accustomed and like the status quo. I find most ideas are simply too complicated..bring nothing of merit to the game..and frankly would make it more boring/too easy. My main objection to yours is that I think it owuld divide the playerbase even further.

 

 

 

Running into Trolls in COH is somehow worse then elsewhere - IMO - I am guessing due to the community otherwise being so polite and respectful the few counter examples stand out like red paint on pure white snow or sudden unexpected dissonance during a live classical concert. 

 

Lets keep in mind this was presented as something to think about and a possible idea. Not as "DO IT NOW."

 

The need some people have to go around calling other peoples thoughts and ideas dumb (presumable due to low self esteem or some other iniquity) has always been hard for me to understand. https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=%2Fjranger

 

Lets all try and respect diversity of view points and respect each other. Practical, feasible, or not, we should respect each others ideas and personal dignity.

 

As I said, a /jranger all alone is basically an unproductive "no".

 

What was done here was a /jranger, followed by an explanation of why they disagreed.

[justicebeliever]

/jranger isn't trolling...It is, has been said, an unproductive and unhelpful way of saying no.  Which some people do as well, following Nancy Reagan's advice and "just say no".  It's always been the way of forums that people think they have veto power and can just say "no" to kill an idea.  It's frustrating, but as Burnt Toast said, it's not a personal attack, and regardless of what Urban Dictionary says, and I don't think all posters mean it as "that's a dumb idea".  I know when I've used it (and always with a reason), I've not specifically thought the idea was dumb.

 

It has also become of late that we say "no" to ideas because somebody said the idea was easy.  "Well, Zep, that idea sounds wonderful, and normally I'd support a change like that, but because you said it was easy to do, I'm gonna say no."  This I think is also silly.  We can spend 80% of thread talking about hard or easy it is (I've fallen into this as well) instead of actually talking about the pro's and con's of the change itself.  It's not like the Homecoming Dev's are going to say..."Oh they said this idea is easy, so it must be...They are going to pick up on an idea, no matter how hard or easy, based on their skills, passion, the level of impact to themselves and the community.  And the Homecoming Dev's, more than ANY of us, know best how big or small an idea is, due to their familiarity and experience with the code, but also they know what's on their roadmap already as well.

 

And I'd like to think that most posters who do think something is easy, understand that they could be wrong, and if the idea is much harder than they think, understand it might be a lower priority.  I'd love to see answers like - "this would be awesome, I would totally do this", or "maybe, but it's really not a priority I'd want the Dev's to spend ANY time on at all [this is effort agnostic]", or "no, I don't like the idea, regardless of the effort involved, here's why I don't like it"

 

[/dreaming about a more harmonious world]

 

Zep - to your specific idea...I like the concept, but I will put myself in the category of my own personal game play, having whole cities redone as alternate universes isn't going to improve my joy that much more than if there were just more portal missions that explored the idea...Maybe new portal mission story arcs that involve going to 3 different maps in each alternate world.  Given that new missions would be less effort than whole city conversions...that's where my priority would lie...

[PaxArcana]

/jranger isn't trolling...It is, has been said, an unproductive and unhelpful way of saying no.  Which some people do as well, following Nancy Reagan's advice and "just say no".  It's always been the way of forums that people think they have veto power and can just say "no" to kill an idea.  It's frustrating, but as Burnt Toast said, it's not a personal attack, and regardless of what Urban Dictionary says, and I don't think all posters mean it as "that's a dumb idea".  I know when I've used it (and always with a reason), I've not specifically thought the idea was dumb.

 

"/JRanger" is also a way of saying "No - and at present, I lack the energy and/or motivation to explain to you the myriad patently-obvious reasons why".

 

And, of course, it is used as nothing more than a forum in-joke.  Especially when the person (as did I) then goes on to explain, at least in brief, why they have offered that /JRanger.

[GM Capocollo]

Closing this thread since it's drifted off into a discussion of a stupid catchphrase.