Multiplayer


2007-04-29

The multiplayer part of the games seem to be missing anything that could be considered MMO, and I'm not sure which of the options should be used for the usual TCP/IP gaming (think I mistakenly tagged WEB for some game, and I now think that refers to browser - such as IE7 and Firefox - games) or the ones that use proprietary hubs (e.g. Battle.Net).

2007-04-29
Effectively when I wrote WEB i meant TCP-IP, but I think that LAN-parties still uses TCP-IP as transmission protocol, so I used WEB to mean world-wide, not room-wide.
Sadly I have to admit that I'm not a multiplayer expert, so you are welcome to suggest the correct names to use.
Propietary hubs are really different from TCP-IP games?

Renaming WEB in the right way, would left out those multiplayer Flash games, so we should find a new type too.

2007-04-29
The hubs aren't different in that sense, but they're different none-the-less (not all games have them and some even require their use to accomplish anything even remotely resembling multiplayer gaming). TCP/IP would still be the most obvious to me, even if LAN games use that (LAN games used to run over IPX rather than TCP/IP back in the days, and you most likely can run "LAN" over wireless and nullcable (though in case of nullcable it's only two computers/consoles together), too, so the argument starts to get pointless).

Internet is really the only word I can come up with that doesn't include LAN in it, but doesn't exclude wireless. And as I said, WEB seems to imply WWW (HTTP and the like), which is the thing used by web browsers and as such excludes most multiplayer games. Come to think of it, games that can run TCP/IP in LAN usually can run over the net, too, making no difference in there except for what they look for and if they use LAN broadcast packets for finding servers or not, so is there really need for the distinction in that case?

This is getting a bit too confusing even for me now, so I guess I'll leave it at that.

2007-05-01
A little question for "multiplayer" : it's impossible to mark game as multiplayer "on the same screen" (for example, Street Fighter, Streets of Rage, PES, etc...) ? Maybe it would be usefull to mark a game multiplayer in "co-op" or in "versus" (or both), for example Streets of Rage => co-op, Street Fighter => versus, PES => both.

2007-05-01
Yes, I should add that.

About more specific data, time ago Zerothis proposed a very complete (so quite complex) way of storing this kind of data.
It's not yet ready as I need to set up a working interface to insert this data, how to search on it without errors and a proper way to finally display it ...

2007-05-01
Shared screen and hotseat are actually two that are needed. Though I doubt adding hotseat is good unless you add turn-based somewhere in the game types as well.

2007-05-01
So these are the changes to make:

- rename "WEB" to "Internet"
- add "shared screen" and "hotseat" to multiplayer
- add "turn-based" to the game types

2007-05-05
Ok, the three items are ready.
Set "shared screen", "hotseat" and "turn-based" to any game needs it
:-)

2007-05-08
Multiplayer Tags Purposal (Part 1)
All of this information is subject to change based on community input and approval of the site manager

A technical manual will follow in the post below

The goal is to have human readable information displayed on the game info page. Perhaps even understandable English 'sentences'. This readable information can be parsed from encoded multiplayer tags stored in the database, the mptag code. The mptag code should be assembled with an easy to navigate GUI called the 'multiplayer tag wizard'. These mptags can be searched with the understanding that most users will never search for anything extraordinarily complicated. So, these simple searches should be simple to preform ("4s" to return 4 player simultaneous games, "4%" to return any 4 player game, etc). But the searches should be capable of delivering full complexity for the users willing to learn the full mptag code ("2-vcsqt-dd" to return games with 1 to 5 players unrestricted competitive or cooperative in teams of any size using dynamic splitscreen). The underlying mptag code does not need to be understood by the end user, but still optionally visible and optionally entered manually. This is in case a game needs a mptag code that the GUI is not optimal at producing.

The mptag code includes some hardware information but this is not its purpose. For now, regular tags are good for that. The hardware information included in mptags is only if it relates to multiplayer. For instance, multimonitor should not be indicated for email chess since this is obvious. This proposal for mptag is complex enough without adding unnecessary hardware information.

The purposed mptags are mode based. That is, it should relate to the play modes and features built into the game. Please note that a mode of play isn't definitively determined by what's on the 'select screen'. For instance, some 2-on-2 fighting games are in 1 player 'conquest' mode by default but change to two player verses mode when the start button on the second controller is pressed at any time. Likewise, the start button on a 3rd controller connected to a multitap can initiate a new mode of play different that the start button on the 2nd controller. And so on.

So far the mptag code has been shaped by trying to describe the multiplayer modes of existing games. This is quite extensive. There are games that link and use splitscreen. There are games that use multitaps and links. There are games that user multitaps and networking. There are games that use standard and special controllers interchangeably for multiplayer. There are games that use built-in multitaps and shared controllers. Occasionally hypothetical games that mix the modes are used to see if their are any hypothetical modes that cannot be described by the code. Then Andrea points out the dumb mistakes I made :) and suggests new ideas. Look bellow to see examples of mptag codes. This has been an on/off project for almost 4 years. I am please to now publish the idea here and receive more correction.

The next exercise to test the mptag codes would be to pick for a game that one of our users "!%user"s (is playing, prefers, has completed, or owns), then show them the mptag code, along with the platform and game type, but not the title or company. If they can't guess it in a few tries, the mptag code isn't good enough yet (or they merely own the game and have never actually played it, those darn collectors!). For this exercise a game with an uncommon set of mptags should be used in order to validate the code. For instance, "NES, Platform, 2a 1p 2pa" applies to hundreds of games.
I'll start this right away with some random games and mptag code. This exercise is better if English is used instead of the mptag code. Check the technical manual in the next post to decode and check "Examples" at the bottom of this post to see the answers.
N64 First Person Shooter, 4s 1p 1pcsd2aa1t2 2pcsd2t2 1pvsd2aa1t2 2pvsd2t2qq 1..4pvcsD1-4aa0-20t0-8qqq
Odyssey2, Adventure, Fantasy, -s 2.3pcas2t2qqkk1z 5.7.9.-pv+-cas2t2qqkk1z
Arcade, Platform, 2p 1p 2pvcsww
PC Engine, Maze, 5s 1p 1pvaa1-4 2..5pvjaa1-4sscc 2pvjppgl
NES, Platform, 2sa 1p 2pvcas0-2wwttiBarteri
NES, Gun Shooting, 2s 1p 2pvsaa1qq
NES, Sport, 2s 1pvaa3t2qo 2pvsaa2t2o 2pcsaa2t2qo
NES, Gun Shooting, 2s 1pu 2pcu0-2
Atari 2600, Shoot'em'up, 2s 2svhww 2svqqhww
Atari 2600, Cards, 1p 2..3cs3uu1-2

Only humans count for the maximum players, not AI bots and/or opponents.

