There’s one issue with multiple players that I haven’t worked out how to deal with yet.
The problem is, the game engine does not support having players very far from each other. The maximum allowed distance is about 4000 blocks, and I could make it up to 16000 if really needed, but either way it is finite. At some point, if players keep walking in opposite directions, there will be trouble.
From the gameplay perspective this is not a big deal, because having players so far away from each other is pointless. It essentially degrades the game to a singleplayer game, as players cannot interact with each other without walking back for many days first.
However, there needs to be some mechanism that prevents players from going too far from each other and breaking the game.
“Hard wall” limit is simple to do, but has a major drawback. If one player started to build something, the other player can screw it up by just walking in one direction. At some point, the first player will no longer be able to move away from the 2nd player and parts of his build will become inaccessible.
If you have a better idea how to do it, please share in comments!
Survivalcraft 
192 Comments
Kaalus, you could do it like Minecraft, where there is a land mass with a limited space and you can’t leave it.
Kinda like the far lands in Minecraft, but that wont help if you are playing single player afterwards because then when you can actually walk infinitely around the world you stumble upon a place you can’t get through, and wouldn’t that put a bit of strain on the terrain generator?
That’s true. I like Hotdamndel’s idea better.
You could just make an invisible wall that you cannot build,throw,or walk past.
I think if you increase it to 16000, it won’t be a problem at all. And if players reach, say, 15500m they get a warning, if they get to 15800, they die.
“Cause of death: missing your only friend in the world too much”
That’s actually a nice idea. Funny too!
Very nice kinda the same ideas.. If only I would have refreshed the page I would a saw your first. Nice.
+1
I find one problem with that. The fact that you die in the out side layer and you cannot retrieve your items. Unless there’s a way to keep inventory when you enter that area but I doubt that part.
If you get your items back, it will be like … TELEPORTING. People will use this Teleport to come back to his friend after already got lost…it is…unrealistic… Love your idea HotDamnDel
The problem with your idea is that the game would have to analyze who is the one who is moving away from who, although your idea is very good
True…. though it could be based on who has been moving faster, who is closer to the original spawn point, who is closer to the point exactly between each players’ sleep spawn point, or where the most amount of player terraforming has happened
+1
Yes very good
Hey, this is a great idea!
+++
How about a ‘soft wall’ with an 8 or 16 block buffer. This would require a penetrable first wall that triggers a chat message.. “Approaching maximum block distance” or something. Then the actual hard wall.
You can make a giant wall made of invisible bedrock like Minecraft PE (in versions 0.1.0-0.8.1)
Also a question: What is the size of the world in blocks? In the cordenades x and z?
I suggest the same thing that happens when you fly too high into the sky, and have it trigger a message until you get to the maximum point, in which there would be an invisible wall.
Have one player as the main and others as secondary. Then set it up so if the others go too far from the main they are teleported back to him.
Good one.
I agree. It would be easy to implement.
It would be good to teleport but the render engine would probably crash depending on how far away you are since it has to render everything now that it was just dropped in a new environment and the strain would be real!
I was thinking the same thing But that It would get anoying after a while if houses were far apart from each other.
Its a non issue really.
Its a pointless concern for most, and if there was LAN multiplayer instead of this split screen nonsense we could have multiple machines loading the terrain, so slowdown would be minimal.
You bring up a good thing about multiple machines. Yes survivalcraft would be played on one machine but with higher end computers the ability to travel in far chunks shouldn’t be a problem. But as for a tablet it would lead to some problems.
I wish there is a way to connect via cord to play together.
Exactly, this feature only makes sense for the better tablets. For phones I dont think it will be useful or practical, and for the PC I think it might work pretty good, if you have a good sized screen.
Kaalus this would really cripple the game. Why can’t you make it like minecraft, Zaicraft and the rest. Don’t get me wrong, I am not playing MC, but there you could be eons away and multiplayer would still work. This was especially true because mc has mine carts kand portals, where fast travelling is possible.
I’ll understand if this is just for the splitscreen mp. This is a bit disappointing to me.
Hey Johan it doesnt matter if you play minecraft dont be afraid to say it here. People here only say that minecraft sucks are because they want to be dicks and say that survivalcraft is better bc it’s a way to suck up to kaalus. Yes survivalcraft is fun but I find it as equally fun as each other.
For as long as I’ve been on this forum, which has been before gravestones were implemented, I’ve noticed a lot of people saying minecraft and have someone be a total crackhead and say that minecraft is bad. *even though that person may/may not have it on his phone* I don’t think kaalus would care. Minecraft is out there and nobody can do anything about it.
Now… I used to be a MC fan, and actually, at one point i was a big fan of both MC and SC. But honestly, i think MC ACTUALLY sucks now :P
Too many bad updates :/
I love SC because every single update still makes it feel like SC. I have a challenge.. play MC 1.6… then play MC 1.10… .theres a HUGE difference, and honestly, they are basically completely different games now. Many old MC fans dont like it now (me) because of the many many obsessed 10 and 12 year olds that kinda just end up polluting youtube and such, (and make other people like MC less) and the fact the updates after 1.9 just dont feel like REAL minecraft anymore…. (the updates are the main reason for me personally, and i know many other who agree)
There, thats my defense for the crackheads that scream about how MC is bad. Of course, they also could just suck at the game and are trying to vent :P
P.S. Im glad MC exists though, cause all the annoying kids go there INSTEAD of SC mostly :P
Here’s another challenge… search “Most annoying Minecraft players”.. then search “Most annoying Survivalcraft players” XD
Yes but I was trying to stop the fact that people would always say minecraft sucks every time someone posts something about it. I mean if they mention MC let them and don’t be a complete crackhead about it.
4000 blocks is a lot. Flying that far takes about 5 minutes.
I suggest getting wireless multiplayer working first because it’s only a logic step and might resolve this issue.
I am a fan of smaller worlds, but people need to explore, I like to explore from time to time.
