Multiplayer Sad State of Affairs

[Matt115]

20 minutes ago, RyanX said:

 

It was a bad choice of words when I said "supported".  You over-focus on the word "supported" and really snagged hard onto that.

 

What I should have said is:

 

The game used to be able to handle the larger server loads, and now it can't.  It could when I bought it, it's the reason I bought the game, it can't now.

 

This last sentence can't be disputed.  Yes, it's early access, it's their game and they can do what they want with it.  I've heard about a thousand times "It's not supported above 8 players" and "It's early access, it was never guaranteed, it's not their vision" .  Those thoughts are overused and everyone knows  it already, so every other post does not need to say "It's not supported above 8 players" and "early access games can change any time".  No duh...we all know that.

 

I'm just one of the advocates who want to keep multiplayer on the forefronts of TFPs minds.  I would like to continue to play the game I bought.

I liked old corpse system , food spoiling. But TFP decided to removed this. They change stuff to make "supported" things like crossplay working good. 

I undestand why you write about - i have something like that with few things. But i know this won't be changed- i bough this game when 7dtd was more like typical horror game. no it isn't - well this is nature of early access. I'm no happy about but - i was thinking that game will be more horror game like no more room in hell or the forest because it was dark easy to die, pretty gore. You was thinking that vending machines will mean bigger MP - we both were wrong so only option is too wait for 7DTD2

[SylenThunder]

18 hours ago, RyanX said:

The game used to be able to handle the larger server loads, and now it can't.

So what?  Even though it worked before, it was never intended to function that way. More content and mechanics have been added, and the extra overhead has reduced the ability for you to exceed the supported standards.

 

18 hours ago, RyanX said:

I'm just one of the advocates who want to keep multiplayer on the forefronts of TFPs minds.  I would like to continue to play the game I bought.

They still largely support multiplayer. Even more so now that you are more limited on some of your build choices. Early-game it a LOT easier when you play with three or four friends to help spread out duties and build focus.  But hey, that's 3-4 people, not 30-40. You know, what the game was designed for.

 

And you can continue to play the game you bought. This is it. 

 

I mean literally, you purchased access to a title pre-release. A title that originally was only single-player, and then was designed to support multiplayer with up to eight players.

You still have that bud.
 

Stop making out like you purchased something different. Or that you are owed something different. Or that the developer should support something other than what they intend the game to be.

 

Edited September 18, 2022 by Roland
Removed insult (see edit history)

[Matt115]

9 minutes ago, SylenThunder said:

 

 

I mean literally, you purchased access to a title pre-release. A title that originally was only single-player

 

wait what?? 

"Solo, Cooperative and Multiplayer - Play solo, coop or multiplayer in our unique Zombie Nomad Mode be a human, a bandit or a zombie for a no rules experience. Watch the leader boards and fight to be the Big Clan of the Wasteland or the Duke of Navezgane."

 

this is from kickstarter

i never saw any info about "SP only"

[SylenThunder]

5 minutes ago, Matt115 said:

wait what?? 

"Solo, Cooperative and Multiplayer - Play solo, coop or multiplayer in our unique Zombie Nomad Mode be a human, a bandit or a zombie for a no rules experience. Watch the leader boards and fight to be the Big Clan of the Wasteland or the Duke of Navezgane."

 

this is from kickstarter

i never saw any info about "SP only"

No, but there was a time you could have purchased the game that multiplayer did not exist/work. Sorry I wasn't more clear on that.

[Matt115]

7 minutes ago, SylenThunder said:

No, but there was a time you could have purchased the game that multiplayer did not exist/work. Sorry I wasn't more clear on that.

okay that's more clear

[Roland]

4 hours ago, RyanX said:

The game used to be able to handle the larger server loads, and now it can't.  It could when I bought it, it's the reason I bought the game, it can’t now

That’s like someone who bought the game only because they could play a mod that later no longer works and the mod author decides not to continue. When people extend the game to do things that aren’t supported and you buy the game because of those capabilities, it is a very risky venture. 
 