Tags are case insensitive.

The term 'cartridge' is use universally to refer to whatever media a game comes on. This is not meant to exclude CDs, disks, tapes, DVD, flash cards, LCD screens, barcodes, or any other type of media.


problems:
mechanisms that compare scores are convenient for competition, but should not be considered a multiplayer option?

There is only one 'special controller' category for gun, wheel, paddle, and other proprietary controllers. Is mouse, keyboard and special sufficient? There are wheel+gun games, does the code do well enough to specify 2 special controllers for multiplayer or does it need to be more accurate?

no range of teams, nor indefinite number of teams.
solved?: range or - between i and i

are strings in the code optimal for stating tradeable items?

what symbols can be used a for future explanation?

are protocol strings optimal or should their be two letter codes for them?

what symbols can be used in the code?

no GUI yet?

no code to English parser yet?

1..4paa0-20 might suggest 24 maximum players
solved: the max players tag only humans count for the maximum players.

tags are case insensitive?
solved: tags are case insensitive

no advanced mptag search yet?

how to search tags with wildcards?
solved: "%" as in "%4%c%qq%mm%" in the tag field

how to search for ranges of players; and of a certian mode?

multi mixed, multi protocol, multi networks of multi variable players (Tribes beta)?

Should the layout of multiplayer splitscreen be indicated in the multiplayer tag?

No way to indicate cross system networking and/or controlling (Jaguar-Lynx, SNES-Genesis, Gamecube-GBA)?

In the case of multiple machines, should keyboard, mouse, special controllers, and/or multitaps be number per system or totaled?

It seems complicated?
solved: it is

What letter will we use for that new quantum entanglement networking thing?
solved: w and add a protocol.


Examples:
[[gameid:96634 Perfect Dark]] 4s 1p 1pcsd2aa1t2 2pcsd2t2 1pvsd2aa1t2 2pvsd2t2qq 1..4pvcsD1-4aa0-20t0-8qqq
[[gameid:20738 Quest for the Rings]] -s 2.3pcas2t2qqkk1z 5.7.9.-pv+-cas2t2qqkk1z (only a team of two simultaneous players can be onscreen but there is no definitive limit to teams taking turns.)
[[gameid:101 Joust]] 2p 1p 2pvcsww
[[gameid:10536 Bomberman '93]] 5s 1p 1pvaa1-4 2..5pvjaa1-4sscc 2pvjppgl (Has single system battle modes as well as two system linking)
[[gameid:8277 Super Mario Bros 3]] 2sa 1p 2pvcas0-2wwtt'Barter'
[[gameid:5128 Super Mario Bros]] 2a 1p 2pa
[[gameid:7755 Duck Hunt]] 2s 1p 2pvsaa1qq (while the gun is required to play, its not required for mulitplayer specifically, since the other player uses a standard gamepad)
[[gameid:8421 Venice Beach Volleyball]] 2s 1pvaa3t2qo 2pvsaa2t2o 2pcsaa2t2qo
[[gameid:7657 Chiller]] 2s 1pu 2pcu0-2 (any combination of game pads and/or zappers is accepted)
[[gameid:41961 Combat]] 2s 2svhww 2svqqhww (note: no 1 player mode.)
[[gameid:41955 Blackjack]] 3s 1p 2..3cs3uu1-2 (paddles are made to be shared)

2007-05-08 (updated 2008-09-06)
Multiplayer Tags Purposal (Part 2 - Technical Manual)
As a visual aid, I have created various practice GUIs to see how simple (or complex) the multiplayer tag wizard would need to be to create the code. I'll try to keep http://pages.suddenlink.net/zerothis/mptags.html up to date as the discussion continues. Remember that it is just for looks, not functional, and the final wizard will look entirely different.

The manual contains the purposed English, the indicator, and then a short description that hopefully can be put in a tool tip that users will see when they hover over that indicator. Below is more in depth descriptions.

First is the maxplayer tag. It is super simple. A number representing the maximum number of players of any mode of the game and indicator(s) of simultaneous and/or alternating play. Its quick, easy, requires absolute minimal research, easily searchable, and all 57537 UVL games should get one asap (appending approval). It is generated automatically if a game has any mptag codes. If you are not confident enough to make a detailed mptag because you don't know the game that well, just manually enter a simple tag for the moment.
#[s][a]
# ?The maximum number of players. One number, not a range.
s ?Simultaneous play
a ?Players take turns

Games can have both s and a, like Super Mario Brothers 3. s comes before a to help distinguish the max player tag from the mptag.
If someone enters a "4s", "4a" or "4sa" alone, then it should be easy for a parser to see it as a max player tag and not a full mptag. While anything with "p" in it is a full mptag code

And now the revolution begins, the full mptag code. The final mptag code contains only 1 to 9, a to z, and -+_ symbols. The [brackets] below indicate that the element is optional, the mptag code does not include brackets. Note some brackets are nested. the underscore _ is a separator for protocols that is included in the code. # indicates a number in the code, % indicates a percentage in the code, / represents an option to use only one of the listed elements in the code, i$i is an optional string in the code. Here is the format purposed:

[[PROTOCOL][#/#..#/#.#.#/#.#.-/-/#-/-#]_] [[PROTOCOL][#/#..#/#.#.#/#.#.-/-/#-/-#]_] [[PROTOCOL] [#/#..#/#.#.#/#.#.-/-/#-/-#]_]p [v[+][-][c]][a][s[#][-#]] [aa#[-#]][t#[-#]][q][qq[#]][h][hh][j[#][-#][i[#][-#]i]][jj#][e[#]][ee[#]] [vv[#]][k[#][-#][i#i]][kk#[-#][i#i]][b[#][-#]] [bb[#][-#]][u[#][-#]][uu[#][-#]] [ss[#][-#]][pp[#][-#]][cc][g[#][-#]][m#[-#]][d#[-#]] [dd#[-#]][o[#][-#]][ww][x][y] [z[%]][tt[i$i][i$i][i$i]][l[#/#-#/-]][n#/[-/#-#]][w#/[-/#-#]][r#[-#]] [nn[#][-][#]]

(note: I've added some white spaces in between as it was breaking the layout [Andrea] )

