Sorry if it is in wrong forum.

I just want to know why there is nothing going on with any multiplayer ideas in gameguru.
I know that there are a lot of people working on cool stuff and i also think it will be nice once it is released but in my own opinion there is one thing that can help people make and sell games a lot easier with gameguru and that is the effect of adding MULTIPLAYER to a game.

I my self play a lot of games and know for a fact that it isn't always the nicest looking games that sells a lot but the games that has multiplayer support. There is a lot of games that are awesome out there but if you are looking at the games that are made small scale then the ones with multiplayer are the ones that are selling a lot more than the games of the same quality that only has singleplayer.

There are a lot of examples of games that doesn't look so good with graphics and all but the gameplay is very nice because of multiplayer.
Counter Strike Global Offence is one of those games that doesn't focus so much on the graphics(Granted it does have pretty nice graphics but not comparable with games such as GTA V etc.) but it is one of the best seller games on the market.

Now I'm not saying everybody can make a Counter Strike but If there is a support for multiplayer or even coop then if you try to sell your game then you will most likely get more sales then you would if you only had a single player game.

The main thing is if people can make a multiplayer game and it doesn't look so good there is still a good chance other people will buy it because they can play with other people.

I know it will take a lot of time and everything to add multiplayer to the standalone so it could be a start by adding the ability to use scripts in the gameguru multiplayer so that you can make actual coop and multiplayer games with a scenario which would make it easier to later add the multiplayer function to the standalone.

I know for a fact that just being able to all ready add scripts and triggers and stuff to the gameguru multiplayer such as custom scripts, then i can play with my friends that could get gameguru and change the multiplayer game accordingly to what is needed, which would all ready make it easier for the multiplayer to get integrated into the standalone of the gameguru functions.

My main point being that if we could later on get a working function of multiplayer or coop in the gameguru standalone then it would make it a lot easier for people to release games.

There is no need to take action now because i know how busy everyone is, this is but a suggestion of mine.

Thanks for any comments about it.

I agree that a working multilayer standalone would be good to have. However it's useless to add until core funationality issues have been fixed or finished. To coin a phrase from the building trade, you don't decorate a room until the walls are finished.

Because we have no developer for it. A developer who maybe could do it is here: https://forum.thegamecreators.com/thread/222017
Also multiplayer is a complicated thing. GG support different genres with each needs a different model of multiplayer infrastructure


I searched for a study that proves that statement, but I didn´t find one. I just find a study which says that multiplayer games have more bad reviews than singleplayer games, but the example was Wolfenstein 2 which is why I do not trust this source.


That is true, but CS has a long grown big fan base and is an e-sport title like Quake or RB Siege. You will nearly never get a fresh start in the business with 0.1% of the success with GG. PUBG has something done which disapprove this thesis, but it is a bit unrealistic to let join more than 20 people to your PC (P2P) with a decent framerate. For more than 20 guys you always need a Server in my opinion.

If we not find a senior c++ developer with networking knowledge, there is no near future for multiplayer. We lost a lot of community developers in the developing process of GG, so there are not a lot here anymore which means, we need some time before some of them come back or new devs come to us.

Edit: I hope the meaning is more clear now

I think maybe we should be careful using the term developer, there might be a bit of confusion happening, and i've seen this same sort of thing happen in add-on communities ...

When we talk about developers, anyone who doesn't know the history might think you mean official developers working for TGC, and your explanation would make it sound like GG has lost all of it's official development team, when in reality it's always been just Lee with a bit of help from Rick and Ravey, when you talk about losing developers it makes it sound like GG is dying, and it's not.

Likewise, while they ARE developers, if you start calling the community members who are contributing, developers, people who don't know will think they're staff, which could lead to all sorts of confusion because customers will think they're staff and take their word as gospel, then if something doesn't happen accuse TGC of not fulfilling promises and so on, it could get quite nasty.

I'm not saying they don't deserve the title of developer, that is what they are after all, but maybe we should start calling them Community Developers, or Volunteer Developers, so that we know who we are talking about, and there's no confusion?

(not having a go or trying to stir anything up, just genuinely worried that people might get the wrong idea if we don't distinguish between actual TGC devs and community devs)

I understand all you standpoints and that there isnt anyone that can work on it now, as i said it is but a suggestion because i know that if i look for any game in steam, unless it has a very nice story or addictive gameplay, i dont buy a game unless it has either co-op or any type of multiplayer because once you have completed the game you might only repeat it a few times before trieng something else, but if it has multiplayer you spend a lot more time on the game.

Also i know we need to work on the core functions of gameguru but also in my opinion is that if we make a current multiplayer standalone with what we currently have then it wont be to bad of a game.

Ahhh .. but there are many including myself that miss the single player game experience ..
Even Battlefront II included the single player game this time around ... The tides are turning

@Belidos I hope it is better now. You are right, sorry.

No need to be sorry, it was just a suggestion to make things easier to understand for people who don't know how it works around here, glad you understood though, sometimes it's hard to explain things on the internet without upsetting people lol

All im saying is that it would be nice to have the multiplayer in the standalone someday

i also agree with roandoom it would be fantastic if there will be support for a complete multiplayer game structure.
single player is always nice, but multiplayer is always awesome

+1 although i agree with Corno we need a networking Dev to do this, however i would presume some of the networking code must already be there otherwise we wouldn't have steam multiplayer which impo is erm (not good) but in saying that its still going to need some work, but as I've always said some kind of arena like fpsc has to start with I'm sure would get the ball rolling ( I can build servers with my eyes closed and get them running) but coding GG into it ....no idea although i am reading up on it.

Although I'm a SP Person I would agree a standalone MP. exe would be good or even the steam app ( which may be quicker. easier ) but a good start to bring in the crowds .. MP doesn't have to rely on AI so much so its all down to the fact people will play a really cool MP map.
Its just getting it done that's the problem .. Things are starting to happen and I wouldn't want to make anyone go off track at the moment.

Tbh m8 i recon a peer to peer standalone is the way forward, steam multiplayer is just too limited, I've just built a server2016 machine and am relentlessly hammering the new learning curve as I'm used to 2008 and tend to have it wireless (2016 doesnt like this :/) but I'm getting there
I do think tho taking on board the fpsc arena idea is a good way to get muliplayer heads interested in GG and hey it'd be a bit of fun...something new