As for living in a smaller world, instead of a wall maybe allow players to enter a “neighboring” area. We might not be safe against other players in another land, but this would be interesting.
In real life terms 16,000 blocks is roughly 9 miles. I don’t care if that’s in radius or diameter cause it’s still huge for even 3 dozen people.
Most likely wouldn’t be a problem if you had multiple machines instead of the one doing split screen.
Because you can load the map around you with your own device, so if you wander off, the devices dont have to generate multiple chunks several hundred blocks away
Hence if we did have a smaller world the game would only need to generate one space and it would be the same for all users, and exploring could still happen because we could move to new areas that may or may not be populated, trade, chat etc and then come back home with home still there.
Please don’t limit the exploration space.
But maybe a limit placed once the first build blocks are laid. Not to include collecting of materials.
what do you mean? Limits on blocks placed?
Placed blocks? The world is made out of blocks so that argument would be invalid to the game. When the world is made it generates blocks so those would be considered placed down blocks.
There is a distinction. The game only saves chunks that have been edited from the generated state.
Due to multi threaded cpus you could allocate one ‘core’ to each person. But this would limit older devices. You could also set separate chunk generation per player depending on name of character. (This would need people to name themselves and possibly set up a login password and would help prevent grieving “mc term” ik but it’s best way to explain damaging others stuff.)
Yeah my question is if we are in cruel mode and we lose everything, does that mean all blocks we place just vanish? That would be horrible for the rest of the survivors but not being able to remove blocks placed by others would be an issue because people would wall off other players.
What does this have to do with being able to move more then 16,000 blocks away from each other?
Why are people treating this like actual online multiplayer?
Trolling shouldn’t be game breaking because you have to sit next to the person you play with. This means that there need to be no protection. That stuff is only for RP servers, not survival stuff.
well trolling will happen regardless of whatever happens.
Yes. But you can literally stop them from trolling by asking them or not letting them use your device.
Its a non issue, its doesn’t matter at all. This isn’t some skinny 12 year old in another country, its going to be someone sitting 2 feet away from you. Trolling wont be a problem.
Separate chunk generation Kallus. That’s it. Done.
But this would mean that words are different for every player in the same world…
No actually, because the seed will make the same world every time. And if you change a chunk, only then does the chunk save. So the two players would have the sane terrain
There’s a lot of good ideas here; I especially like hotdamndel’s idea of giving players a warning message when they get too close to the distance limit. In which case, I suppose it would be best to keep the distance limit relevant to the initial spawn point of the first player to enter the world~
Space was a consern of mine when imagining what small servers would be like, possibly hosted by a player or you (kaalus) ending up buying some servers that can be borrowed by paid customers for a short time (as they are online and a friend or community content member wanted to join, the playing borrowing the server would have to upload /download the world after the session) (with restrictions as described). Space would be a consern especially if you found a way for a mobile device to host over LAN. I figured there could be a hard wall for regular worlds to restrict how many chunks that could generate and make it so you can play regular worlds already existing that are below the space limit easily, and then also have a more ideal island (world) type for split screen/small server multiplayer that would be similar to what you did when you hacked the generator testing out the new feature and what the older console editions of Minecraft did with just the island.For the island border you can make it hard to reach the edge and maybe even dangerous with increased hostile animals and maybe even the second mythical creature that can end up lurking a certain distance from the shores of large islands. Although I thought up this for a possible way for you to let us use small multiplayer servers, I guess this applies well for your current situation.
Longest Essay EVER
Maybe, similar to the sky limit, it warns you that you are too far from the other player, and maybe a bar is on the side of the screen that tells you how far so you won’t have half of a house before you die. Better than crashing! But also, I kind of wanted PvP, something me and my brother had planned. We would go off in opposite directions and build our house, then try to find the other’s base and destroy it. However, if you can’t go too far away, this would be pointless.
But it’s not your fault, I realize. It’s the chunk’s fault!
Kaalus, you’ll have to write a complete server engine that handles the terrain and animals as well as players, separately from each players engine.
You need to look at all the players in the same way as you handle animals, except they must not dissappear. Actually, with this there should not be animals disappearing as well. You can have a radius of x blocks around each player and only animals in that radius are moving. When they leave, they must just be stored with an attribute.
The server must run seperately from each player.
How does MCPE manage multiplayer over huge distances, without having an Internet server, just local LAN?
They have multiple machines, so one machine doesn’t work for two people, meaning it would run smoother since the machines dont generate a world for two or more people.
If it’s 4000, just make it 4000 per player centered on each player. Imagine two spheres wandering around the map. They are allowed to overlap.
How about a block that u can place to be used as the center of the invisible walls circle. That way u could place it at the center of your village and have loads of room in all directions. And the block should be able to be moved. So you could relocate.
That could be a good idea, and i was thinking of that same thing earlier, though there are some obvious problems with it (like when you remove the block to relocate, where would the “center” be?)
I got an idea. If the world was limit like no minecraft pocket edition was a long time ago. Then you shouldn’t have to resort to copying there idea for a world limit but instead use lava as a world barrier.
I mean by on the world’s edge there should be a cliff that hangs off til bedrock or so and have a couple layers filled with lava. So that the player can avoid that area. And if they try to build over it the item gets incinerated and the world says “World limit found. Find somewhere else to build”
Or I even have a better idea. Make a new block called ‘irradiated’ or ‘poison’ and make a layer of the edge of the world this new block and when players step on it they slowly lose health and will die from it.
Or even have it where if you enter the area the further you get a film screen, like in old movies, would get stronger and if it covers the screen you are teleported 20 blocks away from border.
OR probably my best idea yet. If you go into the bordered area,marked by however youd like, the player would lose consciousness and fall asleep and when you wake you appear in your last slept area or magnet area.
Last thing and this is an idea for next update.
What if we could have a 🚀 and be able to travel to the moon and have new types of blocks and ores like iridium and have it be the strongest tool material/ammo. But also implement a way to breath outside the world.
