 |
|
squid
|
|
You can do that if you like, but I don't think I would have ever used multiplayer. Starting with Civ2 (the classic), there was no multiplayer. It was just you and the game. Civ is not well adaptable for multiplayer. If anything, multiplayer would be added just to get on the multiplayer wave....not neccesary.
It's going to be a great game! Improved boarders, passage agreements (no trepassing!), improved AI, sweet graphics...I'm going to love it!
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
markusf
|
|
civilization has always been bugy as hell. And now they are going to release with MP ? People on here may buy the game but new players will be hard pressed to buy it. I mean who wants a game created in 2001, using the standards from 1995. I happen to be a programmer and know how these things work. it will probably be the same as civ2, they released the game with disabled MP support then a while later re released the game with the functionality turned on.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pembleton
|
|
Cyberspace
Apr 1999
time: 23:15
|
|
MP puts me into a bad mood. I want to play games for fun, not to get agitated. I've played Age of Empires, Age of Kings, and Diablo2 multiplayer and I always get pissed off because kids or *******s are either disconnecting after losing or things such as constanly pausing the game. When they're winning, they start trash talking with you. In Diablo2 you have to deal with selfish kids who try to steal what you have or try to PK you (which means kill your character) in a game that's meant to be a team game vs. the computer.
On top of that do what am I going to do while I'm waiting for the other player's turn in Civ3? Read a book? I don't like doing several things at the same time. I'm also too impatient and want to get to the next turn right away.
Most gamers don't have the time or motivation to analyze the exact details of the game and master the AI using exploits and weaknesses. Players who do that are the most vocal on forums and are not representative of the "average" player.
And the "pansies" who play SP, who are the vast majority of gamers, even with games such as Starcraft, Half-Life, Diablo, etc., don't care that they aren't "real" players and will continue to happily give their money to game companies.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
markusf
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pembleton
And the "pansies" who play SP, who are the vast majority of gamers, even with games such as Starcraft, Half-Life, Diablo, etc., don't care that they aren't "real" players and will continue to happily give their money to game companies. |
your living in the past. Besides the majority of people playing those games play MP. But your probably way to old to realize that. Who do you think buys the majority of the games? Some of the new games like Tribes can only be played multiplayer there is no longer support for single player. Other games are moving in that direction as well. The people in this forum aren't going to make much of a different to firixas bottom line. But the people shopping in the store and looking at the packaging will. When your comparing 2 games and one has 2 times the features of the other which one will you buy?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pembleton
|
|
Cyberspace
Apr 1999
time: 23:15
|
|
What does age have to do with it? It's called looking at statisitics. There are far more people who have *bought* the game than there are registered on-line to play the games multiplayer. The *hardcore* multiplayers don't have enough buying power to put Starcraft and Diablo2 on the bestseller *over* games such as the Sims, Barbie whatever, or whatever Golf game.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pembleton
|
|
Cyberspace
Apr 1999
time: 23:15
|
|
quote:
By comparison, playing a person with thought processes and reasoning ability is much more difficult than playing a stupid AI. |
You're assuming that they're good. The game I've played the most multiplayer was Age of Kings and I've played plenty of people who were worse than the AI.
BTW, my zone rating was around 1850, the best players are around 2000, and your rating starts at 1600. My strategy is just as good as the experts but I don't have the fast click/mouse talent they have. There are plenty of times when I will spend too many precious fractions of seconds "re-moving" my mouse into position or I click the wrong thing, etc.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Pembleton
|
|
Cyberspace
Apr 1999
time: 23:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wiglaf
but to do this not only ignores a large portion of consumers, it reveals what Firaxis is all about - money money money.
|
God forbid that game programmers try to make a living! What do you think they are, philanthropists?
Also, Sid Meier does care about the reception the game gets. This isn't the last game he's going to make and wants to keep his reputation intact. And Firaxis has not really hurt themselves. They probably lost .0X% of the sales. That's how they compare to a random person on the street who has only played a few computer games in his life, which will include Civ3.
I already posted how Civ:CTP, a horrendous game, was still a bestseller for a long time even though people were returning it but CTP2 wasn't because it didn't have the Civ name attached to it. Civ's recognition by the masses which includes press by Time magazine and NY Times alone, will ensure great sales. You think Black and White sold so much because it was a great game? (In case you missed the sarcasm, B&W was horrible.) Firaxis knows this and that's why they will most likely ignore the MP protests.
But the ironic thing is that they *do* care about money, money, money and that is why they *will* eventually make MP.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15.
Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
08-09-2001 20:31
The Diplo crowd of players etc etc.. this seems to develop better games as the group sets the rules they play by and still maintain the enjoyment of the group. 
|