Hi,
I will try and keep this fairly concise - though what in fact prompted this thread is the certainly-not-concise "GameGuru after almost three years" thread - which raised some interesting points about GG - most absent though seemed to be comments on multiplayer.

By way of background, I must admit when Mutiplayer was first added, my first thought was "what's the use of that?" - It was a feature of Classic which I'd never used. However GG works really well in multiplayer - or at least more than single player - let me elaborate further:

In multiplayer, it doesn't really matter that the AI is poor, and graphics not spectacular. GG is always easy to knock up a quick level, and fun to play with a few friends, and it doesn't suffer as much from optimisation problems as levels tend to be smaller; and really this is where I've got the most value out of the product.

HOWEVER, the problem is the basic multiplayer seems to represent a missed opportunity in so much that it's under-used, we have a catch-22 at the moment: not enough players on the servers means no-one ever goes on the servers.

I appreciate that everyone has their own agenda, and it's easy to say "do this" or "do that" - but at the moment GG doesn't really seem to represent a finished product (I know it's not, it's in development :p ) - my argument is, it could be a lot more.

In order to be really functional, GG needs a free to use standalone multiplayer client that can run the maps for Player VS Player (other modes could be added later) independent of the GG development software. This could include the stock maps as standard and a cache of the stock media (for fast loading, encrypted), and the ability to hook into the servers as seen in GG for those hosting maps in development.
Most of this infrastructure is already there - it just needs to be standalone.

I think this would enable more servers of maps to be running the whole time - and open up playing to a whole load of users who are't interested in developing and so wouldn't pay the $20 for the app. It might even attract more customers - who've played people on it and then want to create their own levels.

I have got the most fun out of playing people on MP. As a Gold backer I had 5 keys, so gave a few to friends who've also had a good time on it playing against me.

If it were down to me (which it isn't), I'd consider rebranding GG as a multiplayer map creator - marketing the multiplayer server product as the primary focus of GG as a development tool.

I know this is hardly likely to suit a fair few of us here - but it wouldn't be shutting out existing users, or even dropping development on it as a general game maker - but it would maybe dispel the notion people always seem to have of GG being an easy "unity"/unity rival - it's not a magic dream machine every-genre game-maker, I don't think it ever will be, but maybe here is a market that can be 'tapped into' effectively before everyone jumps ship for something else?

I don't think this approach would really take very long to do either - all the code is already there, so port to a standalone which can get the core updates from GG as it goes along surely wouldn't take that long? Certainly not as long as some of the other updates are taking.

I could expand more on this vision easily (small store for low priced mp levels (up to £1), etc etc) but I think I've talked enough already.

I would be very interested to hear Lee & Team's input on this, and of-course the community.

FINALLY:
Here's a multiplayer map I published in showcase board (which seems very empty!): (Click Here)
Which is a good example of what can be knocked up in a matter of hours with stock media

It doesn't need to, and it isn't meant to, if people bought GameGuru to create AAA games, then they bought the wrong product

Hence why it's under "as has been well documented" which is more of a side note...
I am well aware that GG is not, and never has been for AAA games.

I suppose the point of the thread is just there seems to be a bit of a disconnect between the people buying the product and what they expect of it - hence they leaving negative reviews, because it doesn't have this feature or that feature, or they don't think it's finished. I'm also getting a bit tired of people posting unity this, and unity that.


To me it just seems that GG needs to be marketed a little more towards what it's good at - it's not a generic "game maker" it's a (mostly) outdoor (mostly) FPS maker, which some more clever people have pushed to boundaries to create something else.

I just see a lot of easy-to-reach potential in the multiplayer section which is barely being utilised - and could really help the product find a new market and develop.

AAA ? Stereotyping between AAA, indie blah blah blah, it has more to do with the quality then any thing else.Graphics is just flash, the sooner people get over this, "oooh that is shinny" the better. Graphics is nothing without skilled artists behind it and a thrilling story, or none at all.Should that float your boat.

With all the engines out there that indie's can use that even the big studio's use the graphics is on equal level. Scripting and such also pretty much on equal footing.Where the biggest difference comes in is the art, this where the studio has the upper hand, as they have lots of people just being able to work on art for a single level at a time, then you have the animators, sound and this and that ect.

So no single person has to do all those things at once.The second biggest issue, often overlooked by the indie is concept and research, before any game is created.

Give this engine to any big studio unmodified, and graphics will mean jack. The sheer amount of indie games that kick AAA games behind is staggering, it means that gap between the two is marginal at best, and simply comes down to the art.However with the sheer amount of assets stores out there and the quality being out of the top draw, also sort of puts AAA and indie on equal footing.

The real issue is budget constrains, the more money you can throw at assets, even custom work the better.

There is simply no reason not to create excellent games, if you are looking for excuses, graphics is bad or this excuse or that excuse, then you not trying hard enough. Game quality is limited to artistic skill nothing more.

Kinda disappointed everyone seems to just prefer to talk the odd line I write out of context, and no-one seems to be interested in talking about multiplayer (the entire point of this being a new thread...)

Just seemed to me mutiplayer is one of the most fun ways to use GG, it's not difficult to create a fun map quickly, and it seems underutilised bearing in mind it's potential. I don't see GG being ever being the next platform for a 'big' Indie/AAA single-player game (feel free to prove me wrong).

It's the most annoying thing on this forum I have read in ages in or out of context one kinda gets tired of the same old after 10 years.