OR we could just have the players loop back into the area…
I like this idea! Round worlds are awesome! (Even though they aren’t really round.)
I like most of my ideas, like leaving an area and end up in another village of people. Everyone likes to explore, even me at times… *hides under rock*
But that won’t make it an infinite.. Perhaps make the looping world only in multiplayer?
Both players can be bound together by an invisible rope.
Like a tug of war, if one player moves fartherthan the maximum distance netween the two players then the other player gets dragged. As in if player 1 moves forward then player 2 (since they are bound by an invisible rope) will get dragged toward the same direction as if the player 1 is pulling player 2
Or. The player loses health points and keeps losing if they are far away and do not return to within the limit
Not bad of an idea but what about when 3 or 4 people come into play? and what if one is flying or swimming? Not criticizing but Just a thought!
I suggest multiple warnings, but when the limit is reached, all players die (with inventory projected towards the middle). This way it sucks for all, which is why the players will end up avoid doing it on purpose. Additionally, if you end up not wanting to keep a player playing on your device, you should have the option to remove them without messing the current state of the world up. If a player keeps playing “dirty”, it’s obvious that you will then remove them and will keep playing the same world without them.
Why not just have them killed by lightening? it’s an instant kill.
Nah, my first time playing SC ever in the Halloween update with werewolves, i tried building a house out of sand(dont ask…. lol…..) then there was a thunderstorm during a full moon and it was pitch black… as you can probably guess, it wasnt a good situation…. well, then i got struck by lighting and was caught on fire(cause obviously i couldnt make a roof :P) and i managed to find my way to the ocean before i burnt to death. Then i got struck again(Idk how) and ran again. Then a werewolf came and ripped my face off and ate my bacon :(
Then the demo ended.
Lol
Oh that was back before the update… Lightening kills in one hit regardless of armor, will even pass threw a non-stone block really and kill you.
I have a simple idea.
Use the spawn point, so where the player / players sleep I’m the calculations.
So u take player 1 Pos + player 2 pos + spawns then take the average. Use that as the central point on the distance I can travel. That way 1 player would not have any priority when walking away from the base.
Perhaps, that the map is an island, that is, with limits, and when trying to leave them, you die by high tides, animals, or maybe even rays (what you think ?, sorry for my english)
I do like islands too, but how many people per island? Only 18 people per island would work really so we can get 2 people per “mile”.
If not interesting what I have to say you scroll up I don’t mind
Hola everybody and kaalus
Wondering boy is speaking
I was wondering if there will bee any other food in SC, it could use some more and also this game is sosososo (5 minutes later) amazing!!!!!
Oh yes I was wondering when you die
Your item on the floor is leaving too fast or it alright don’t know.
Oh yes I wounder if kaalus will put in local and online (I am not saying it is easy i try to make a multiplayer game like kaalus and I think I spend couple days in cuma). And also I wounder if there will be sitting animation it would bee cool still but I prentend to sit down do a little sleeping fishing but I need a fishing pole.
That all have to say but I have more to say but not right now anything I say kaalus already going to put in SC
Ive actually reached the edge of the world, what happens is that you see a void and it will tell you “turn back!” As it attempts to create more chunks then here’s whats cool, you come to a large land mass, is it a new land were your deserters live or a new whole land mass that has been reset…
I know you said this isn’t officially multiplayer, but could a LAN connection incorporating players be possible to possibly circumvent this issue? Pushing that aside though, maybe the farther a player goes from another player the more treacherous their survival ability increases. Say like becoming more susceptible to animal attack during daylight!
If being 4000 blocks apart screws gameplay maybe you could make maps specifically for multiplayer. Possibly little multiplayer floating islands so they can’t build far away even if they wanted. Best regards, Sabrina *^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^ (\___/) ( O,O ) ((;;;;;)) ” ” *^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^
> >
Life inside of a bubble is hard, just ask John Travolta. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boy_in_the_Plastic_Bubble
That’s a brilliant idea, I hope Kaalus uses it
In curious – why is this a problem? I suspect the GPU could handle multiple viewports. It’s a tricky problem, though.
Perhaps consider a consolidated service that could handle the CPU aspects such as AI processing.
I think it would be better if you make it like another mode(co op mode or something). This will seperate from the usual infinite modes we have and making this mode “limited world” so players wont have that much of a problem exploring. Similar to the old versions of minecraft pe. This way you can make this mode like “beta” thing, work in progress where we can still play and report bugs while you try to figure out things to make it better.
Well, 16000 blocks is quite a lot. I agree, the boundry most people spoke of is a good idea, but then it should be restricted to multiplayer only. Therefore have a multiplayer option seperate to single player, and those are restricted worlds of 16000×16000 blocks or some sort. That should solve the distance problem not so ?
I’ve been taking part in these discussions, but I’m not sure why. The one feature I’ve been waiting for, was multiplayer and this is the one feature that was dragging my boys to minecraft. Sorry for sounding a bit negative, but this is not it. I understand that it is on the way to it, but I do not see that I’m going to use this feature at all. If this is going to work in certain worlds only, it will be bad.
People don’t want mp just to fight, some want it for creative builds and would like to do it on current worlds.
I’ll just have to wait for proper LAN. I suppose this is just a way to get there. Sorry for the negative vote. I do appreciate your work Kaalus. Some will find this useful. Maybe I’ll get a controller to test it at least.
I did not realise implementing full mp was such a difficult thing to do. It’s there a possibility that you could get help on this one? It sounds like a bit too much for one guy.
Thanks for what you have done thusfar.
What he has already done is some work towards multi-device multiplayer. I expect it will com fairly soon.