4 hours ago, RyanX said:

I'm just one of the advocates who want to keep multiplayer on the forefronts of TFPs minds.  I would like to continue to play the game I bought.

This I totally respect and admire.  Just consider that as an advocate, honey works better than vinegar…

 

I hope that the current issues are simply a temporary snag while the architecture of multiplayer is being worked on to handle cross platform play. I would be very happy for you guys if the capability for 50 player servers re-emerges even if it never is officially supported. 

Edited September 18, 2022 by Roland (see edit history)

[RyanX]

16 hours ago, SylenThunder said:

 

Stop being a tool and making out like you purchased something different. Or that you are owed something different. Or that the developer should support something other than what they intend the game to be.

 

 

Hey buddy, where do you get off calling me a tool??!?!?!?  I've been warned and had a post deleted for less than that!!!!!!

 

And @Roland what are you talking about honey vs. vinegar?  And there were no "mods" that allowed larger servers to work that I played, there were only "fixes" to try to make the game playable, and more fixes were needed with each alpha until server owners for the most part threw up their hands because it couldn't be done reasonably anymore.

 

Where in the last couple of posts did I say anything that was aggressive? I don't think anything I said was even remotely out of line or unreasonable. 

 

It's like there's an "I'm offended" squad setup to point out how silly it is to even be talking about larger multiplayer, and that I'm an idiot for wanting it.

Edited September 18, 2022 by RyanX (see edit history)

[Roland]

1 hour ago, RyanX said:

And @Roland what are you talking about honey vs. vinegar?

If you aren’t self-aware enough about your usual posting habits to understand the reference, I can’t explain it to you in a way that will help you. 
 

1 hour ago, RyanX said:

  And there were no "mods" that allowed larger servers to work that I played, there were only "fixes" to try to make the game playable,

“Modding” stands for modifying. If people were “fixing” the code to make the game work for 50-player servers then, yes, you were playing a mod. “Mods” also signify playing any version of the game that is altered from the vanilla default version. The vanilla default version allows for a maximum of eight players. If you were playing with 50 players then you were playing a mod and not only that but it appears you purchased the game on the basis of an unofficial modified version of the game that had no guarantees of being able to work in perpetuity. 50-player 7 Days to Die was never ever a product that TFP sold. It was a product a modder cobbled together and you bought into with the hope but not the guarantee that it would always be possible. 

 

1 hour ago, RyanX said:

Where in the last couple of posts did I say anything that was aggressive? I don't think anything I said was even remotely out of line or unreasonable. 

Sure, you’ve been fine in the last couple of posts. Even a broken clock gets it right twice a day but I don’t trust that clock until it is keeping time consistently. If you are announcing a new trend of non-aggressive and chill posting then that is wonderful. If you’re just telling me your two most recent posts were nice then I’m glad you at least know how to post that way but I’m waiting to see what the future brings. Mind you, I’m not saying you have to agree. You can still criticize what you don’t like and advocate for the changes you want but without the vitriol, thank you. 

 

2 hours ago, RyanX said:

It's like there's an "I'm offended" squad setup to point out how silly it is to even be talking about larger multiplayer, and that I'm an idiot for wanting it.

I definitely don’t think you’re an idiot for wanting it and I have no problem with you asking for it and hoping for it. But I think the reason you keep getting posts reminding you that 50 player compatibility is not supported is because you come across as demanding something you are entitled to have and sans the last two posts being quite rude in your demands. 
 

I completely agree with the idea that 50-player compatibility would be great to have and I hope along with you that TFP is able to get the netcode and game features finished in such a way as to make that possible again. 

[Roland]

2 hours ago, RyanX said:

Hey buddy, where do you get off calling me a tool??!?!?!?  I've been warned and had a post deleted for less than that!!!!!!

