PDA

View Full Version : next-gen multiplayer game



Mr_Moonstone
07-14-2015, 09:18 PM
Hey hey,

I'd like to kick of a discussion about what you expect from a next generation multiplayer game.
I don't mean the obvious things like graphics and stuff.
I want the devs and Ubi to maybe see more than just a new franchise.

Feel free to criticize and give feedback (maybe even vote).

First of all I would like to start with 2 points which were pointed out this way or another by many other than just me:

- Level- / Mapdesign:
As far as I've experienced games such as Titanfall or Evolve these games replayability is partly depending on the variety of maps.
Sadly at some (more or less) early point in the game the environment is getting more and more well-known.
Though you can learn the layout of the map to properly play it strategically (if that's your thing) you percieve less and less of your surroundings which in turn become boring.
Games are emerging which address this matter of exploring new maps or make you adopt to the new terrain.
As far as For Honor is concerned, I feel it should also address this point. It would heighten the replay value as it would make you hone your skills as you can't really predict the battlefield.

What it could be like: The map's layout (starting points, capture zones, lanes, etc) would be the only thing that's really hard-coded. Elements such as walls, gates, houses and so on could be applied randomly. Texture sets can create diffrent architetural styles. Daytime and corresponding lighting and finally weather.... These points could be applied as the devs see fit (i know they can't make everything new from sketch).
Bloodborne's chalice dungeons work similar as warframes levels do. No man's sky and hunt: horrors of the guilded age are around the corner....

- Seamless gameplay transitions:
Another point that titanfall irks me with: they gave you little intro sequences in the campaign while having a plain menu in between maps in multiplayer. Normal you could say but playing planetside 2 I learned how pumped up you can get just by forming your team and preparing for the next attack.
What I wish for a next-gen multiplayer game is that the transitions between maps are hardly perceivable at all. This would, just like randomized mapdesign, deepen the immersion.

Example: The battle is won. The surviving gather and are team up with new knights/samurai/vikings and prepare their gear while travelling to the next destination. In these scenes you don't necessarily have to guide your character, but it could walk or do whatever on it's own. Meanwhile you could display all menus as subscreens or even in-game objects. So the vikings would sail to the next coast, the samurai (the chosen are desert-dwellers, right?) could lead their caravan, the knights plan new tactics in around a torch-lit table and so on... If the battle before was lost, you could see the second platoon arrive / the remaining forces barricade / overseeing the victors and plan an ambush...

Feel free to add and/or criticize

P.S.: Sorry for the long text

Dead1y-Derri
07-18-2015, 11:57 PM
I think you've got some excellent ideas, I really like your idea about seamless transition and I think with MP only games these are definitely a nice touch. I'm unsure about procedurally generated maps though. I think that if you had that then it could possibly create certain advantages or disadvantages for one faction or the other because one team could get a lot of cover or vantage points and others might not. Which would lead to possible balancing issues.

Havemercy87
07-19-2015, 02:00 AM
I'm not sure about randomized map designs. Although I'm sure they will have a hefty amount of maps to play on and I'm also sure a random map selection option will be in place. It seams like and only logical that they have multiple maps for each faction.

Something like your idea of a seamless transition would be cool, I'd admit. Would also help with immersion, but I'm not sure (have the faintest idea) of how that would work. I'll leave that to UBI and let them figure it out if they want it in there

Fatal-Feit
07-19-2015, 03:47 AM
- Level- / Mapdesign:
As far as I've experienced games such as Titanfall or Evolve these games replayability is partly depending on the variety of maps.
Sadly at some (more or less) early point in the game the environment is getting more and more well-known.
Though you can learn the layout of the map to properly play it strategically (if that's your thing) you percieve less and less of your surroundings which in turn become boring.
Games are emerging which address this matter of exploring new maps or make you adopt to the new terrain.
As far as For Honor is concerned, I feel it should also address this point. It would heighten the replay value as it would make you hone your skills as you can't really predict the battlefield.

What it could be like: The map's layout (starting points, capture zones, lanes, etc) would be the only thing that's really hard-coded. Elements such as walls, gates, houses and so on could be applied randomly. Texture sets can create diffrent architetural styles. Daytime and corresponding lighting and finally weather.... These points could be applied as the devs see fit (i know they can't make everything new from sketch).
Bloodborne's chalice dungeons work similar as warframes levels do. No man's sky and hunt: horrors of the guilded age are around the corner....

Interesting idea, but I don't agree with it. One of the best parts of mastering a MOBA or MP game are learning the maps and exploiting them. Discovering new tips and tricks and being able to use it to your advantage. Titfanfall and Evolve are great examples of that, IMO.