A deadly unseen predator pounces on anybody abandoning their team/clan/village… when you near your limit, start a scary growling as a warning…
It does make it more challenging because sometimes you have to travel to find certain kind of resources (like twine only grows in humid forest areas), the whole team will have to travel together to forage…
You can do a limited world for that “multiplayer”
A few ideas here; the further you separate from each other:
1. The weather gets worse and you begin to get struck by lighting…
2. Animals attacks increase as individuals are easier to pick off when separated… leading to an inevitable death.
3. You can add a phantom as a new creature, that wisps you closers to your teammates.
4. God smites you. Warning messages appear stating that you’ve been warned to stay together.
5. Implement a teamwork meter. The closers you are together, the more you benefit from a perk like “animals are less hostile”. When separated, animals will attack… second #2 above.
6. A combination of the above.
Lol, those are great ideas imo and would work, though i doubt kaalus would add in a phantom, lol
My favorite by far would be God smiting people who stray too far :P
How about add some human mobs? Like tribal peoples bcoz your trapped in an island anyway… But theres a creative menu option where we can change their skins… That would be awesome
Like the bulls and cows, tribes must have some “defender” too
Please add this in the new update!
I mean it can’t be that hard, you already have a 3d model of human, and just do some minor coding and design a new spawn egg!
Please😇
OK, if there will be a limit and hopefully it is only for this split screen mode, the best way is the idea that when players are too far away from each other, the will be blocked, like an invisible force field. This must however be flexible, so that if players move together, the limit never kicks in. This is the only sensible way.
But please Kaalus, in the future, take this limit away when you (hopefully) implement local LAN multiplayer. You said that the game engine does not allow for this unlimited play. Is there a way to change that in the near future?
I think your hard limit should be OK at 16000 blocks but may be a little tight at 4000. There can be at most 4 people, no? Some people would have trouble with ANY limit. Many games have a hard limit and people either work with it or take advantage of it…
Just zap then with lightning when they go 4k blocks away.
well the other “instant kills” are busy or easy to dodge so… Yeah Lightning
How much is loaded now?
What happens to the original area when you go a great distance away?
Have the area loaded around each player. Any overlap of area is only loaded once. When next to each other, it is just the one area. When far enough away, two separate areas are loaded (or however many players you have.)
The problems are: Kaalus is on one device, which means 1 processor is handling 4 different loadings… also if he does separate loading like this for all 1.4 Million (I don’t know how many players we have) that would eat up a server in a hurry.
Lol wut? Its split screen. Not a server, what are you talking about?
With local LAN, the initiator is always the server. So even with split screen, you’ll be the server as well. Hopefully this is the problem that Kaalus has, that he cannot have an server engine while using split screen and that this will not be an issue with LAN.
I have a few suggestions to add for 2.1 update
Hopefully you’ll include one or two of my ideas..
1) add more flowers, and herbs
Medicinal herbs to cure you
2) add tribal NPC’s and villages, (if you dont have the time, just remodel the cow. Haha!)
3) those NPCs skins can be customized in creative mode
4) add customizable weapons, like the furniture’s but cannot be placed down like a block
5) add more rare animals that cant only be found on tundra
Like, Macaws, Sloth, elephant,
6) add spawnable mobs like. Gorilla, monkey, rabbit, butterfly,
7) add Hostile NPC like Cavemen’s, and Pirates!
8) make a bigger boat, almost like a mini ship which you can ride, enter, and sleep in
9) make that boat paintable
10) make a way to create a scuba suit
11) add ghosts on tombstones, that will follow and creep around you,
12) add a Voodoo hut, randomly generated, that has amulet and charms
13) add witch doctor mob
14) charms like health generation, luck in finding rare mobs, and swim faster
I made these ideas like connected to the main plot of the game,
Hopefully you’ll include a few of these in the next update, especially the NPC’s
BTW. You the man kaulus!
Thanks
1) Maybe make more uses for the current flowers, as at the moment they are a bit of a chest clog.
2) This has been requested a lot. It would be cool, but take a lot of work.
3) I don’t really see why this is necessary.
4) This would have to only be available in creative mode, where it would be only useful in adventure maps. This level of specificity makes it not worth adding.
5) Sure, more animals are good. It would be nice for more of the animals to be useful, though. Some don’t attack or drop anything, making them useless.
6) Sure, more animals are good. It would be nice for more of the animals to be useful, though. Some don’t attack or drop anything, making them useless.
7) Interesting… I think this could be a nice feature. The lack of communication makes it easier to add.
8) This would be difficult to add.
9) Making the *current* boat paintable would, if possible, be a good idea.
10) A bit techy, maybe a breathing reed would fit better.
11) This will annoy Johan and seems useless.
12) Nice idea; I prefer temples personally but these would be good too.
13) This is too similar to Minecraft.
14) This could be okay…
Overall, these ideas are unique (which I do not mean in a bad way – it gets annoying when people request the same thing over and over again). I hope a few of these get added.
Haha, you are so right Tom, it sure would.
Hey Kaalus,
I thought about the distance problem and came up with a possible solution. When we get split screen each character could have their own render range independent of other characters so they can move as far away from each other without any limitations. Terrain that is newly rendered can be storaged like it is now so when other players revisit already rendered land it loads as the game would if it was one player. Of course this would put more load on the device. That’s why this should be a optional render method when creating a new world that can be switched in the settings to another option that I call “globed world”. basically it make the world “round” but it won’t be noticeable. After traveling for about 4000 blocks the player will be on the other side of a flat 8000×8000(4000 blocks in each direction from center which will be spawn} map. It would be seamless so they won’t notice so the world appear round like earth when its actually a flat map stitched together into a sphere so if you continue in one direction you would talk around back to where you started.
Think about it, 4000 blocks is quite a distance to travel and if you do get to the 3999 block point you will just continue in the same direction until you end up where you started without even noticing. Having a world like this could make the idea of having seasons and weather systems respective to their biomes like rain falling in the forest while its still sunny in the desert. Other ideas that would go hand in hand with this would be having a jet stream and wind in the game that works with the weather to create different conditions in different biomes.