You are correct that Sylen went too far and broke the name-calling rule. I deleted his insult. When we delete rude posts or delete the rude parts of posts it is usually because someone reports it. So if your posts were deleted it was because they were reported. 

[Matt115]

2 hours ago, RyanX said:

 

 

It's like there's an "I'm offended" squad setup to point out how silly it is to even be talking about larger multiplayer, and that I'm an idiot for wanting it.

No. We just trying to explain how this work

8 minutes ago, Roland said:

 

I completely agree with the idea that 50-player compatibility would be great to have and I hope along with you that TFP is able to get the netcode and game features finished in such a way as to make that possible again. 

I think 50 players MP would made 7DTD just "dayz" or "rust" copy - it's better to just focus on world/lore/number of zombie because well... games with lot of PVP players are  usualy lack of NPC , lack of props etc. so hm... it's better to focus on smal number of players but create a lot of stuff in world 

[Roland]

2 minutes ago, Matt115 said:

I think 50 players MP would made 7DTD just "dayz" or "rust" copy - it's better to just focus on world/lore/number of zombie because well... games with lot of PVP players are  usualy lack of NPC , lack of props etc. so hm... it's better to focus on smal number of players but create a lot of stuff in world 

Sure, but TFP focused on those things in the past and the community was able to modify/fix the code enough to allow for 50 players to play together. Who cares if a mod makes the game play like Rust ir DayZ?  
 

TFP is never going to officially release the game with the capability for 50 players if they can’t GUARANTEE game stability for that kind of load. But, once they’re done working on the netcode and cross-platform architecture it would be great if once again the community could get 50-player 7 Days to Die working again.

[RyanX]

1 hour ago, Roland said:

Sure, but TFP focused on those things in the past and the community was able to modify/fix the code enough to allow for 50 players to play together. Who cares if a mod makes the game play like Rust ir DayZ?  
 

TFP is never going to officially release the game with the capability for 50 players if they can’t GUARANTEE game stability for that kind of load. But, once they’re done working on the netcode and cross-platform architecture it would be great if once again the community could get 50-player 7 Days to Die working again.

 

I haven't played on an 8 player server per se but I've certainly been on many servers where 40 or so was allowed and the population was low.  But even when there were 8 players or less it still bugs out a lot.  In the past, when 8 players could play smoothly, server owners were able to play around with some of the code to lessen the amount of bugs and glitches to allow more players.  I don't believe it really even supports 8 players now as it is claimed.

 

I agree with Roland that it doesn't have to play like Rust or DayZ.  Multiplayer for some reason gets mixed up with PvP very often.  PvP in 7D2D would just be a matter of turning player killing on and off.  Best case scenario imho would be to just focus on increasing the player count in the PvE realm but allow the modders to tinker with the PvP side of things.  Unfortunately, that ability has lessened over time.

[Roland]

7 minutes ago, RyanX said:

I haven't played on an 8 player server per se but I've certainly been on many servers where 40 or so was allowed and the population was low.  But even when there were 8 players or less it still bugs out a lot.  In the past, when 8 players could play smoothly, server owners were able to play around with some of the code to lessen the amount of bugs and glitches to allow more players.  I don't believe it really even supports 8 players now as it is claimed.

This would need to be tested. I think it would make a great bug report. There is a difference between playing on a game that has been modified to work with 40 people but doesn’t run very well when only eight are online and a game that is vanilla and eight are online. Does the vanilla game with eight players have the same problem?  If so, then it is a bug and should be reported. Using the bug report utility to bring up issues with the supported number of players is going to get more traction for netcode fixes because TFP are certainly obligated to fix what they claim to support and we are definitely entitled to a game that works with what is advertised as a default function of the game. 
 

Testing the unmodified 8-player game and submitting bug reports for issues in that may very well be the path to improvements that might allow large player servers to be possible again. 

[Matt115]

1 hour ago, RyanX said:

Best case scenario imho would be to just focus on increasing the player count in the PvE realm but allow the modders to tinker with the PvP side of things.  Unfortunately, that ability has lessened over time.