PROTOCOL_
?Optional. Which network protocol(s) are in use for this mode.
We already have indicators in the mptag code to indicate linked, networked, IR linked and wirelessly linked games and an indicator for hubs. Protocols further specify these indicators to a specific type.
If the game uses the protocol, but it is not used for multiplayer, then it should not be included in tags. Protocols are likely to be mixed, such as SERIAL_NULL_; or TCPIP_ETHERNET_. Many protocols mean different things for different systems. SERIAL probably means a DB-9 null modem cable for PCs, but a D-13 null modem cable for Atari 8-bit, etc. There is a problem that I have not thought of a good solution for yet. How to deal with inter-system linking when used for multiplayer (N64-GBA, Jaguar-Lynx, SNES-Genesis). I'm using caps for readability as tags are case insensitive
No protocol code can be a substring of another. This may confuse the parser. (no RJ45/RJ45X)
No can end in a number. This may confuse the parser. (RJ45 may look like 'Protocol RJ 45 players')
Possible protocols are:
IPX = IPX
DUN = Dial-up Networking
MODEM = Direct modem-to-modem call
TCPIP = TCP/IP
RJ14P = RJ-14 cable, most likely used with a hub and another protocol
RJ14X = RJ-14 Crossover cable, likely used with another protocol
RS232P = RS-232 cable
ETHERNET = Ethernet cable and protocol
ETHERX = Ethernet Crossover cable and protocol
GIGANET = Gigabit Ethernet cable and protocol
GIGAX = Gigabit Ethernet Crossover cable and protocol
IRC = Uses the IRC protocol and/or network for multiplayer
EMAIL = Uses email multiplayer. Note that nearly any turn based non action game can be played this way but for UVL it means the game specifically provides for this option.
SMAIL = Game makes printouts for manual entry in the other player's machine, usually snail mailed.
FILE = Game makes files for reading in the other player's machine.
CFDP = Coherent File Distribution Protocol for playing multiplayer turn based games between spacecrafts
FREENET = Freenet the anonymous distributed internet alternative.
FTP = Uses File Transfer Protocol for multiplayer
HTTP = Uses Hyper Text Transfer Protocol for multiplayer
GOPHER = Uses Gopher for multiplayer.
FTAM = use wide area network file access for multiplayer
IMAPI = IMAPI mail and messaging
ISP = Requires using a specific ISP's services, includes AOL, MSN, Prodigy, Compuserve, and others.
APPLESHARE = AppleShare, Mac networking thing that some might be able to explain better.
APPLETALK = AppleTalk, Mac networking thing that some might be able to explain better.
BT = Uses the BitTorrent protocol for multiplayer
RAUD = Uses RealAudio streaming for multiplayer
NETBUEI = Uses the NETBUEI protocol
NULL = Uses the Nullmodem protocol, used with several types of cable
SERIAL = Uses the serial protocol, the types of cable and connectors are system specific
PARALLEL = Uses the Parallel protocol, the types of cable and connectors are system specific
USBLINK = uses a USB Link cable and possible hub(s)
USBNET = uses a USB Network cable and possible hub(s)
MIDINET = uses the MIDI interface to establish a network
UDP = UDP port(s) are used for multiplayer
RTPM = Real-time Transport Protocol use for multiplayer
RTPI = Real-time Transport Protocol
COMLYNX = Since this protocol is used on at least 3 systems, it gets its own listing.
XBAND = Uses the X-Band modem protocol/adapter
An alternative to using text would be to use two digit codes.
Number of players
#
?REQUIRED The base number of players in this mode of play. Some form of number(s) or range required
#.#.#
?Indicates multiple modes use the following tag, based on number of players per mode. Example 1.2.4 means this tag applies to 1, 2 and 4 player modes.
#..#
?Indicates multiple modes use the following tag, based on number of players in a range of modes. Example 1..5 means this tag applies to 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 player modes.
-/#-/-#/#.#.-
?The - represents indefinite or gianormous number. (rarely used)
Every mode of play should be included. For Bomberman '93 for Turbo Grafx 16 (and TurboExpress), the follow tags are not correctly used:
5s 1p 1pvaa1-4 2pvj1aa1-4 3pvj1aa1-4 4pvj1aa1-4 5pvj1aa1-4 LINK_2pvl2
ppg should have been specified because this game has multiplayer modes for single system, single cartridge and also has a mode for multisystem, multicartridge. The LINK protocol is not necessary because there is no other protocol to link TurboGraFX games. However the l indicator is used to indicate this mode is a linked mode. l2 is unnecessary because you cannot link any other numbers of TurboGraFX systems. The TurboGraFX will only use 1 multitap, so j is sufficient. Also, this game uses different numbers of systems and cartridges for different modes. So these must be specified in each mode with multiple players. Also important is the redundancy of listing all the battle modes separately. since all the battle modes are supposed to end with "pvjaa1-4sscc" and allow any number of players between 2 and 5, we can take a shortcut and use a player range, 2..5. note that 1pvaa1-4 is still necessary since this mode does not need a multitap. Here is the correct version
5s 1p 1pvaa1-4 2..5pvjaa1-4sscc 2pvjppgl
we are left with a max player tag (5s), A tag for single player mode (1p), a tag for battles modes without a multitap (1pvaa1-4) and with (2..5pvjaa1-4sscc), and a tag for the linked mode (2pvjppgl)
Some games were poorly (or uniquely) designed to not allow all possible numbers of players. That is, they are 1 or 2 player without a multitap but skip right to 4 players when a multitap or network is added. They don't allow 3 players, NOOOOOOOOOO!!! Or in the case of Quest for the Rings, more players can only be added in pairs. So while there are 3, 5, 7, etc, player modes, there is no 4, 6, or 8 player modes.
PROTOCOL_PROTOCOL_PROTOCOL#_
PROTOCOL_PROTOCOL_PROTOCOL#..#_
PROTOCOL_PROTOCOL_PROTOCOL#.#.#_
?Sometimes multiple protocols are needed for a mode
PROTOCOL#..#_PROTOCOL#.#.#_PROTOCOL#_
?Sometimes the same tag can apply to a mode that uses different protocols and different numbers of players per protocol.
The ultimate test, can it handle STb (Starsiege Tribes beta 0.9)? Probably not, the complex multiplayer features of STb worked great when I used them, but were removed for the final game, probably because it was so potentially confusing and disconnects were statistically more likely if you didn't know what you were doing. A computer running STb could be connected to another computer by parallel null modem cable and a 3rd computer by serial. It could also connect to a LAN at the same time for even more players. The LAN connected computers could each have null cable connections also. And with parallel, serial and LAN in tow, it could connect to more computers over the internet. These other computers could be connect to even more by their own LANs and cables. It could be described like so: host received local cabled clients, LAN clients, and internet clients that could have cabled sub-clients and/or LAN sub-clients each with their own cabled sub-sub-clients. In reality they were all routed clients of one host. Protocols were null modem serial, null modem parallel, dun, tcp/ip (WAN) and ipx (LAN). The thing is, the upper limit of players would need to be determined by a complex algorithm involving connection speeds, not very easily expressed concisely. Designing the multiplayer tags for this is quite a challenge. But the current code allows for different protocols to apply to the same mode, even if the different protocols have differing numbers of players allowed.
SERIAL_NULL_1..2_PARALELLE_NULL_1..2_IPX_1..8_TCPIP_1..6pcs2-8ppn
in this example of a theoretical PC game, there is no need to specify the number of machines or the number networked nor multiple copies, the numbers are the same as the range of protocol players.

