Just for context, the "problem" they pointed with multiplayer is that "With a day/night cycle it would be messy when the two players are supposed to progress at different pace".
Or something of that sort. I'm paraphrasing a bit the jist of the argument because I can't be bothered to find the actual quote (which was an answer to someone asking for it in an interview, by the way).
And frankly this strikes me as another example of Larian overcomplicating things, because the simple solution about "progressing time at a different pace" would be "DON'T".
- The "background clock" should always be in sync for all the players logged in a game (i.e. if it's 11:03am for the host, the same will be true for everyone).
- When one of the players enters turn-based mode and the "clock" freezes for them (i.e. If it's 11:05am it remains so as long as the turn-based mode lasts. Maybe with a 6-seconds-progression per round if you want to go overkill with the accuracy), it should "freeze" even for other players relatively afar sticking to real-time exploration (i.e. It will remain 11:05am for everyone as long as player X is in turn-based mode).
- "All players would need to agree on doing a long rest" is a bit of a redundant suggestion, since that's ALREADY THE CASE right now.
There, your "design issue" about "asynchronous time" solved entirely by removing the problem without removing the feature of having passing time.
Potential downside? Can't think of much, frankly, but for the sake of argument let's throw in the only plausible one:
"B-but if the players in turn-based mode take a lot of time to end combat, the others would experience longer days in real-time".
Possible answer: "SO FUCKING WHAT?". Who would care, honestly? How would that be any worse than just having your entire game world stuck in a single time window?
Who would prefer to explore a Baldur's Gate (and I mean the actual city now) frozen in eternal midday, without the joy to experience the dusk coming it, the city getting darker, the street lamps turning on etc, etc... just to avoid a trivial, negligible incongruence with the consistency of the clock?
No one in their right mind, that's who.
Last edited by Tuco; 28/06/22 12:07 AM.