This is not good scenario - there 3 ways to gain popularity in sandbox way --> a lot of players and PVP (rust, dayz) or small number of players with focus on world -->( project zomboid, 7dtd) ---> focus on lore (green hell , the forest) so it the best option to create as much fulfited world with tons of props etc.  Well this just connected with performance so  there is only few options

in 7dts situation. There too much PVP big server sandbox and only few world/lore focused

[Howlune]

1 hour ago, Matt115 said:

This is not good scenario - there 3 ways to gain popularity in sandbox way --> a lot of players and PVP (rust, dayz) or small number of players with focus on world -->( project zomboid, 7dtd) ---> focus on lore (green hell , the forest) so it the best option to create as much fulfited world with tons of props etc.  Well this just connected with performance so  there is only few options

in 7dts situation. There too much PVP big server sandbox and only few world/lore focused

Allowing 50 players =/= rust/dayz. We are here for 7 days. Player count has no bearing on the games identity, especially when we could have those player counts in the past in the same game. There is a reason we stayed here instead of going to the other games you mentioned, because they are different games. Everytime I've seen your replies, you seem to treat the desire for higher player counts as an assault on the way you play this game. It would not affect you at all.

 

As for the honey and vinegar metaphor, I worry that many taking the side of expanding multiplayer come in here with an axe to grind. If I were a dev, I'd be less willing to listen to these people being as abrasive as they are. It's not helping. We need to stop being mad/angry and instead focus on helping those able to make change understand our plight.

 

Madmole talking about hiring a programmer for netcode gave me hope, and I made the mistake of thinking improvements would show up within months after him saying that. I should have realized most development takes a long time and such a thing would not show up until probably a21. So here's to continued hoping.

 

In the meantime, I'd also hope people upset over multiplayer stop being angry and hostile, and others stop spitting on the wish for higher population servers with no solid reason to do so.

Edited September 18, 2022 by Howlune (see edit history)

[Matt115]

4 hours ago, Howlune said:

Allowing 50 players =/= rust/dayz. We are here for 7 days. Player count has no bearing on the games identity, especially when we could have those player counts in the past in the same game. There is a reason we stayed here instead of going to the other games you mentioned, because they are different games. Everytime I've seen your replies, you seem to treat the desire for higher player counts as an assault on the way you play this game. It would not affect you at all.

 

As for the honey and vinegar metaphor, I worry that many taking the side of expanding multiplayer come in here with an axe to grind. If I were a dev, I'd be less willing to listen to these people being as abrasive as they are. It's not helping. We need to stop being mad/angry and instead focus on helping those able to make change understand our plight.

 

Madmole talking about hiring a programmer for netcode gave me hope, and I made the mistake of thinking improvements would show up within months after him saying that. I should have realized most development takes a long time and such a thing would not show up until probably a21. So here's to continued hoping.

 

In the meantime, I'd also hope people upset over multiplayer stop being angry and hostile, and others stop spitting on the wish for higher population servers with no solid reason to do so.

Do you know that this game will have a sequel in future right? So that will affect me.

Why? well some things don't have be directly connected with offical stuff to influence about game series. So let's say that 7dtd became know as game with  big servers.  Devs see what people are talking/writing about 7dtd. So they can  focus to make 7DTD2 PVPE game for bigger groups.

Why ? people would have opinion that "7dtd is like rust mixed with rust" - they will not know that more that 8% wasn't offical supported.

So to well get more buyier of 7dtd2 they can focus to created game for "50 players" groups but this will mean something will be "simpler".

If you focus more on X then there is less options to create something else - more players = less props. That's why big maps games are pretty poor about props - check Cod SP maps then MP then Warzone ---> less players more details because performance.\

Why  i'm so sure about that?

I will give Company of heroes 3 as example.