Players/Player
p
?REQUIRED FOR EACH MODE. Distinguishes the mptags from the maxplayer tag

Competitive
v[+][-]
? v indicates verses.
Cooperative
c
? vc indicates no enforcement of cooperative or competitive play. (Joust, Golden Axe)
? v+c indicates some players can not compete with each other
? v-c indicates some players can not cooperate with each other
? v+-c indicates restrictions on both competing and cooperating players. Usually teams verses teams.

Alternating
a
?Taking turns. a precedes s to help distinguish the mptag from the maxplayer tag

Simultaneous
s[#][-#]
?Specify number(s) of simultaneous players only if the games mixes alternating and simultaneous.

Artificial Intelligence
aa#[-#]
?Artificial Intelligence players or Bots to replace or simulate additional human players. Not counted for maximum players.

Teams
t#[-#][i[#][#-][-]i]
?Number of players per team. This can be used for single team and single player games also.

Asymmetric teams
q
?Teams of different sizes. "t" can be used more than once in this case (is this redundant redundancy?)
The games that are 1, 2, or 4 player are often that way, it would seem, to avoid having teams with a number of human players than is different from The other teams'. As in, 1 vs 1, 2 vs 2, but not 2 vs 1. These same games often don't have a 4 player mode where all 4 human players are on the same team yet have games where only two human players can be on the same team against the computer. 2 humans vs 1 human+1 AI is and example of an asymmetric team. 2 humans verses 2 AIs is asymmetric. 4 humans verses 4 AIs, asymmetric. 1 team is the norm for RPGs like Final Fantasy, Ultima and Dragon Warrior. This is important to multiplayer since players can agree to make the decisions for one of the characters on the team, effectively using it as a multiplayer game even though it was intended for 1 player. This agreement uses mechanisms beyond the game's design so does not any multiplayer tags except ones that begin with "1p". While the code allows for teams of different sizes there is no specialized way of allowing multiple numbers of teams. 1 team is not uncommon, 2 teams are the norm for multiplayer team games. but, i think halo allows for 8 teams. Asymmetric players are not just for verses games, cooperative arrangements like driver/gunner, bomber/escort work too. Also, different characters in a verses game are sometimes asymmetric in a way that changes advantages and disadvantages of playing them. GoldenEye Has the small Oddjob, and the large Jaws, but also players in dark clothes and players in light clothes.. Quest for the Rings has 4 completely different characters to choose from; as does Gauntlet.

Asymmetric players
qq[#]
?Bomber vs fighters, duck vs hunter, fox vs hound, turtle vs hare
# is the maximum types of players, if more than 2.

Handicap option
h
?Game allows for asymmetric difficulty settings

Handicap enforced
hh
?Game enforces asymmetric difficulty settings
Remember that the games with this code need to have difficulty settings built in. You can't tell a player "To make this game fair, from now on you must kill yourself twice right at the start, hang upside-down on the tree outside and watch the screen from there, and play with your toes." None of those are part of the game design.

MultiTap
j[#][-#][i[#][-#]i]
?Use numbers if multiple multitaps can be used.
0 is a valid number in a range of multitaps for multitap optional games. Not needed for PC (Mac, etc) type except with rare multiplayer joysticks setups (Grip, etc.) The range after i represents the players per multitap. Ranges can help distinguish between different multitaps if a system had more than one type. Multiple j indicators reveal compatibility with different formats of multitaps. j0 is also useful to clarify cases where a game has more players than seem possible without one. Such as 8 players for Micro Machines 64 Turbo, and Micro Machines 2: Turbo Tournament. Both these games use 0 multitaps to achieve 8 players.

MultiTap built-in
jj#
?if the multitap is built into the cartridge (J-cart), # of ports provided
If the multitap is physically part of the cartridge. (J-cart). The # represents the additional ports provided. As far as I know, the J-cart is the only adapter that works this way. I suppose it will remain this way since no new systems use cartridges anymore. But, one never knows.

Share controllers
e[#]
?Maximum number of players per controller, # only needed if more than 2
The Micro Machines 64 Turbo achieves 8 players and 0 multitaps in example above is due to controller sharing. 2 People can share each controller plugged into the N64 (which has 4 ports). Micro Machines 2: Turbo Tournament uses jj and controller sharing so is still 0 multitaps. Apparently it never occurred to codemasters to mix the j-cart and multitaps so each player could each have a controller to themselves (10 maximum players). Micro Machines for GameBoy also uses controller sharing to achieve 2 simultaneous players on one gameboy.

Multi controller
ee[#]
?Maximum number of controllers per player, # only needed if more than 2 (Robotron, SmashTV NES, Goldeneye)

Asymmetric controller
vv[#]
?Indicates that players are forced to use controllers of different types (gun+gamepad, keyboard+game port, controller in joystick port+controller in STe port, keyboard+game port+mouse, keyboard+joysticks). An optional number represents the number of players at which asymmetry must occur (3 if 2 players can use the keyboard but the next player uses the mouse).

Keyboard optional
k[#][-#][i#i]
?Makes use of the keyboard or multiple keyboards for multiplayer, the # after i is the maximum players per keyboard.

Keyboard required
kk#[-#][i#i]
?Keyboard required to play multiplayer, and range of players share it. the # after i is the maximum players per keyboard.

Mouse option
b[#][-#]
?Can make use of the mouse or trackball or a # of mice for multiplayer

Mouse required
bb[#][-#]
?Mouse or # of mice required to for multiplayer

Special controller option
u[#][-#]
?Can make use of the gun, paddles or other controllers. or a # of controllers for multiplayer

Special controller required
uu[#][-#]
?Gun, paddles, wheels, or other strange controllers required for multiplayer

Single-System
ss[#][-#]
?Only needed for systems where Single-System multiplayer is rare (PC, GameBoy, etc) or if the game mixes multi system and single system. If mixed then a range of players per system is specified.
Single-system is standard for consoles and coin-ops but it seemes to have gone out of style very early in PC history, which sucks. Also abnormal for handheld systems, which make more sense. Not limited to cartridges, CD, disks, tapes work also. Specifying a range is necessary if multiple systems are connected for multiplayer but each system in the arrangement will handle more than one player itself. Example, Andreatti Racing for PSX allows for linking two system and 2 player splitscreen together, for a total of 4 players. But, I am not familiar enough with the game to offer a mptag

Multiple-System
pp[#][-#]
?Not needed for systems where multi-system multiplayer is the default. GameBoy, etc.