Another rendering method could be a fixed distance from spawn. For example, X amount of players are in a world and the spawn is at 3500, 3500, they can only render up to 2500 blocks before hitting a soft wall that will trigger a message to show saying they are nearing the world boundary. If they continued they will be met with a invisible hard wall that is marked by all the blocks on the ground have a tint of red or black that will slowly damage the character similar to when your hungry. These are my idea for the view distance problem, hope you at least get an idea for what I typed if you don’t like it.
+1 to the sphere world idea :)
A plus to this is that when you look off in the distance you would kinda see the world curve like in real life when its actually a visual effect to simulate the world being a sphere.
+1 to loop around the world.
I honestly think that having a world limit for split screen multiplayer is a bad idea.If MCPE uses C++ as it’s game engine, then what does kaalus use?
Really, MCPE is written in C++11 and Survivalcraft in C#
The gaming engine is not as such the programming language. C++ and C# are only the compilers, not the gaming engine.
16.000 blocks limited world woud be a good idea, because nobody woud go that far from its home, no?
Things I would add to the game: bit faster movement, hoppers, NPCs, mod support, pets, more minerals, etc
I’ve traveled thousands of blocks from home before just because I didn’t want to deplete the area around my house too bad. I’ve also traveled back several times as well, and I’m a simple farmer. People like to explore and see sunsets over a mountain, beach, etc.
Well… maybe you could make it so the only things the game loads in are the areas that the players are in, by say maybe like 128 block? Then everything that the players have edited in any way (and then leave the area) get compressed down so it is easier store. when the players come back to the compressed area, the land generates back in completely, and the areas that nobody has ever gone is in generated from scratch(that would kinda ruin the ability to create Seeds for the multiplayer worlds.
Now… two things… First…. i hope you understand what i mean… Second… .i assume you already either though of all that (or most of it) yourself since you seem pretty smart to me, lol, and/or you got other comments say pretty much this same thing and im basically posing spam, but im kinda pressed on time so i was not able to read through many comments. Either way, i hope maybe i said SOMETHING helpful :P
SurvivalCraftFTW!!
My 2 cents for this split screen feature; use a finite space like MC does – a bigger preferably. My kids like multiplayer and Creative mode. They do not like the risk of getting lost and losing all their work. Other modes would still work in finite space. But I suspect Creative mode would get the most benefit and converts from this fledgling MP feature. So I’d support Creative types with finite worlds.
Hmm.. you know what would be pretty cool…(though probably not worth the time :( )? Maybe adding a setting when creating a world that enables “Block Gravity”, where every single block would fall if it is not connected to something. You could possibly also have a setting that is pretty much the same thing, but it makes it so any block not connected to a block falls…. and that must have proper real life support too. You wouldnt be able to have a giant sky bridge that is 1×200 or something :P
Eventually, the blocks would begin to fall slightly at a certain point by like 1/2 of a block, and would begin to go down 1/2 a block more and more the farther you go down. Hmm… i think ill actually try and give some screenshots that help show what i mean… not sure if i will be able to though…. your the smart guy, not me ;)
Also, i do realize this will probably never really be put in… but… i said PROBABLY, so i do think theres a chance you may consider
Here is a simple pic showing it a bit:
http://imgur.com/a/EXmCn
I’ve thought he needed this for a while. It would also help with trees.
kaalus, i found a bug, look this video, and see the text ( COMO BACK ) JUST ANIMAL FALL TO THE SPACE, NO MORE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypXLRScbzzA
Kaalus, whatever you do, please do not have separate worlds for Single and Multiplayer. I see many suggest this, but this is what made Worldcraft bad for many. Worldcraft has a small limited world option, only for multiplayer, but infinite for single player. I played it before I got SC.
I suggested that you enclose players so that the area is always from a radius (square not round though) with the centre as an average of all the players. The outside of the square must have an invisible wall. The biggest problem with this, is that if someone dies, they might have slept outside the mp area. To avoid this, if this is the case, a player will spawn randomly inside the area. This will make players cautious on where they sleep. Yes, it might let somebody wake up amongst werewolves (still wish we could disable them), but that is a small trade off to having limited worlds.
This is also the least complicated way to go ahead. You just need all the players’ coordinates and get the average for the radius and then have an invisible wall around the players, like the Berlin wall and give them a warning message when they reach it. This movable cage will then be dynamically moved around as players move. In this way exploration will not be stifled. People who are scared of being lost will also be helped. They cannot stray far away from their friends (or enemies).
If anybody thinks that a limited world is a better option, then please reconsider. In this way you do not need to implement anything else. The worlds can stay the same, the rendering, well everything stays the same.
Please support this with comments if you do agree.
And yes, we will hope that with LAN this limit disappears. With a square radius of 8000 blocks (16000×16000), this would be not so bad at all. When fast transportation is incorporated, this limit should be dealt with.
I’m good with smaller worlds/islands, as long as we can travel between them/explore empty areas. Just have to keep our inventory from one place to the next, and make sure we don’t drain zones completely of resources.
Crossing several zones with nothing in them would be fatal for most people and not knowing where they are would be a pain. Also 15,000 blocks fully developed into a massive city could hold hundreds of thousands of players and still be very functional.
Sadly we would probably need about 3-4 small cities to house all … wait 500,000 downloads? that’s only about 505,000 players!!!1!, but there would still be people that like a small town to live in or just want to see the occasional traveler/trade once a week.
I hear you, but if getting lost is such an issue, why are we not hearing more about it currently. I maybe once or twice read where someone complained about losing their house. Get a magnet, that is what it is for. With all this, if Kaalus could make mp without a lmit, would this be bad?
I have played MCPE with Mp and also have I never heard anybody complain that the world is too big and they get lost too easily. MCPE has a cure for the problem. If you sleep and then destroy your bed and then die, you respawn at the original spawning point. Kaalus could implement something as easy as this in SC. Also, when you have a moving boundary, losing your friends won’t happen.
The benefit about this option, is that you can mp build a world in creative without any restrictions and then change to mp and go and play in that world. You can also use a current adventure world and switch to mp, or maybe he can implement an MP Adventure mode, or as you would like, an MP cruel world. By having a fixed sized world, you lose all these benefits.