Some people were complaining about....   "too edgy" COH2. Coh 3 will be released in this year and looks like... kid was playing with ww2 action mans - colourful, "plastic" models, strange vehicles proportions and battlegroups instead commanders. 

So as you say - that's why even "not directly" things can influence on others things too. So - in short period it can be nothing for me but in longer period this can hurt a lot

So there is solid reason for this. COD looks now like.... fortnite. Check how WaW looks like and then how looks Vanguard. this happens because some people were saying "historical accuracy don't matter  , this is a game broo so you know fun" and now because of that we have anime skins and railguns. And this don't change because Acti get more money using microtransations. Ofc there are games like hell let loose or squads - but this is not cod ( too long to explains)

So as you see can influence about diffrent stuff.  The biggest Diffrence is ... there is no alternative for 7DTD series -  i don't even mean voxel games. Dead matter is abbadoned. project zomboid is not fps but isometric, dead of the night looks too much like asian F2P shooter (check traps and zombie models). So well this is important at least for me too keep this "sp/coop" "opinion' of community about 7dtd.

 

I will use cod again as example -> there is now warzone in  cod and because of that zombie community get hurts. Why? less maps, maps take from MP , lack of orginal maps because some devs are now working on warzone. So... you don't have cookie and eat cookie.  If warzone was mistake that would mean better cod zombie content.

This is example have thing in one game can influence on other games from this same series

 

Edited September 19, 2022 by Matt115 (see edit history)

[RyanX]

3 hours ago, Matt115 said:

Do you know that this game will have a sequel in future right? So that will affect me.

Why? well some things don't have be directly connected with offical stuff to influence about game series. So let's say that 7dtd became know as game with  big servers.  Devs see what people are talking/writing about 7dtd. So they can  focus to make 7DTD2 PVPE game for bigger groups.

Why ? people would have opinion that "7dtd is like rust mixed with rust" - they will not know that more that 8% wasn't offical supported.

So to well get more buyier of 7dtd2 they can focus to created game for "50 players" groups but this will mean something will be "simpler".

If you focus more on X then there is less options to create something else - more players = less props. That's why big maps games are pretty poor about props - check Cod SP maps then MP then Warzone ---> less players more details because performance.\

Why  i'm so sure about that?

I will give Company of heroes 3 as example.

Some people were complaining about....   "too edgy" COH2. Coh 3 will be released in this year and looks like... kid was playing with ww2 action mans - colourful, "plastic" models, strange vehicles proportions and battlegroups instead commanders. 

So as you say - that's why even "not directly" things can influence on others things too. So - in short period it can be nothing for me but in longer period this can hurt a lot

So there is solid reason for this. COD looks now like.... fortnite. Check how WaW looks like and then how looks Vanguard. this happens because some people were saying "historical accuracy don't matter  , this is a game broo so you know fun" and now because of that we have anime skins and railguns. And this don't change because Acti get more money using microtransations. Ofc there are games like hell let loose or squads - but this is not cod ( too long to explains)

So as you see can influence about diffrent stuff.  The biggest Diffrence is ... there is no alternative for 7DTD series -  i don't even mean voxel games. Dead matter is abbadoned. project zomboid is not fps but isometric, dead of the night looks too much like asian F2P shooter (check traps and zombie models). So well this is important at least for me too keep this "sp/coop" "opinion' of community about 7dtd.

 

I will use cod again as example -> there is now warzone in  cod and because of that zombie community get hurts. Why? less maps, maps take from MP , lack of orginal maps because some devs are now working on warzone. So... you don't have cookie and eat cookie.  If warzone was mistake that would mean better cod zombie content.

This is example have thing in one game can influence on other games from this same series

 

 

None of this is really relevant, though.  The game would be fine just as it is for multiplayer if the servers are able to handle it.  You don't need different maps because the ability to change the size is already there.  They don't need to "create" anything for the higher player counts because it's all already there.  Balancing issues can be handled by modders.  There are just so many exploits, bugs, and cheats caused by the code that also work in single player.  So, if you fix the single player, you also fix multiplayer, providing that the server can handle it.