Single-Cartridge
cc
?Single cart or single copy for multiple systems. This is the technical limitation not any legal ones. Example, multiple Baldur's Gate players can all run a network copy of the game. But this is illegal. cc applies to Baldur's Gate but should have a note in the description that it is illegal to do so.

Multiple-Cartridge
g[#][-#]
?Multiple cart or multiple copy, only for systems that often use Single-Cartridge.

Panoramic Monitors
m#[-#]
?Number of monitors for each player, if it can be more than one

Multimonitor
mm#[-#]
?Number of players that get their own monitor or monitors.
It makes so much sense to let each player have their own screen on PC systems since most computers do multimonitor now days. I guess the problem is that single system multimonitor doesn't make as much cents as selling multiple copies and computers.

Splitscreen
d#[-#]
?Number of screens per monitor for multiplayer
A fairly standard practice for single system multiplayer. So far mptags do not indicated screen layout, just number. Should it?

Dynamic Splitscreen
dd#[-#]
?Range of screens that can dynamically change shape, change size or join together. DragonBallZ NES.
DBZ is the only game I've seen that uses it, but it was cool. Beginning this indicator with d0-# reveals that the players can get close to each other to automatically or manually eliminate the split entirely.

Off-screen
o[#][-#][ii]
?a number of the human characters can continue being controlled when off of their own screen. Sonic 2, many sports games.
While annoying in an action games, this can be very usefull for an RPG. Also, this is common in sports games. When playing on a recangular area, its fairly easy to guess where your character is when off-screen, especially if there is an arrow to indicate direction, or a radar map, which are also common and either are indicated by ii.

Warping Viewport
ww
?Screen warps or wraps around horizontally, vertically, both, or more.
Combat, and some Bomberman games let you go left to find the right side of the screen. However, this should only be indicated if it effects multiplayer not just used in single player mode. For instance, in Combat, an enemy can be blasted from the far side of the screen to the side nearest the blasting tank for a quick two combo shots. Some Bomberman games let the player kick bombs to the other side of the screen to surprise an opponent he seem to be at a very safe distance..

Expanding Viewport
x
?As characters move apart from each other, the view zooms and/or shifts to fit them
Would it be helpfull to include an approximate zoom percentage. If so, should 100% in cuffs be based on the unzoomed view or the maximum zoom out? This is only if the character's distance from each other effects the zoom.

Cut-off Viewport
y
?As characters move apart from each other, one is 'yanked' closer with penalty or unique action beyond the player's control

cuffs
z[%]
?Characters are stuck on the screen area or within a maximum distance of each other. Knuckles Chaotix.
Maximum distance that the characters are separated by is approximately expressed as a %percentage of the diagonal screen size. Being stuck within the borders of a non-zooming viewport implies 100% so it is unnecessary to specify in this case. Note the values above 100% are possible for games that use o.

trading
tt[i$i][i$i][i$i]
(tt)
?Super Mario World, trade lives / Gran Turismo, trade cars. $ indicates what is tradeable.
Inventory, Lives, Cars, Points, Money, Barter, Items, or some specific item.
(update) strings are probably not needed here since we have general tags. mptradeinventory, mptradelives, mptradecars, mptradepoints, mptrademoney, mptradebarter, mptradeitems. What do UVL users think of this? A: this needs to be reformed/merged with FILE, EMAIL, SMAIL, and options to print moves. This is 'user handled transfer'. The indication of what can be traded is an uneeded detail for the mpcode, but should be specified in the game's main description.

Link
l[#/#-#/-]
?Serial / parallel / or other wired link. # of machines OR range of machines OR indefinite number of machines. # is never the number of players). Use of hubs is indicated by a different mptag code..
Some systems have multiple types of links, so a protocol indicator is used at the beggining of the tag. In the case of a system having only one link type, a protocol indicator is unneeded. Note that multiple linking of systems is not necessarily a 'network'. This does need to be specified for systems that have cross-platform links.

Network
n#/[-/#-#]
?indicates this mode is networked and how many machines (not # of players). Implies the use of hub(s)
For the purposes of mptags, a crossover cable is to be considered a link cable but not specified as for games that use both without altering the multiplayer setup (2 systems networked with a hub work exactly the same a if a crossover cable where used.)

wireless
w#/[-/#-#]
?indicates this mode is wirelessly linked or networked using with number of machines specified, or range, or indefinite (not # of players.)

infrared
r#[-#]
?indicates this mode is IR, light, laser or other line-of-sight networked and how many machines (not # of players)

hub
nn[#][-][#]
?indicate this mode requires hub(s). - indicates an indefinite number of hubs.
Not really for PC but for the GameBoy 4 player adapter, or the PS1 40 player adapter, or the Jaguar CatBox, and the like.Most consoles have a limited number of hubs. But for computers, the number of hubs is of no concern to the game therefore there is no need to specify.

2007-05-09
I'd like to know what the other editors think about this. :-)

2007-05-09
I'd like to know what the other editors think about this. :-)


Well, I'll carefully read that tonight then tell you what I think about this.

2007-05-09
To be honest, I don't care very much to go this far into details when it comes to differentiate multiplayer into myriads of combinations. Or which input possibilities you have for a game (keyboard, mouse, joystick, etc). If there is a very special and fun multiplayer function in a game, there is still the option to mention it in the description.

As long as there are thousands and thousands of games without pictures or descriptions I'm not going to put much work into things like finding out something like which multiplayer modes a game supports.

I'm much more concerned with the many strange tags at the moment. For nearly 1/3 of all tags I have my strong doubts that they make sense. But that is a different topic.

But if some people will work on it and the new features don't remain an empty shell, then go on.

2007-05-09
The big issue here is IF this data (once added) can be easily extracted, so all my future tests will be on this.

I've seen you editors do the most various tasks, someone prefer to fix as much release dates as possible, others mostly adds new images while few others goes to spell-check game descriptions. So I'm sure someone can't wait to go with this (other than Zerothis, eh).

Maybe will attract new editors thanks to these new features (this is quite common, every time I see a site "similar" to this, it laks 70% of the other features)

2007-05-10
Adding this wouldn't be bad IMO, but I'd rather have clear editor interface to set things rather than the markup itself being made (barely?) human readable for the purpose of manually writing it.

