What features would you expect in orbiter Multi-player?

[gordliamjack]

I've been hooking up Orbiter with Raknet( A winsock 2 interface library with advanced features.)

I was just wondering what you would like to see in it?

Basic functionality will defiantly include Sync of vessels positions, docking and also later on in the year sync of animations.

I could possibly have a working alpha in two weeks, as I have school(5th year).

I will include a header file and the lib so that you can add sync-support to your vessel's systems.


Project Site: http://surgesoft.x10hosting.com

There is no release as of yet, please post your ideas below.

 

[Hielor]

Chat features.

 

[Woo482]

VOIP support would be pretty nice, it's a pain to always have to type what you want to say, especially while doing some pretty high speed flights or re-entry.

 

[Face]

I've been hooking up Orbiter with Raknet( A winsock 2 interface library with advanced features.)

I was just wondering what you would like to see in it?

Basic functionality will defiantly include Sync of vessels positions, docking and also later on in the year sync of animations.

I could possibly have a working alpha in two weeks, as I have school(5th year).

I will include a header file and the lib so that you can add sync-support to your vessel's systems.


Project Site: http://surgesoft.x10hosting.com

There is no release as of yet, please post your ideas below.

Well, I'd say you could start by reproducing at least the features of this. A basic documentation can be found here.

regards,
Face

 

[Hielor]

VOIP support would be pretty nice, it's a pain to always have to type what you want to say, especially while doing some pretty high speed flights or re-entry.

I don't see why VOIP should be included within an Orbiter multiplayer client, given that there are already at least two (Teamspeak, Ventrilo) very good free VOIP clients designed for use with games.

In order for built-in VOIP to be useful/interesting, it would need to integrate into the game world in more interesting ways, perhaps similar to how FSX does it (anyone sharing your aircraft can hear you all the time without a PTT, and you can PTT to transmit to aircraft on the same frequency). The problem with something like that is that Orbiter has no concept of a "COM" frequency, since all of the frequencies are just used for navaids...

 

[Epsilon]

Biggest thing OMP needs to be viable from a "multiplayer Orbiter" standpoint is "lowest requested time acceleration" support. That is to say, if you've got 4 people in the MP scenario, you need to find a way to allow people to set 10x, 100x, 1000x, etc. time factors. This at least doubles the number of places you can go in a reasonable amount of time - LEO, and the Moon. Mars and Venus aren't too far out either, and even a group mission to Saturn or something would be possible (though still take a couple of hours real time.)
It still wouldn't be viable for a large number of players working towards different goals, though - the only thing that would allow that would be something like WarpDriveMFD. Sadly, using warp drive somewhat defeats the purpose of Orbiter IMO.

 

[fireballs619]

I don't see why VOIP should be included within an Orbiter multiplayer client, given that there are already at least two (Teamspeak, Ventrilo) very good free VOIP clients designed for use with games.

In order for built-in VOIP to be useful/interesting, it would need to integrate into the game world in more interesting ways, perhaps similar to how FSX does it (anyone sharing your aircraft can hear you all the time without a PTT, and you can PTT to transmit to aircraft on the same frequency). The problem with something like that is that Orbiter has no concept of a "COM" frequency, since all of the frequencies are just used for navaids...

Could this be solved by the development of a COM MFD between ships? It could be interesting.

As for the multiplayer, as it gets more advanced, I would like to see a VATSIM type set-up. Substitute ATCs for 'Mission Control' to coordinate space flights. Perhaps this can be used to solve the problem of Time Acceleration in multiplayer. I.e. The mission control could determine when a certain ship could accelerate time, as not to cause disruptions with other ships. This could be difficult to implement however.

 

[Hielor]

Could this be solved by the development of a COM MFD between ships? It could be interesting.

Maybe, but getting it supported in a generic fashion might not be very easy.

As for the multiplayer, as it gets more advanced, I would like to see a VATSIM type set-up. Substitute ATCs for 'Mission Control' to coordinate space flights. Perhaps this can be used to solve the problem of Time Acceleration in multiplayer. I.e. The mission control could determine when a certain ship could accelerate time, as not to cause disruptions with other ships. This could be difficult to implement however.

This is a nice thought, but the odds of it actually working this way are very low. VATSIM only works because it has a relatively large community to work with, but that community is itself only a small percentage of the flight sim community as a whole. If a similar percentage of the Orbiter community were interested, you'd have maybe one "ATC" and 1-3 vessels online at the peak times, and that kind of defeats the purpose.

 

[fireballs619]

This is a nice thought, but the odds of it actually working this way are very low. VATSIM only works because it has a relatively large community to work with, but that community is itself only a small percentage of the flight sim community as a whole. If a similar percentage of the Orbiter community were interested, you'd have maybe one "ATC" and 1-3 vessels online at the peak times, and that kind of defeats the purpose.