However, I do agree with your idea to a certain extent. We have discussed something similar on the forums. There have been ideas thrown around on how to make the maps feel more distinct and refreshing each time, and my favorite idea was AC3's MP approach (it's also something you've suggested). The layout and everything are the same, but the seasons, time and day are always changing. Imagine playing on the same map in the demo at nighttime while it's snowing. I think that change in atmosphere is the appropriate amount to keep it feeling distinct without compromising gameplay.


- Seamless gameplay transitions:
Another point that titanfall irks me with: they gave you little intro sequences in the campaign while having a plain menu in between maps in multiplayer. Normal you could say but playing planetside 2 I learned how pumped up you can get just by forming your team and preparing for the next attack.
What I wish for a next-gen multiplayer game is that the transitions between maps are hardly perceivable at all. This would, just like randomized mapdesign, deepen the immersion.

Example: The battle is won. The surviving gather and are team up with new knights/samurai/vikings and prepare their gear while travelling to the next destination. In these scenes you don't necessarily have to guide your character, but it could walk or do whatever on it's own. Meanwhile you could display all menus as subscreens or even in-game objects. So the vikings would sail to the next coast, the samurai (the chosen are desert-dwellers, right?) could lead their caravan, the knights plan new tactics in around a torch-lit table and so on... If the battle before was lost, you could see the second platoon arrive / the remaining forces barricade / overseeing the victors and plan an ambush...

Neat idea! Dunno how Ubisoft may pull it off, but I'm down for something like this.

Dead1y-Derri
07-19-2015, 11:43 AM
A change of atmosphere e.g. Night, Day, Raining, Snowing, Sunny, Cloudy etc would all be good. It would still get old eventually but it would be a chance from the same map, with the same setting.

Mr_Moonstone
07-20-2015, 05:20 PM
Hey hey,

thanks for the feedback.

I admit that all procedural maps could lead to chaotic gameplay, which wasn't my intention in the first place. On second thought about Titanfall or Evolve: it was not the map layout but more the look of it that bothered me after a while.
Combined with the process of learning a map i would suggest an alteration to the whole thought:

- The physical properties and placement of gameplay relevant objects on the map are unchangeable (including walls, cover, hallways, spawn points, target areas and so on). Textures and minor objects are swapped in different sets.

Example: first round: an old castle defensive wall covered with moss where crumbled walls are used for cover. The second set would replace the castle textures with an old dryed out aqueduct where washed up rubble would be the cover. The next time it's a narrow rock confined pathway deep in the woods where you can hide behind log piles. The next time you're in a fortress made out of sandstone....

- As for the seamless transitions i do believe it's relatively easy feasible. If you're not using an open world (which would make the whole point obsolete) you could still use some tricks and cinematic effects to fulfill that purpose. I meant in-game menus in the first (not completely seamless...sorry if I gave the wrong impression)

Again Examples: After the battle is won the attackers see their next target in the distance (could either be a coast, castle of whatever).
Cut..
The next sequence shows your character on a ship, horse or chariot. During this sequence the timer for the next match runs down and you can make all the changes you want. When the timer runs out yuor character stands up to see that they are about to arrive.
Cut..
Your character disembarks/dismounts and you are about to enter the charge scene/phase of the round.
If you lost the previous round it would be even easier because you can introduce a "spare" character wherever you want preparing for battle and already at the next battlefield.

What is essential to me is that the focus of the camera is always on your character, not on the scenery, to avoid to distance you form the whole event.
This thought goes hand in hand with alterable texture sets to make these transitions more seamless.

Again so much text.

So, what do you think?:confused:

Fatal-Feit
07-21-2015, 03:54 AM
I admit that all procedural maps could lead to chaotic gameplay, which wasn't my intention in the first place. On second thought about Titanfall or Evolve: it was not the map layout but more the look of it that bothered me after a while.
Combined with the process of learning a map i would suggest an alteration to the whole thought:

- The physical properties and placement of gameplay relevant objects on the map are unchangeable (including walls, cover, hallways, spawn points, target areas and so on). Textures and minor objects are swapped in different sets.

Example: first round: an old castle defensive wall covered with moss where crumbled walls are used for cover. The second set would replace the castle textures with an old dryed out aqueduct where washed up rubble would be the cover. The next time it's a narrow rock confined pathway deep in the woods where you can hide behind log piles. The next time you're in a fortress made out of sandstone....

Hm... Interesting idea. I like half of it. The idea of the maps changing from new to rusty, combined with the seasons and time of day idea, it could totally work. But changing the aesthetics entirely, from a castle to woodland, seems kind of redundant. I mean, the devs would be better off making a new map, ya know.