2007-05-10
Absolutely you will have two options:
- write it down
- an easy click & select interface.

2007-05-11
There seems to be no way to tell if the singleplayer campaign/story/thingy is playable in multiplayer (coop or not) with the mptag. Or if the singleplayer mode is just some pointless botmatch (a la unreal tournament)? I could be wrong, though, didn't read the description too well and searching didn't find anything relevant.

2007-05-17
e-mail multiplayer option is missing, not from mptag but from the normal multiplayer options.

[[gameid:162478 Laser Squad Nemesis]] and [[gameid:162477 Horde: The Northern Wind]] use this, at the very least, and I'm certain there's plenty more.

2007-05-23
E-mail multiplayer option added.

2007-07-10
As long as there are thousands and thousands of games without pictures or descriptions I'm not going to put much work into things like finding out something like which multiplayer modes a game supports.

Then you would enter the simplified max players tag "4s, 2a, 3sa," etc... (4 player simultaneous, 2 player alternating, 3 players simultaneous and alternating). Or you wouldn't and other people will:) Note that the max players tag requires only a text box for the number and two check boxes without any complicated wizard or knowing the code.

...input possibilities you have for a game (keyboard, mouse, joystick, etc)

Before USB, controlling multiplayer games on a computer was a hodge-podge. While there are many multitaps available covering nearly every computer platform, they are not standard and rarely used. Some computers have more than one type of multitap, not compatible with each other. Some computer multitaps are specific to one game, most are specific to games from one company. Many computers have 2 game ports. A few have multiple types of game ports. Only one computer platform has 4 matching game ports. A Y-cable is often part of the standard specification for many computers with only 1 game port (IBM-PC). Surprisingly, game port Y-cables were not used in far too many 2-player games. This means for many computer games with 2 players and nearly all with 3 or more players, some alternate arrangement on standard equipment must used (keyboard, mouse, 1-2 game controllers). Since every computer has a keyboard, it is the default game controller and specialized game controllers (joystick or gamepad) are often an option. Since the game controller is usually the superior choice, additional players are relegated back to the keyboard after the available game controllers are occupied. Most computers have a limited number of simultaneous keys that can be recognized, so one player per keyboard is best. 2 players is the practical limit but this hasn't stopped author from trying to add more. Even if a game is designed for 2 players per keyboard, this doesn't mean it is without control conflict that would keep one player from having their input register because the other player currently has the maximum number of keys pressed. There is a third standard option, the mouse. With 1-2 buttons (rarely 3, and extremely rarely 4 or more) and X-Y directional control, it is a minimal game controller option. The trackball usually makes a better game controller than the mouse simply because of the awkwardness of moving a mouse around on a flat surface and pressing buttons that are on the movement control itself (button presses cause movement). But the mouse and trackball are the same controller as far as the computer is concerned. While plugging in multiple keyboards, or multiple mice is usually possible on a computer, rarely do games differentiating between them. The computer sees all the mice as 'the mouse', and all the keyboards as 'the keyboard'. So there is little benefit, other than players achieve 'elbow room' when using multiple keyboards. To further complicate things, there is often limited or full overlap between signals passed by keyboards, mice and game controllers. For instance, on most Apple ][ models, the Open Apple key is synonymous with the 1st button on the 1st joystick and 1st button on some mice, and the closed apple with the 1st on the 2nd. Atari PCs used direction signals of the joystick for both modes of the mouse and the trackball. While one mode used identical signals to the joystick direction, the trackball/mouse produced a signal that resembled a pattern of joystick signals (UP, STOP, DOWN, STOP, UP, STOP, DOWN, STOP, UP, STOP, DOWN, STOP). Plus the mouse used the gameport. An then we have the rare phenomenon of individually recognized mice/trackballs and ultra rare phenomenon individually recognized keyboards. You find multiple trackballs/mice in some of the oddest places. Atari PCs, Atari 5200, Playstations 1-3, and Arcades have this oddity in common. Multiple numeric pads and people per numeric pads should be accounted as keyboards. However, numeric pads are not reason enough to justify recording multiple keyboard and players per keyboard information since a numeric pad hardly makes a full keyboard even when two are used in tandem. For justicifation, how about Hot Gimmick games, that use one keyboard per player? Also bear in mind that the MESS/MAME project saw fit to implement multiple mice and multiple keyboards for the purpose of emulatiing games that use them. This is hardly necessary since it was already possible to map emulated mice and keyboards to other devices. They did it not because it was necessary but because it was important to the authenticity of the gaming experience.

Knowing if a game requires 4 players will have share a keyboard is important. Knowing the required mix and match between mice, keyboards, and joysticks for multiplayer is important. For these various reason, I think it is important to record input possibilities for keyboard, mice, and joysticks.

There seems to be no way to tell if the singleplayer campaign/story/thingy is playable in multiplayer (coop or not) with the mptag. Or if the singleplayer mode is just some pointless botmatch (a la unreal tournament)? I could be wrong, though, didn't read the description too well and searching didn't find anything relevant.

The tag, as it currently is, is multiple tags and does show multiple modes that could imply the 1 player game is different from the multiplayer. Your right, this is vague. I think single player campaign/multiplayer mode difference is best left to the game description. However, I do see where a standard way of indicating this would be nice. How about a tag? If not, we still have "gg ll mm oo rr xx yy zz" to use in the code. (i don't recommend "ii" as i is used a delimiter and the theoretical parser might confused it for a deliminated null. Their may be games that need a deliminated null.) We could end a mode in "zz" to indicate different from all other modes and "yy" to indicate different from some, but not all other modes.

As mentioned in the Part 2 - Technical Manual post, I favor a GUI entry wizard that constructs the markup so players do not have to know the code. But your question got me to thinking, why couldn't the theoretical 'multiplayer tag wizard' be adapted for use in searching also. With GUI entry, English parser, and GUI search, UVL users would never have to pay any attention to the code.

DOH! I forget to give a parsed English from a same code [this particular may be wrong in my post]:
4s 1p 1pcsd2aa1t2 2pcsd2t2 1pvsd2aa1 2pvsd2qq 1..4pvcsd1-4aa0-20t0-8qqq
Maximum of 4 players simultaneous.
List of modes:
* 1 player
* 1 player simultaneous cooperative screen split in 2 with 1 artificially intelligent players in a team of 2
* 2 player simultaneous cooperative screen split in 2 in a team of 2
* 1 player simultaneous competitive screen split in 2 with 1 artificially intelligent players
* 2 player simultaneous competitive screen split in 2 asymmetric players
* 1-4 player simultaneous competitive screen split in 1-4 with 0-20 artificially intelligent players in team of 0-8 asymmetric teams asymmetric players

2008-09-05
Well, it been a while since mptags was commented on. Is it time to throw it out, solve the problems and consider it again, or replace it with something else?

