New Multiplayer UI? Pictures

• Leaderboard = Would make your achievements more worthwhile. For instance : 1v1 Leaderboard, 2v2 Leaderboard etc.

The Best player's Name and Custom/Chosen Picture will be tracked on the Leaderboard. There should be a formula that calculates which player is the best Vasari,Advent and TEC player. (Obviously if he has played 51% Games with the Vasari race, his main race will be indeed Vasari)

The time clock for multipayer games would be phenomenal, and I think that it would be a relatively easy implementation.  Have it set up basically like the Diplomacy screen when you go to submit missions, but have it be before the game starts.  However, the only problem that I see with it is how to determine a winner after time has run out.  One player could have a larger fleet than the other, but be nowhere near to victory.  Same thing goes with colonization and research.  So that would take some time and innovation in order to come up with a fair way of setting that victory condition when time runs out. 

I also love the idea of the faction pictures and being able to choose each one instead of a set, but I think that uploading would be a bit useless, since each player can already have their own uploaded picture for their Steam account. 

And, finally, I love the idea of a leaderboard.  Almost every online game to-date has one, so why shouldn't SOASE?  It would be awesome to see your name up on the top 20s list so you can have some bragging rights, since right now nobody really knows where they stand overall.  It would also help out with uneven teams.

Thanks constructive criticism is always acceptable . Btw i meant the In-Game time as just a clock you know not a Victory Condition, but i see you have an idea there already . What i simply meant actually was just an in-game clock. Just to have some basics like Civilian Structure at 2 min tactics etc. Ty for comments!

YAY I am on third place.

WAIT I am also last  :'(

I'm going to be looking into additional multiplayer stuff on my own time, gang. Will let you know more once I design some stuff out, but give me till December/January to get my bits organized.

I'm going to be looking into additional multiplayer stuff on my own time, gang. Will let you know more once I design some stuff out, but give me till December/January to get my bits organized.

Well HALLELUJA!

seriosly thats a great bit of communication.

The years of nearly pointless debate have yeilded a nugget of promise.

yay!

Why is it attention is only given to multiplayer after everyone leaves because it is unpolished/broken?  This happened in regular sins and you let it happen again in rebellion.

Because he liked the sound of Rebellion 1.2: the MP Reunion.

We invested quite a bit of time/money/effort into multiplayer with Sins: Rebellion.  I'm sorry that it didn't meet everyone's expectations, but we did fix the existing desyncs, crashes, many performance issues, added Steamworks support to help prevent smurfing, added Steam Friends and more.

Yarlen, don't take this the wrong way, but I wouldn't count fixing bugs/performance issues/crashes as adding any new MP features. It is good support but not related to advertising the game as having enhanced MP features. So really, as near as I can tell, just Steam friends integration was added, along with new UI graphics for the races. Functionally, it is identical to Diplomacy, other than Steam friends. New maps came after release as well though, which is great. Am I missing anything?

Realistically, what new MP features are being considered? Given time and budget constraints. Personally my top one would be being able to change maps while in a game lobby (eg. you have 8 people but want to switch from a 4v4 to a 5v5 map and open two more slots without having to kick everyone out and remake the whole game lobby). I don't think the engine can do Rewind in watching replays so that is probably out. A game timer in game would be nice, but then again I can just hit shift-tab and see how long I've been playing on Steam overlay. I can't think of what else is needed - assuming an automatch/ranking system is not on the table at this point (and I don't think enough play it at this point to make it worthwhile - could've worked at release maybe). If you're open to reading other suggestions, maybe others could chime in.

Hmm i'm not saying i'm dissapointed with the changes, its just that the changes are more stability based.  People expect stability as a baseline service, and although you may be working a lot on multiplayer, you need some flashy changes like "shiny new interface with new capabilities".  There haven't been many improvements to ICO itself in regards to improving its direct interaction with the player. 

I believe this direct interaction upgrade was strongly implied by the developers when they were saying that rebellion would have enhanced multiplayer.  Also, I think that your company is quite aware of this, its a calculated risk that drives sales.  I hope you don't get into the habit of it however, as this business practice is tedious, annoying, and will harm your game long term because you make your company look bad by not delivering on promises in a timely fashion.

After all, don't we pay the up front price for rebellion because it has improvements that we want to the game in it?  Your post launch forgiveness period is usually the first patch, and after that public ire will rise if you don't fix obvious problems. 

They aren't as bad as they were but they still occur on ICO....

Woot!

So, out of curiosity.. This thread showed a lot of promise with Yarlen chiming in and all... And as the playerbase in sins is still diminishing because of the lack of Ironclad support it gets..

Will the devs be developing anything new for the multiplayer UI or not? As minor as it is, anything will make a difference at this point.

I feel like the playerbase would come back, given a good reason, such as a more enticing multiplayer. That's really the only thing SOASE is lacking right now.
Granted the new beta has given a LOT of changes, to the gameplay in general, but I feel as though Ironclads new direction should primarily be to fixing up the Multiplayer.. That will end up being the biggest reason a lot of people will return to sins. Because the gameplay was great, it just needed some more polishing on the Multiplayer is all..

Sins has always been a game much better at MP than at SP....

And yet, Sins audience has always been dominated by the SP player...

There's a fundamental conflict of interest...starclad has a game with stronger MP elements than SP elements yet most of the people playing it are from the SP crowd...given the current state of things, adding things for the SP group is probably the better business decision...

I would say that's mainly because the MP isn't that good yet.
In my opinion.
To each their own though.

WTH? 

That's Ironstar ...  

Wouldn't it be Irondock?  Either works I suppose...both are shorter than typing out the 2 names combined...

There are certainly issues with the MP....here's the thing though....

Sins has a very streamlined gameplay...it is fluid, fast, and efficient...the UI is very good, zooming out works flawlessly, and if you care to develop the skills you can macro and micro pretty well without having to have an insane APM...in short, the game is quick to learn, quick to play, and accessible to a large audience...

On the other hand, it lacks depth...while the lore/backstory is very intriguing, it isn't explained that much or well-developed...there are no "deep choices" tied to morality, ethics, or ideology...most tactical "choices" are superficial, with only a few true decision trees (cap/titan abilities, SB upgrades)....again, these are the types of things you need for an excellent SP experience but aren't necessary for MP (in fact they can sometimes get in the way)...

This is why I say Sins is more an MP game than an SP game, because I feel it has more MP potential than it does for SP...

But, the devs are adding more to the SP...and probably for the better since that is after all where most of their players are...the DLC focuses on adding to the "holes" in the SP experience...more planets and more meaningful planet bonuses/artifacts adds to the whole exploration component of the game...add in planet specialization, and you are introducing another element of decision-making or choice (hopefully it won't be superficial)...

Elements like a campaign or expanded diplomacy would also be great DLCs as they would also enhance the SP experience....but only time will tell whether those get realized or not...

Yeah, I can definitely see what it is you're getting at.
And I can agree with it, it's just that I feel as though the MP deserves some sort of attention right now, besides just patches here and there. It needs just a few more things to make the matchmaking a little more streamlined, make it easier for others to play against their skill level, etc.

And, make it not take ten years to get a 5s going..

I agree, I just think Iron should be 1st as it is their engine, concept, and IP.

That's always the case when trying to get 10 internuts to agree on anything ... 

Idk man....Irondock sounds like the name of a transformer....Starclad sounds like the name of a pokemon...tough call either way...