What I meant, but did not explain clearly enough, was that it'd be cool to have the option to be mission control. You're right that there'd never be enough people randomly online to require a Mission Coordinator online. It could, however, prove useful to have one if you and some Orbinaut Buddies were having an event (i.e. OFMM or space-station building). Better to have this option then to haphazardly have 7 people launching for the same rendezvous point at once. Not top priority of course.

 

[gordliamjack]

weapons

What about creating some kind of role play system, for example a job system in place and an example job could be station building or Iss refuel etc the possibilities are endless.

also incorporate some kind of weapon/damage system for the seperate ships what do you think?

 

[Jarvitä]

What about creating some kind of role play system, for example a job system in place and an example job could be station building or Iss refuel etc the possibilities are endless.

also incorporate some kind of weapon/damage system for the seperate ships what do you think?

No. In orbiter, you do the role playing yourself (if you're that way inclined). The simulation itself is open ended and doesn't have any defined goals, and should remain as such.

 

[eveningsky339]

No. In orbiter, you do the role playing yourself (if you're that way inclined). The simulation itself is open ended and doesn't have any defined goals, and should remain as such.

I echo this. Let's not turn Orbiter into an RPG. One of the many things that make Orbiter great is the "sandbox" mentality-- here's your sim, now go do what you want.

I think the issue of time acceleration is still a huge hindrance to the development of a solid multiplayer project for Orbiter. For example, Player A is on his way to Saturn, and Player B is flying a tricky manual re-entry. Player A goes for time accel x 10,000... Player B is now spinning faster than the speed of light far away from the solar system.

 

[Face]

I think the issue of time acceleration is still a huge hindrance to the development of a solid multiplayer project for Orbiter. For example, Player A is on his way to Saturn, and Player B is flying a tricky manual re-entry. Player A goes for time accel x 10,000... Player B is now spinning faster than the speed of light far away from the solar system.

Hm... I already proposed the spacetime-bubble concept to solve this problem. It was rejected for the MMORPG project, but I still think it is a proper solution for a "sandbox" style multiplayer project.

Quickly repeated:

• every user can choose arbitrary time-acceleration
• users using time-acc leave the server's time bubble and go with their own
• users willing to meet others have to synchronize with their bubble
• every bubble has a "leader" who is able to set the bubble's time-acc for e.g. interplanetary fleets
• users see each other only if in the same bubble, optionally "ghosts" are possible, being recordings of trajectories of other users at the appropriate MJD time

In your example, Player A and B would be in different time-bubbles, leaving either player A or B "stranded" in future and past, respectively. Player B can choose to sync with player A after landing, of course...

regards,
Face

 

[fireballs619]

I think Face's solution is the best we're going to get. How do normal flight sims do it? Maybe we can take a page from their books.

 

[Hielor]

also incorporate some kind of weapon/damage system for the seperate ships what do you think?

If you want space combat, Orbiter isn't the best platform to do it.

 

[supersonic]

I have never see anyone use time warp in a multiplayer flight Sim. If they did, I would guess it would look like a velocity increase rather that time warp to the other players.

 

[Alexw95]

some kind of server side time exel that only exels your ship for interplanetary

 

[eveningsky339]

Hm... I already proposed the spacetime-bubble concept to solve this problem. It was rejected for the MMORPG project, but I still think it is a proper solution for a "sandbox" style multiplayer project.

Quickly repeated:

• every user can choose arbitrary time-acceleration
• users using time-acc leave the server's time bubble and go with their own
• users willing to meet others have to synchronize with their bubble
• every bubble has a "leader" who is able to set the bubble's time-acc for e.g. interplanetary fleets
• users see each other only if in the same bubble, optionally "ghosts" are possible, being recordings of trajectories of other users at the appropriate MJD time

In your example, Player A and B would be in different time-bubbles, leaving either player A or B "stranded" in future and past, respectively. Player B can choose to sync with player A after landing, of course...

regards,
Face

I've pondered concepts such as this when reading Orbiter multiplayer threads, but my only issue is this: Saturn will have moved a certain distance if Player B time accels for the equivalent of, say, two months. But Player A, orbiting earth, did not use time accel, and has been floating about for twenty minutes. However both are in the same solar system... so where is Saturn?

That may sound confusing, but it's the best I can say it.

I'm assuming that Saturn would be in different positions depending upon which space-time bubble one selected?

 

[supersonic]

Uhhh.....:uhh: after hearing that I know this is going to take a good long while.

 

[fireballs619]

I just checked in FSX- It is shown as an increase in velocity (i.e. the one plane appears to zoom past at ludicrous speeds). Would this work for orbiter?