I''ve been trying to come up with a way of implementing multiple time rates in multiplayer games, and getting nowhere. Just thought I''d throw the problem out there in case anyone''s sitting on the solution (or has any ideas that might lead to one)

Time-outs in the basketball game are a good idea: each player can slow down the game at times when they need the extra micro-management - but their doing so is limited - choosing when it is best to use the slow downs/timeouts is a gamplay decision in its own.

But doesn''t that also slow down play for their opponent? I can''t imagine a way to actually adjust game-time for two different players. It would put the players out of phase. I guess you could say that what you''re talking about is what lag does, but I doubt that exactly what you had in mind.

The only way I can think of doing this would be in turn-based gaming, but then it doesn''t really matter. If your objective is what I interpret it to be, you may be faced with an impossibility. You''d have to ask Stephen Hawking about it first, though.

If you just want to adjust the game-time, then it''s no different than a one-player game. Unreal Tournament had time manipulation built into the engine, and the administrator could regulate time flow, making the game faster or slower as he liked. Super-slow games with sniper rifles are always fun. Very Matrix-ish. From this perspective, it''s just a matter of deciding who controls the speed of the game. Host? Losing player? Vote?

I think he is referring to how to deal with people having different time rates that are appropriate for different types of actions.
For instance, if I am in the middle of a fight, ideally I would like to play that on a turn per turn basis (meaning time wuold flow slower than normal), whereas if I am travelling, or if my wizard decided to embark on a two weeks ritual, I would love to have a way to speed things up...

in a single player game, no problem, simply do it since the world effectively revolves around you. Remember the time factor buttons in Frontier ? You are doing a bit of subspace travelling ? Switch to x10000. You want to fight those nasty pirates harassing you ? switch back to x1.

But how would you deal with allowing people to have some sort of time warp feature, without, precisely, having people living in different time zones ?
Could be fun when it''s a spell or something, but the fact that the idea has potential doesn''t solve the problem of its implementation.

Anyone with some thoughts on this ? I have been thinking about it for long but can''t see any way out of it either...

---

Sancte Isidore ora pro nobis !

Human beings have to communicate with each other to play a multiplayer game. That''s basic reality and that''s why you''re not getting anywhere with your problem.

If you let the time synchs get all weird, the communication is going to get weird. I don''t care if you''re talking about a RTS played second by second, or a PBEM played month by month. Timeslicing is basically the notion of fairness. If the timeslices are all skewed, someone is going to feel they''re not being treated fairly. Unless you make the whole game about time itself, so that players are deliberately trying to screw with time to mess people up.

Brandon Van Every, 3DProgrammer, Seattle, WA
20% of the world is real. 80% is gobbledygook we make up inside our own heads.

personally, my only solution is basically to allow players to have several avatars that they can play. While one is doing some time consuming activity (like researching, or labouring in the fields) the player could switch to another avatar who is having a more intense gameplay experience (like going hunting or going to town for a drink, etc)
Similarly, you could send one avatar on a journey, switch to another more interesting character for the time being, but when something happens to your travelling character, you have to switch or rely that the instructions you gave before sending your char on his trip will be enough for him to survive without you intervening.
This would be a whole different type of gameplay, more akin to the multitasking modern OS have got us used to.
The more experience you get the more you can invest in one character, or on the other hand share it among your avatars.
Creating new avatars would of course cost you *a lot* initially.

I am sure this would create tons of other kind of problems, but
it sure as hell would allow people to never be bored, while at the same time allowing them to have the kind of experience fast action games cant afford without getting utterly boring...

---

Sancte Isidore ora pro nobis !

What if you only made those who engaged in combat subject to the time speed alteration. Using something along the lines of Max Payne''s bullet time, allow players a limited amount of regenerating bullet time. Whenever a player engages an enemy, allow bullet time to come into effect between the two adversaries (limited being the keyword so that it doesn''t become annoying). If anyone tries to take advantage of the slowed players and engages them while they are slowed, then they are also considered to be engaging and are also slowed down the exact second that they perform an aggressive action. I think this would work okay for bullet time, as the time difference is so minor that a world still continuing at regular speed around them is only a minor concern, something like the Frontier x1000 time modifier is obviously a completely different story though!! What I''m saying could even be interwoven into a game idea I guess.... what about some kind of weapon that created a time bubble of sorts to create a matrix-like bullet time scenario within a localised area only? Just some food for thought.

Steve

the point of bullet-time is to give the player an advantage over their adversary, because they have more time to think and act. if everyone in a fight saw the slowed perspective when someone went into bullet-time, there would be no point in it at all (other than neato effects, which should not be the main goal of your game IMO).

I think he means that people engaged in fighting would be in a different times scale than outsiders for the duration of the combat.
I have thought about that, and personally I find it pretty cool, as it would allow fighters some sort of turn based fighting which would be slightly better than twitch action.
Maybe figthers could be surrounded by some sort of barrier that indicates they are fighting. If you wanna join the fight, simply enter the bubble. If you want to shoot, you automatically enter the fight when you target the group. ETc.

The only problem is, how do you resolve the fact that fighting players will have effectively spent an afternoon fighting, while for them it will have only been a few turns ?
You could explain it out by saying that this take into account the fact that players need time to recover after a fight, ehal their wounds and so forth, but still, it''s kinda disturbing...

---

Sancte Isidore ora pro nobis !

ahw is closest to what I had in mind - having, for example, an XCOM style game where (in single-player) the global view runs fast until something happens, then the player goes into a turn-based game where time is really, really slowed down.

The only things I''ve been able to come up with to extend it to multiplayer are: slow everyone down at the same time (boring for those players not directly engaged in combat and really doesn''t scale well for large numbers of players) or seal off the combat zone in some fashion, and wait for the results to come out at the end of the real time conflict (which has no real problems in terms of mechanics, but seriously strains the ''realism'' of the game)

It looks like the latter solution is probably the way to go - in which case, there''s got to be some sort of technobabble about side effects of battlefield control causing time warps or lengthy recovery times required before combatants can report the outcome of battle. In either case, reinforcements can become an issue...

I guess it could work, but I''m still hoping there could turn out to be a more elegant solution.