OK, everybody could also get lost together. Well, survival does have its danders, doesn’t it? Maybe time to learn to use a magnet and a compass. You could also go in creative and use coordinates to get back. This should not be a decision maker at all.
I don’t use magnets and navigate just fine. The sun rises in the “east” and sets in the “west” so I just know which way my house/base is roughly within 100,000 blocks (3 days travel). Outside of that range it gets harder to get home even with a compass because they only point in a general direction and can be easily thrown off by another magnet, or the last place you slept if the magnet was destroyed.
How do you survive without a compass? I do just fine myself. Fix sized worlds are fine as long as we have about 6 or so to explore before we start looping (16,000 x 6 = 96,000 blocks = 50~ Square miles) and we only have half a million people to get on an area larger then Manhattan.
Different worlds for single player and multiplayer is not a good solution. Honestly, I think everyone is stressing out over the distance limit. If Kaalus makes it 16,000 then it takes over half an hour to go that far when constantly flying. Walking is much slower, especially if you are also trying to survive. I think a warning and then death when you pass the boundary is the best option.
As Kaalus has just said:
“From the gameplay perspective this is not a big deal, because having players so far away from each other is pointless. It essentially degrades the game to a singleplayer game, as players cannot interact with each other without walking back for many days first.”
1. First off, I totally agree that having separate worlds is a very bad idea.
2. Why again with the dying idea? For what reason? Why can there not just be an invisible barrier. I’ve heard so many give this idea, yet nobody has yet given a good reason why you have to die. They all just say it is the best, without explaining why.
3. What Kaalus has said is true as long as we still do not have a proper high speed travelling system like with MC. In MC, using the mine carts, you can be far away from each other for a time and then return. When designing a feature, you must always keep development in mind, otherwise you need to rewrite things again, as Kaalus has already experienced. For now, it is a limit he cannot get around, but he must leave open the option that someday, hopefully soon, he’ll get around it.
1) Yes
2) To be honest, death or barrier doesn’t really matter, as long as the border is far enough. Death is more consistent with the height limit, but barrier has advantages.
3) The thing is that the massive distances that this would let you travel is unnecessary. There is plenty of land available in a very small space. If the players are building something in creative or surviving with a base the limit does not matter, as no player would bother straying 2000 blocks from the base when there is so much space everywhere else (a finite world size would not matter in these situations but I still don’t like it). The other scenario is one in which they explore together, with no base. In this case, they stay together otherwise it is just a single player world.
How about before the world is made a leader is chosen, probably player 1. The leader is the center of the invisible wall. If another player reaches the limit it displays a notice saying. “You are too far away from the other players, do you wish to lose your items and be transported back to the leader, Or do you wish to turn around and keep your items.” If the leader happens to be dead then you will transport to his last sleeping spot. And I suggest a very very soft wall if you start walking into it you slow down more and more till you stop. And because the leader is moving you could make the player at the boundary become temporarily “dead”. Till he decides if he wants to turn around or go home immediately.
That could also work, using the main player as the centre, but you do not need to kill a player or something like that, just prevent movement. If one player is the centre, then you have another problem. If he moves and somebody behind him is at the wall, would you then block his movement? A average centre would be better.
The idea behind a level “center” is neat, I’m sure with multiple players we’d find a way to break the game/system eventually, but that would take time. I’m sure a week after multiplayer is out we’ll break the game at least once that’s just how curious people are.
You can make an option for multiplayer survival games that generates the map as a pure island… and any attempts to leave will result in God Smiting you.
Or better yet, a big whale eats you!
Whales and be dodged… and lava can be turned to stone… so Lightening is the only other thing that can kill instantly.
I have noticed a pretty effective deterrent to exploring in SC… which is when you hit that cursed white barrier that I call the “deep freeze.” It can kill you in minutes (maybe a little slower if you’re wearing bear-skin garments). So have the far limit of the team-play world turn bitterly cold. Players might stray into it, but they won’t be staying too long. 😆
Just make a separate multiplayer tab in the main menu, and in the create world screen choose the world size using the world boarder (that shimmering glass pane block like in Minecraft)
Either 4000/4000 for low memory devices,
Or 16000/16000 for higher end devices.
An acceptable sacrifice for multiplayer in Survivalcraft.
I am not sure that people read other posts at all. How is this better than just limiting the players in a normal world? Nope not in any way is it better. Kaalus will even have rewrite the entire world creating engine.
Wow you just came to the realization other people don’t read other people’s posts at all?
I can feel myself fading away Johan now that I’m not needed anymore… the stupid comments are so few and far between now …
…ok, I won’t share my possible ideas. Maybe a more kind and accepting approach next time. Okay, Johan?
OK, I’ve been a bit harsh on you and sorry for that. I am just frustrated that it seems like people just splash ideas without even reading what other people have written So many people come with ideas of killing off players that wonder too fat. I mean, you get players eaten by whales, wisked of by some kind of mythical creature and even smitten by God (a strange view of God that is) and whatever. Almost everybody wants a small world to play MP in, yet they do not consider other options.
What frustrated me, was that I gave a fairly good solution to the problem at hand, yet almost nobody seemed to read it. So I gathered from your statement as well. I do not have a problem with your idea, but I do have an issue that it seems that you did not read my idea.
Why is this even important?
Well, how reasoning works, is that people put ideas on the table and then people bring other ideas to the table and challenge the ideas on the table. The way to challenge my idea, would be to show the weaknesses in my ideas and promote solutions to my suggestions or for that matter, somebody else’s idea. Almost nobody does this. Everybody just throw their idea on the table without considering other ideas. Look at my post, I did point out the weaknesses of the other ideas and presented a solution. Try to do the same.
If my idea is flawed, show me where and we all can come up with a better solution. Everybody just continues in the same trend and it is not helping Kaalus!
Okayyyyy then fam I sort of get you
I have a good idea for survival & adventure. Just intentionally increase hostile creatures’ spawn rate if the players are too far away from each other (and/or the original spawn point). But I’m not sure what about creative mode.