[Roland]

4 hours ago, Matt115 said:

Do you know that this game will have a sequel in future right? So that will affect me.

Why? well some things don't have be directly connected with offical stuff to influence about game series. So let's say that 7dtd became know as game with  big servers.  Devs see what people are talking/writing about 7dtd. So they can  focus to make 7DTD2 PVPE game for bigger groups.

Why ? people would have opinion that "7dtd is like rust mixed with rust" - they will not know that more that 8% wasn't offical supported.

So to well get more buyier of 7dtd2 they can focus to created game for "50 players" groups but this will mean something will be "simpler".

If you focus more on X then there is less options to create something else - more players = less props. That's why big maps games are pretty poor about props - check Cod SP maps then MP then Warzone ---> less players more details because performance.\

Why  i'm so sure about that?

 

Anything is possible I guess but what you describe isn't very probable with these developers. They built their game with the intention that people would modify it and change it and this can include making it into a large population multiplayer game. Just as they aren't suddenly going to make their sequel into Darkness Falls they aren't going to change it into a Rust clone just because it is a popular way of playing the game. 

 

7 hours ago, Howlune said:

Everytime I've seen your replies, you seem to treat the desire for higher player counts as an assault on the way you play this game.

 

The important thing is that the devs don't see it as an assault on the game they are creating. They have no problem with people stretching the game to fit how they want to play whenever possible. There is no animosity or intentional efforts from the dev side to stop people from doing large population servers. Hopefully, once they are done working on the netcode such servers will be possible again. 

[FinkPloyd]

 

I tried to play on some large population servers a few years ago.

IMO they never worked overly well.

Lots of lag, no wrenchable resources left (cars, etc), hard to find unlooted POIs, abandoned bases preventing building everywhere (no decay system), etc.

 

8 hours ago, Howlune said:

Madmole talking about hiring a programmer for netcode gave me hope, and I made the mistake of thinking improvements would show up within months after him saying that. I should have realized most development takes a long time and such a thing would not show up until probably a21. So here's to continued hoping.

 

 

See the Pareto Principle.

 

I once spent over 3 months tracking down a performance issue in some of my code (C++ WIN32 safety system using a text to speech engine to warn train drivers over voice radio).

 

I fixed the issue by moving 2 lines of code.

[Matt115]

10 hours ago, RyanX said:

 

None of this is really relevant, though.  The game would be fine just as it is for multiplayer if the servers are able to handle it.  You don't need different maps because the ability to change the size is already there.  They don't need to "create" anything for the higher player counts because it's all already there.  Balancing issues can be handled by modders.  There are just so many exploits, bugs, and cheats caused by the code that also work in single player.  So, if you fix the single player, you also fix multiplayer, providing that the server can handle it.

You missed a point when i wrote about 7dtd sequel. Yes this can have influence on sequel. So as i said in short period will not inflence me but in longer period it can

 

9 hours ago, Roland said:

 

Anything is possible I guess but what you describe isn't very probable with these developers. They built their game with the intention that people would modify it and change it and this can include making it into a large population multiplayer game. Just as they aren't suddenly going to make their sequel into Darkness Falls they aren't going to change it into a Rust clone just because it is a popular way of playing the game. 

 

Who knows? Just Cause 3 MP mod is so popular that even get offical support (like some hl2 mods - check steam page) - a lot of people bought JC 3 because this mod was added so probably JC 5 will  get MP too. What's this mean? Less SP content.

DF is something diffrent - Well this could inflence on 7DTD 2 but hm... only about some elements idk - starting classes.

So yes this is possible that  7dtd 2 will be focused on bigger groups because... if people don't know if servers are offical or not ( not everyone know about 8 players max support.) and such servers will be more know in public people will have view that's normal thing.

 

I don't say this will be 50 people but even 16 would big change in balance, diffrent solutions etc.