2008-09-05
I'd say it's too complex.

Here are some points
1) The different cables should be obvious for devices that specifically need some type.
2) Controllers shouldn't be part of this, as they should already be part of single player experience as well, and therefore are not mp specific info
3) Protocol is good point as some get deprecated and no longer supported on modern systems (such as IPX and direct modem-to-modem)
4) User handled transfer (printouts, files, etc.) of data shouldn't be split into so many alternatives.
5) Specific service provider info (e.g. AOL) is better introduced as regular tags than incorporated into this.
6) Platform specific hardware shouldn't be in there usually (X-Band?).
7) Add-on hardware similarly shouldn't be part of it (e.g. MultiTap, should be obvious from the other info, such as the number of simultaneous players)
8) "Artificial Intelligence" should be called bots
9) "Multi controller", isn't this part of the game itself and not multiplayer?
10) "Single-System" called hotseat in PC games at least, though this traditionally was because of turn-based games where the players would take turns in front of the computer, but it's also used when the players had to share single keyboard (there are plenty of old games with support for up to 4 players on single keyboard)
11) "Warping Viewport" is also present in singleplayer games so this shouldn't be in mp specific things
12) Didn't notice (it was too long to read for me anyway) anything to signify a game has no player limit (common for MMOs).
13) MMOs are often called "persistent" online games, which is perhaps better name for them in case we are going to identify them in this.
etc.

To summarize: I'd like it to be a lot simpler and more generalized.

Also, instead of thinking how to express the choices, we should focus solely on what they should be, as the former can be pretty much anything and not something anyone but the server should have to handle.

I'd recommend starting a new thread and maybe begin with the number of players there, and shorter descriptions please, I get easily distracted when reading long specs (the kind you'd expect to see only in legal documents, no-one reads those) :)

Edit: I'm reminded of the KISS principle, but I'm not sure it applies to spec docs as is.

2008-09-06 (updated 2013-12-17)
The different cables should be obvious for devices that specifically need some type.

In some cases yes, but a 'multiplayer cable' for PC is vague, same as for GameBoy, Atari 8-bit, Atari Jaguar, many computer system, and probably others. Gamecube, Wii, Gameboy, DS, have cross-platfom link cables to further confuse matters.
Controllers shouldn't be part of this, as they should already be part of single player experience as well, and therefore are not mp specific info

Respectfully disagree. For example: A computer game uses keyboard, mouse, and joystick for 3 players. Does that mean:
1=keyboard+mouse, 2=Joystick 1, 3=Joystick 2
1=keyboard, 2=Joystick or keyboard 1, 3=mouse or keyboard
1=Joystick, 2=keyboard and optional mouse, 3=keyboard
1=Joystick or mouse, 2=keyboard, 3=keyboard
1=Joystick or mouse 1, 2=Joystick or mouse 2, 3=keyboard
1=Joystick 1+keyboard, 2=Joystick2+keyboard, 3=mouse+keyboard
1=Joystick 1 or keyboard or mouse, 2=Joystick 2 or keyboard or mouse, 3=Joystick 3 or keyboard or mouse
1=Joystick 1 or keyboard or mouse 1, 2=Joystick 2 or keyboard or mouse 2, 3=Joystick 3 or keyboard or mouse 3
As mentioned above, I think is important to know if controllers must be shared or if players can or must use different controllers This is further complicated by multitaps, additional special controller, and multisystem multiplayer. This is only if the use of different controllers relates to multiplayer.

User handled transfer (printouts, files, etc.) of data shouldn't be split into so many alternatives.

Ok. You have a point, its user handled transfer regardless of the method. Passwords can be used for this also.

Specific service provider info (e.g. AOL) is better introduced as regular tags than incorporated into this.

Ok, there are too many many ISPs. I'm noting that I did not include Prodigy or CompuServe, which also had exclusive multiplayer options in some games. But shouldn't the mp system at least generically indicate that a specific service provider is required?

Platform specific hardware shouldn't be in there usually (X-Band?).

But X-Band is not platform specific. There were SNES, Genesis, PC, Mac, and Saturn modems to connect to X-Band. Additionally 3-way cross-platform SNES-Genesis-PC multiplayer sessions were established under lab conditions (proving it is truly cross-platform) though cross-platform sessions were never offered to the public.

Add-on hardware similarly shouldn't be part of it (e.g. MultiTap, should be obvious from the other info, such as the number of simultaneous players

Not so, Micromachines 64, Micro Machines 2, Micro Machines Turbo Tournament '96, Micromachines, Micro Machines Military, Smash TV for NES, Jeopardy! series for NES, and many other systems use multitap is non-standard ways or lack multitaps or link cables while offering 3 or more players.

"Artificial Intelligence" should be called bots

Ok, but how do we distinguish them from 3rd part/cheat bots?

"Multi controller", isn't this part of the game itself and not multiplayer?

Sorry, this should read "?Maximum number of controllers per player, # only needed if more than 2 (Robotron 64, SmashTV NES)" And it should have included Goldeneye and some computer controlls examples as well. Again, this is only for very specific cases where the multiplayer options are effected by the hardware. Robotron 64, SmashTV for NES, and Goldeneye have the option of dual-weilding multiple controllers. This option is not lost in 2 player games, as the N64 has four ports built-in, and the NES can achieve this with a multitap. However, this option is lost in Goldeneye for 2 players of the 3-players in a 3 player game and all of the players in a 4-player game. Perhaps I should also include an ee0 exception, indicating the loss of a duel wielding option in multiplayer modes. For PC examples, obviously keyboard+mouse does not apply. But mouse+mouse for player one and mouse+mouse for player 2 would. also Joystick+mouse involving 2 mice, any combination of computer controls involving two keyboards.

"Single-System" called hotseat in PC games

Why "hotseat" would apply to anything but turn-based interactive play is beyond me. Since "hotseat" is widly misused I purposed to give it a new name.

"Warping Viewport" is also present in singleplayer games so this shouldn't be in mp specific things

if it applies to multiplayer

Didn't notice (it was too long to read for me anyway) anything to signify a game has no player limit (common for MMOs).

Yes, the minus symbol can be used in several places to indicate no upper maximum is known to be imposed.

MMOs are often called "persistent" online games, which is perhaps better name for them in case we are going to identify them in this.

"persistent" refers to the game world that the players interact in. It persists even when the players go away from it and theirs no set conclusion to the game that would require the state of the world to be reset or end. This can apply to offline single and multiplayer games as well.