Another approach is to make terrain ‘loop over’ but that might look somewhat odd. Maybe there’s another way to ‘loop it over’.
I do hope all these changes recently paves a way to make wireless multiplayer possible. Because as nice as it is to be able to play multiplayer on once device (would work really nice on Windows 10), wireless multiplayer is a must. At least start with local wireless.
Please, make the multiplayer just like how you can play Minecraft Pocket Edition. Separate devices, connect through wifi…
Yes, hopefully this is a proof of concept for the next step of wifi multiplayer. And then (maybe) online with friends…
Please people, before you post, read the other ideas, because you are just repeating the same ideas. A world that is looping over is the same as a round world as for example. We need to be constructive. Nobody has even challenged my idea or at least debunked my argument against a limited world, something everyone is advocating. This is going nowhere, quickly!
And please stop with the idea of killing players that wanders too far. Really?
Since you asked nicely:
The problem I have with your idea is the fact it just changes the way you would create the problem. Instead of one person wandering off making the others’ buildings worthless, you’d just need two people to wander in one direction.
This is referring to your “Player Average” idea. Assuming you meant the “average” was the world’s center.
I personally think making the world 3999 x 3999 would be best. (Or whatever the max possible would be) Making a simple fixed world. (Only for split screen of course, not including LAN or online when they come)
Plus, you never explained why this idea made Worldcraft bad.
OK, we both are making assumptions which I did not realise. I was working with the idea that with multiplayer you’ll be doing things co-operatively, while you assumed that mp will mostly be for war or competition. I did not take this into account. When I play MC with my kids, we go on missions to explore etc., together. Sometimes though, we would be very far appart, but would return to each other. We did once play fighting each other, but decided that we do not want to do that again.
Justin also at one stage mentioned that mp will be bad because it will bring a lot of death. This need not be like this.
Anyway, your point is valid and thanks for engaging, even if you did sound a bit condescending. I suggest we incorporate both. By default, multiplayer must begin with a fixed invisible wall in a normal world with the main player as the centre of the radius, not some special small world. There should be however a setting that gives you the option to make this wall dynamic, as I proposed. So, if you want war, choose a fixed barrier and if you want teamwork, choose dynamic barrier.
Would this not solve your concern?
Just look at all the comments that followed your last comment. Can you see my frustration? Again people are advising new ways of dying when you leave the area and again they did not read what any of us have written. So, again sorry that I was hard on you.
You weren’t hard on me. I also didn’t mean to sound condescending. However, I didn’t assume MP would be for war. I actually never even thought of it. I was simply just using Kaalus’ concern and showing how with the right circumstance could show in your suggestion. I personally couldn’t care less how he does this. I agree we should stay way from the instant death idea though.
OK.
Pls pls i have very important ideas i hope you like them:bag to carry more things,fishing rod,can cook with the camp fire,the torchs turn off after while,make the 4 seasons,dont let the electricity come from a switch its stupid,(This one is very important for every survival:get stronger in fighting,running,swimming and have a long breath underwater)and this one for the graphics(let the rain look real and cloudy to know how is the weather).at least do one thing for this update.
That’s what other players are for, Have one guy carry all the cloths, another carry food/weapons, another to carry crafting table/furnace and fuel… Then where ever the team ends up they can quickly set up a camp, hunting lodge the next day, Inn and hours the day after… 1 month later a city with 2,000 people. Multiplayer makes things different.
Kaalus, I have a solution but would much prefer that the limit itself be undone somehow.
Here is my idea, have a Super Compass or something that marks the middle of the multiplayer world when any player gets however far it will be 4,000 or 16,000, it kills him like a creative mode person who flies too high.
That way neither player can render the fortress of the other inaccesible.
kaalus you could do it like minecraft xbox 360 where its like a gaint 16000 world and then theres a invisible wall and all you can see beyond that is a infinite ocean
Kaalus Hear Me Out 😏.. Once A Player Spaces Out From One Another ↔ , Their Screen Should Start To Fade Out As If The Player Was Falling Asleep .. But Instead Of The Screen Being Pitch Black ? Its Pure White 🍚.. With Words Saying ” Turn Back ” . Flashing .
Sorry but please don’t capitalise every word you write. It makes it really hard to read.
This Is So Annoying, Please Stop.
Why do all want some special effects when you reach the end. It is not complicated, just stop movement with an invisible barrier. Yes you can have a message, but why must so many want you to die???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Multiplayer = Death, so much death.
I feel my idea will be very bad, but what if create domain system? And load it partially. So, if you (kaalus) expand max load size, there will by 16000, so, 16000/4= 4000 metres for one player if there will by 4 players. And, if 3= 16000/3= 5333 metres for one. If two- 8000.
Wait what
But…math!
Just hacked into my world files, and made infinite land masses.
Removed the ocean entirely, and the ship that dropped me off is just flying away.
Pretty cool
Now Just hack the rest of the game and get us multiplayer.
That be closer to writing a new game.
What if the resurrection point is set to the center of a person?It is the place where the sleeping place is central to the center, and it is open for the area.
After reading all the suggestions and complications put forward with regards to the MP distance limit, it becomes seemingly easier to implement LAN MP instead of the split screen MP. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not rushing Kaalus at all or in fact shooting down the split screen idea, but, with 2 or more devices running the same world a distance limit wouldn’t be needed. Players would be practically independent. There wouldn’t be the need for “death” or any sort of soft wall either. I don’t know the coding process behind adding LAN and how much work it is, but from a non-coder’s perspective it still seems simpler.
With all that being said, I now prepare myself for criticism to rain down on me.
And good luck Kaalus, I hope you find a solution soon
I do agree with you. I think Kaalus would have done better to rather use all this energy on full LAN mp. How many will actually use this feature?
If this is needed to bring about full mp, then am sorry for being so negative myself. I’ll try to support nonetheless.