- As for the seamless transitions i do believe it's relatively easy feasible. If you're not using an open world (which would make the whole point obsolete) you could still use some tricks and cinematic effects to fulfill that purpose. I meant in-game menus in the first (not completely seamless...sorry if I gave the wrong impression)

Again Examples: After the battle is won the attackers see their next target in the distance (could either be a coast, castle of whatever).
Cut..
The next sequence shows your character on a ship, horse or chariot. During this sequence the timer for the next match runs down and you can make all the changes you want. When the timer runs out yuor character stands up to see that they are about to arrive.
Cut..
Your character disembarks/dismounts and you are about to enter the charge scene/phase of the round.
If you lost the previous round it would be even easier because you can introduce a "spare" character wherever you want preparing for battle and already at the next battlefield.

What is essential to me is that the focus of the camera is always on your character, not on the scenery, to avoid to distance you form the whole event.
This thought goes hand in hand with alterable texture sets to make these transitions more seamless.

I'm not exactly sure what you are talking about, but I think I get it. Kind of. What you want is a lobby where you can still interact with your character, right? Or like, a series of cutscenes prior and after the match that replaces traditional menus?

Mr_Moonstone
07-21-2015, 09:01 AM
You are hard to please, Fatal^^

The idea for the maps seperates it's physical and geometrical properties from it's actual look. So the example with the woods was a bit misleading. Of course if you play a castle map you won't end up in the forest. Like I said they are divided into sets. So let's say there's the set for northern european castles, woodlands, jungle... and these sets have different alterations but aren't mixed with each other.
So a new map consists of its geometrical and physical layout (which is balanced and unchangeable) and a texture set with maybe daytime and season which belongs to a theme.

You got it right with the transitions. It would go like: outro sequence, cut, interactive lobby, cut, intro, battle\match.

Greets

premiumart
07-22-2015, 12:25 PM
To be honest i like my maps hand crafted and i dont need that much diversity. If it was a shooter i would say it depends on the map layout in terms of cover, choke points etc.

But since there is basicly no ranged combat in this the map layout solely depends on the paths between capture points, that ll lead you to your next enemy or your enemy to you.
I m not really sure what i expect from a map of a meele action game, i would appreciate some ways to surprise my enemy by flanking them etc.

Mr_Moonstone
07-22-2015, 02:20 PM
To be honest i like my maps hand crafted and i dont need that much diversity. If it was a shooter i would say it depends on the map layout in terms of cover, choke points etc.

But since there is basicly no ranged combat in this the map layout solely depends on the paths between capture points, that ll lead you to your next enemy or your enemy to you.
I m not really sure what i expect from a map of a meele action game, i would appreciate some ways to surprise my enemy by flanking them etc.

With the concept of moba-lanes in mind and the melee character of For Honor the emphasis would be on the length and widths of the lane, obstructions, possible environmental hazards such as cliffs, shelter from aerial attacks such as arrows... Which would all be coded to the layout, not the look.

Maps do need visual diversity, in my opinion.

As for surprising enemies: there's a radar in the upper right corner showing player controlled characters. But maybe they will have a perk that wipes your presence.

Greets

premiumart
07-22-2015, 05:52 PM
What i was saying is that even if you can you see your enemy you cant engage if he is on the other side of the map unlike a shooter and even if you have a radar you can still be surprised by enemies(happens quite often in destiny XD)

Also Yes maps need diversity but at some point you will absolutely have seen it all, like any shooter or game where you played a certain or all maps hundreds of times and know any corner, but you can still get fun out of it.

And i feel like random generating stuff just doesnt cut it, just like warframe tile sets they are randomly connected but you know every room allready XD.

Mr_Moonstone
07-22-2015, 10:32 PM
Yeah, I'm with you on Warframe. Random room connecting just didn't cut it for me too.

Dead1y-Derri
07-23-2015, 01:22 AM
I honestly think continuously changing maps lanes would be difficult to pull off on a game like For Honor because if it was random then it could easily grant tactical advantages and while this isn't an issue for specific games, I think a game like For Honor might suffer from continuously changing map lanes. Now aesthetically if the maps change e.g. rain, snow, sunny, windy, dull etc. Then sure I think it could be a good idea.

To be honest I'm trying to withhold judging what might be good or bad for the game until I've actually played it because continuously changing maps lanes and what not might be a good idea in the end.

Mr_Moonstone
07-27-2015, 09:46 AM
Leaving randomized maps aside, how many maps do you wish for when the game releases?

Greets