To summarize: I'd like it to be a lot simpler and more generalized.

Also, instead of thinking how to express the choices, we should focus solely on what they should be, as the former can be pretty much anything and not something anyone but the server should have to handle.

I'd recommend starting a new thread and maybe begin with the number of players there, and shorter descriptions please, I get easily distracted when reading long specs (the kind you'd expect to see only in legal documents, no-one reads those) :)

okey dokie. Strange, I read them.

Edit: I'm reminded of the KISS principle, but I'm not sure it applies to spec docs as is.
Don't forget that the vast majority of games are simple and the maxplayer tag will sufficiently summarized them with 1, 2a, 2s, 2sa, 4a, and 4s. The mptag code is really just for handling exceptions to the ordinary simplicity.


For simplification, these are the basic questions regarding multiplayer modes
What must we have for each multiplayer mode?
What must we do for each multiplayer mode?
What features and options do we gain in multiplayer modes?
What features and options do we Iose in multiplayer modes?
How are these features and options accomplished

A multiplayer information system should not only answer these questions in detail but allow UVL users to do a backwards look up based on specified details. ie:"We have 5 players, 2 PCs, "

What must we have for each multiplayer mode?
PROTOCOL_, Players(/Asymmetric), Teams(/Asymmetric), MultiTap(/built-in), Share controllers(how many controllers do we need), Asymmetric controller, Keyboard/mouse/special controller required/optional, Single/Multiple-Systems/Cartridges/Monitors, Link, Network, Wireless, infrared, hub.

What must we do for each multiplayer mode?
Teams(/Asymmetric), (plug-in, install, configure hardwares), configure Single/Multiple-Systems/Cartridges/Monitors, trading

What features and options do we gain in multiplayer modes?
Competitive, Cooperative, Teams(/Asymmetric), Asymmetric Players, Warping Viewport, trading

What features and options do we Ioose in multiplayer modes?
Panoramic Monitors, Share controllers, Keyboard/mouse/special controller required/optional, Multi Controllers, Warping Viewport, Cut-off Viewport, cuffs

How are these features and options accomplished?
Share controllers, Keyboard/mouse/special controller required/optional, MultiMonitor, PROTOCOL, Alternating, Simultaneous, Bots, Teams(/Asymmetric), Asymmetric Players, Handicap enforced/option, Asymmetric controller, Single/Multiple-Systems/Cartridges/Monitors, Splitscreen (/Dynamic), Off-screen, Warping Viewport, Expanding Viewport, Cut-off Viewport, cuffs, trading, Link, Network, Wireless, infrared, hub.

2008-09-06 (updated 2008-09-06)
re: re:
but a 'multiplayer cable' for PC is vague

PC never was about cables and that stuff only applies to DOS anyway. With windows it all turned to simple case of used protocol (IPX and IP).

In Windows you're limited simply to IPX and IP, with IPX being deprecated in Vista and newer (AFAIK).
In DOS, you had: modem, serial port, COM port, IPX, and TCP/IP. I'm not sure if there are any uses of COM ports, but serial port is used with null modem (null cable).

Modem here is the same as DUN and modem-to-modem, as all those uses are part of it. Also, IP runs through modem internet connection too, so the difference is if you use phone numbers to connect or IP numbers.

And with that, I can say it never was nor never will be about the specific cables used. The hardware the cable connects to is more important and even that can be generalized a lot (such as ethernet cards can be crudely generalized as LAN). Still, if the mp tags use text strings to represent all cases, I'd rather keep out the instances that have no use cases until some are found (such as COM ports).

For example: A computer game uses keyboard, mouse, and joystic

All of which are quite likely optional alternatives for single player, so I don't see why specify with this.

at least generically indicate that a specific service provider is required

Use regular tags instead. I don't think we need to bloat mp tags with it even if it's directly related to it (GameSpy, and some others already use them).

though cross-platform sessions were never offered to the public

And so we needn't care of it :)

how do we distinguish them from 3rd part/cheat bots?

We don't, such things are beyond anything we need to record.

Multi controller *snip*

Still, isn't this already part of the game and not limited to multiplayer?

>> Warping Viewport *snip*
if it applies to multiplayer

If it applies to single player, wouldn't it naturally apply to multiplayer as well. And I doubt there are games with it only applying to multiplayer. Also, features part of single player very often do not appear in multiplayer. And many games add some strange features to multiplayer not present in single player (such as different/more weapons)

>> persistent *snip*
*snip-some-mode* This can apply to offline single and multiplayer games as well.

I've never heard of it applying to offline games as that is dependant on the user running the game. Though I seem to recall Nethack or similar recorded the death locations of older players and the later ones could then find them, but other than that none (everything else reset). Also, mp tags are for multiplayer, so...

For simplification, these are the basic questions regarding multiplayer modes *snipped, too much to quote*

Large majority of that info needs to be hidden by default as it's too much detail most don't care about.

2013-12-16
I wanted to add multiplayer modes to Zombi U but I don't know how to treat games that have a two-player mode : one with a wiimote, the other one with the Wii Pad. It is not shared-screen as the Wii Pad is another screen, nor split-screen as none screen is divided.

2013-12-16 (updated 2013-12-17)
We don't have anything for that currently. That being devices with innately multiple displays divided between players, or even games that support multiple displays where each display is per player or such. It's some variety of local multiplayer.

Edit: though if we do have generalized local option, it should be split into same (shared controller/screen/whatever comes with the system itself) and separate systems (nullcable, LAN, etc.).

2013-12-18
though if we do have generalized local option, it should be split into same (shared controller/screen/whatever comes with the system itself) and separate systems (nullcable, LAN, etc.).


I agree with that.

2013-12-29
The more I read your proposal, the more I am unsure about what we should do :-)

We do not have a generalized local options but both "Split-screen" and "Shared-screen
Should we rename these in some way just to make it clearer and add a third option ?

2013-12-29
We do not have a generalized local options but both "Split-screen" and "Shared-screen
Should we rename these in some way just to make it clearer and add a third option ?

These are both multiplayer options on same display screen on same machine. Hotseat is another but usually seen as the term used for turn-based things where people take turns on the same system (shared screen in essence, but not simultaneously).

Essentially the following is what is needed.

Local multiplayer (generic option, probably should be autofilled when any of the following is selected rather than being manually checked)
> Same/single system (missing currently: generic option where single system is enough)
>> Split-screen
>> Shared-screen
>> Hotseat
>> Multiple displays [or something?] (missing currently: covers things like using display on a second controller for one player and TV screen for another)
> Multiple systems (missing currently: generic option where multiple systems are needed)
>> Cable/Nullmodem
>> LAN
>> Wireless