Multiplayer is a moot point, unless you can get the customization equal to that of existing MP games and the ability to have your own servers.MP has and will always be a afterthought with gameguru or any TGC product. You can't even create CS:S or 1.6 clone if you wanted to.Player movement speed is retarded slow. I don't care for MP, gameguru is just able to create a decent single player game, it's waste of time.

i think multiplayer would be a great direction for GG to go in and would bring about a lot of new customers if done well, look how popular COD and BF games still are and if you ever stop by the script thread you will see one of the most requested things is how to do something along those lines... but until we get the ability to use custom scripts in multiplayer it's just something of a joke (fun for 5mins).

I am as often as I can in the offical times on and there are no servers, so I could never destroy you all

It could be a very good advertisement for GG if a server is setup and hosts a few multiplayer games made in GG.
A review as posted a few days back won't be as damaging to GG when people see and know what is truly possible with GG.

Seriously there is delusions of grandeur in this thread with expectations of MP being able to complete with what is out there.I will bet you a cold beer and clean crisp 5 note, gameguru will never ever amount to any thing MP wise.

I guess you are expecting some reasonable explanation ? Consider this how many BF games and COD games has there been, how quickly does the MP buzz fall away ? It's got zip to do with gameguru capabilities, and more to do with the fact that these games have a loyal following and linage of over 10 years.

First call of duty was released in 2003 and battlefield Vietnam in 2004, before that EA games had the Medal of honor.Half-life 2 MP not even Doom 3 MP had the user base that quake 3 and unreal tournament had and over extended periods of time.The likely hood of finding a quake 3 server up is still pretty good. Odds of finding a older COD server is close zero. The competitive nature of those games means having to get the game on pre-order so that you have every possible advantage over players, learn the maps a quickly as possible.

Pokemon Go user base dropped off the face of the planet with the exception of a few countries.There are very few indie MP games, even less successful ones at that.There is more to it then script support and gameguru, you require millions and millions of dollars and then some more for advertising budget.There hasn't been a WOW competitor in the market for years, for one simple reason. It's estimated that you need between 3 to 5 billion dollars to successfully complete against WOW, and then it's a massive risk no studio in their right mind is willing to risk it.Unlike single player games, MP games fall as quickly as they rise.MP is a beast all on it's own, indies should make more MP games but the competitiveness and the ability to hold onto players isn't worth it.

Which is why I am asking about delusions of grandeur ?

Heres the thing .... You can play Multiplayer very easily via steam ..Its not like it isn't available at all and although its only Death match and Co-op the fact is hardly anyone seems to want to ....No doubt if we had hundreds of users Playing MP all day and night demanding a main server things may be different but right now there seems to be little to hardly any interest.

The Free player app for non GameGuru users is currently at No 4 on the voting list allowing non GG owners to play MP ( which is surprising in itself ) but Standalone Multiplayer where you could actually create your own server is at No 75. The numbers speak for themselves .
If MP is empty now then TGC setting up, Maintaining and paying for a server wouldn't make a difference ..

Yeah - sorry I think I may have given rise to a misconception about what I was asking - I meant using the existing mutiplayer server on steam, not set up something entirely new.


Yes, but I think part of the reason for lack of use is lack of access. If more people could access it to play via a on-GG front end it would get more users. When I first started with FPSC x9, it was being used in the 1-hour game making club at school lunchtimes (even if this was 6/7 years ago) - there were usually 15 - 30 people making levels, but in order to play each to others you had to copy it round the room on USB stick. even in the room there were lot's of people who'd have liked to go on multiplayer for an hour against their friends in someone's level. I think a lot of people now would be interested in playing against me in a level I'd made, even if they had no interest in developing themselves.

Yes, sorry I forgot the voting list was still active. I've not been on the forum so much since Lee's blog reduced frequency - I was a daily reader.



Yeah, you're right - I wasn't asking for a standalone server, just the existing one being able to do a bit more and be tapped into by non-GG owners (so a separate free front end with the ability to host maps, or have a few default ones live people could jump in and out of).
Being able to make a multiplayer game and publish it with it's own unique server is obviously a non starter, since that's narrowing down possible users even more.

Mutliplayer does feel like a very tacked on 'test mode' at the moment, but my point is it didn't have to be. It's easier to make a complete map for multiplayer and say it's done, than a complete singleplayer game - after all what % of game guru owners have published a completed game? GameGuru itself feels more like a level editor than a full game-maker with it's feature set, and I didn't see that as a bad thing: more enjoyment comes from playing with others, than seeing your published game you spent hours on get entirely negative reviews on steam.



Wow...
You started going on about AAA vs Indie and GG's capabilities - something which is far more boring and repeated on this forum than mutiplayer - AAA vs Indie/GG's current (other) feature set was nothing to do with the thread - which is why I kept it separate, though straight away the discussion was pushed towards "same old".


You give very mixed messages - one minute the only limit is how good the artist is, and then next anyone who aims to do something has delusions?! No-one has said it's going to rival current or even old multiplayer games, but it gives an outlook for finished product - having a place where people can try out MP outside of having to have the GG engine running, much bigger potential user-base.

I'm sure you probably didn't mean to be offensive - but as another longtime TGC/FPSx9/GG user I do find the main problem facing this forum is the general air of hostility there seems to be.


Admin: Unless Lee/TGC fancy input you can lock this thread as I'm done here.

@Sparrowhawk

I do agree the present MP has lots of room for improvement still to come ..
CTF would be cool for example or our own "Capture the Guru "

I think once many of the main features are finished interest in MP may well resurface .. To even create a good CTF map we really need to be able to copy or mirror half the map. Rotate and snap it into place but right now we can only copy and paste single items.. Custom scripts are not transferrable at the moment either which limits a lot of custom map features ....


Locked at your request ...