Johan, I’m not sure if it was you or Justin that brought it up, but most MC clones come out with LAN MP on-board. You make a valid point, Kaalus is working towards LAN MP through split screen it seems, but seeing that so many games already have it and do not have split screen at all, why take the long route ?
We also need to consider though, that Kaalus is one man coding this entire game. MC is a full-on company with probably 20 or even many more coder on just one game. The clones are in a similar boat. So if introducing split screen makes things easier for Kaalus, I’m all for it. Either way, Kaalus has my full support as well
No one person owns “multiplayer” for any game or genre. So if Kaalus wanted to copy Minecraft’s multiplayer system that’s fine.
I only suggest for multiplayer that we get to talk into our devices so we can hear other people’s voices inside our visual area. Putting up signs for everything would be crazy.
Obviously Justin, even if the concept is copied the entire MP needs to be coded for SC independantly, which will take some time. You’re right, no one owns “MP” so nothing but actually writing it is stopping Kaalus from adding LAN MP to SC. Although, I’m almost certain there is a valid reason why Kaalus has not yet added LAN to SC, and why he wants to add split screen first. Guess we’ll have to wait it out
Kaalus said a while ago, whilst he was adding Dropbox support, that he hates net programming. It is not an easy feature to implement, anyway. I personally like split screen multiplayer but obviously LAN is another step up.
One thing to think about:
-Split screen multiplayer
-Controller support
…console version?
You need to know how to finish what you’re doing before March 2017
I got an idea. When one player is far from the others, he will start receving warnings:”Don’t get too far, you will loose your friends!”(repeating), then: “You are too far, come back!”, then:”You are so sad, you lost your friends!”, after 1 second:”Cause of death: Suicide when losing your friend(s).” Then respawn at your last sleep position( or near a friend if the last sleep position is too far from your friends.) Your items should be trowed near your friends( they got them when they found you dead, then you resurrected).
Cool thing:
The Survivalcraft (2) world is 2147485615 * 2147485615 blocks in the x and z directions, I think.
It could also be 34359800320 * 34359800320 but I think this is less likely.
Did you find the edge of the world?? I wanna see screenshots! Been trying to find it forever
I’ve flown over land for 4 hours straight… there is no end that I know of, so unless he’s hacked the game somehow, nope.
Also a picture won’t work could just take a picture at sunrise and say it’s sun set.
There is technically. It doesn’t abruptly just end. You just start falling through the world.
No, I have not found it. Flying that far would take 8.5 years. After you have travelled this far, your coordinates would overload C#’s max integer size and the game would crash every time you went close enough.
The character’s location could be hacked to test this, but this is all OT, anyway. Besides, are you certain it was written in C# and not D-flat? Hahahahahahaha…
I have o so long ago..
It is their and it is solid
Very short for a fore year journey ;-)
Honestly you guys are not dedicated enough to search for it, it is present in normal terrain and in fact, it is close to the equator / prime meridian perpendicular
The corrdinats are close to zero but not quite
No hacking required, and you can find it now if you wanted :-D
Honestly, JB, you don’t understand the discussion. It wasn’t about finding the ‘edge of the world’, it was about the SIZE of the world…
In that case, I apologise…
Upon reading my comment, it sounds like an insult, I wan not intending on insulting anyone; moreover, I should have attempted to gain a better understanding of your conversation and it’s context.
Sorry if I insulted you; no offense intended :-)
The world size can be as big as the devices can take, then the worlds loops around like Starbound.
I like my 20×20 island, got my bird eggs for food, and simple living. Making cloths for fun, but I don’t need them on my island.
There is always the option to have a message pop up saying that moving further away will corrupt the world. You leave it up to the player to decide. In my opinion, it is kind of lame and boring. This can be a backup option if nothing else works.
I’m a huge fan of survival craft and understand a lot of people want some kind of multiplayer system. But I just think this way of going about it (and no offense meant) is just broke from the outset. There are primary restraints here that severely limit the whole infinit world aspect of the game. Not being able to move too far from other player, respawning on death and keeping items, building limits defined by players relative distance. The list goes on and it seems to cripple what the game’s primary aim is – you are alone on an island.
Again, I’m a great fan of the game and love the electronics and pistons, furniture, et al. But if a better way to implement multiplayer, either through Bluetooth or WIFI then I can’t see it working effectively and it will lose some of its appeal to some players.
I would agree and disagree wih you. Making single device multiplayer does have inherent issues that wouldn’t be a problem with a LAN based MP – such as this topic. I will probably never play this way and PvP is practically silly on a split screen, as everyone knows your opponents will always ‘cheat’ by looking at your part of the screen.
However, I doubt his will cause anyone to stop playing. Some will be disappointed with the limitation but hopefully this is a step in preparation for LAN play.
I don’t think it will stop people playing, more likely people won’t use it and it will be a waste of Kaalus’ effort until, as you suggest, a way to play via LAN is developed. It’s still an interesting solution in the meantime though and if I can get my partner to try it with me it could be a fun thing short term.
I agree with the first part to an extent. Yes, the initial idea is to survive alone on an island, but then again it’s a game and games are more fun when played with a friend or two. The primary aim of ANY game is enjoyment. If you don’t enjoy it, what’s the use of playing it ?
I understand the second part as “unless LAN multiplayer is implemented” meaning split screen will give too many problems. I agree too that restrictions might be a bother, but that doesn’t necessarily mean appeal will be lost. The game can still be played as if split screen was not added without any problems
If we make the transition from the teleport at the point (eg 256.4000 transfers to 256.1)
What if you used two separate modes, one with limited world size for multiplayer and another with the current sizes for longer running single player mode?
Why don’t you just make it local LAN so that way all the players can have their own devices loading the world up to prevent this because realistically who’s gonna want to play survival craft multi in split screen other than the people who play it on like computer or a powerful tablet connected to a tv and also are you going to add in controller support because currently there is none and by the looks of it in the picture of you boys playing the game they are indeed using controllers