 |
|  |
 |
|
Pembleton
|
|
Cyberspace
Apr 1999 time: 23:15
|
|
Um...I know this is going to be flamed to hell...but here goes...
If they haven't planned on releasing Civ3 with MP, then why should all the SP players, who are in the majority, suffer a delay because a minority wants MP that *they will eventually* implement.
I've read that some think it will delay it a month or so. I don't think that would be the case. If multiplayer is implemented for real-time and not just hot seat and PBEM, there will be a lot of development time. Look at all the early patches for most strategy games. Almost all of the first ones just address multi-player. MP needs to be tested a lot and even after that, there will be a lot of bugs for quite a while.
In order to release a satisfactory MP that will *still* need patches, it will take few-several months. It was already stated in the "letter" (which may or may not be real) that MP won't be released until next spring.
I'm not against MP. If I wanted to play MP I would be very angry too. But don't delay the game for the rest of us. I want them to concentrate on the SP before they start on MP. If they started on MP now, then they will spend less time perfecting the SP aspect. We would end up with a rushed SP as well as a rushed MP, and both types would be unhappy.
The game hit beta a while ago. I really don't think that they are going to change their plans at this point for such a drastic change.
If you want MP, don't buy it and wait until they put out the MP version.
Ok, now for the flames to begin...
Last edited by Pembleton on 09-09-2001 at 08:12
|
|
|  |
 |
|
d_dudy
|
|
stands beside Pembleton, gets out his loud speaker and states
"I agree"
now run!!!!!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
tniem
|
|
Hope College
Apr 2000 time: 00:15
|
|
I hope you don't consider this a flame. I consider it a rational reason why Single Player only players should be very concerned with this announcement.
Multiplayer has become a major part of any game. SMAC and CtP have had huge longetivity because of those still playing Multiplayer. Everyone knows that AI is only so good for so long and so a human is the only opponent worth playing.
Firaxis knows this. They worked to put MP in the game. They went as far as to promise a radical approach that we would all love for MP. They of course have promised a lot of things, MP not the only one. And the question is whether they will deliver.
So what we know is that MP is a huge part of the industry today and the promises made to us and it is not going to be included. They just don't have enough time for this imporant part of the game. So what else has Firaxis had to cut?
Think about it if MP is on the chopping blocks, then nothing was sacred and tons of things could be in the balance.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
tniem
|
|
Hope College
Apr 2000 time: 00:15
|
|
quote: Originally posted by isaac brock
I don't agree with tneim that "if MP is on the chopping blocks, then nothing was sacred and tons of things could be in the balance." |
Would you agree that many people play MP? Would you agree that MP is vital to most games success now on the market? Would you agree that MP was promised since the start by Firaxis?
I think you would have to agree with all of those. So MP is obviously an integral part of the Civ experience. I think one of the polls of what is most important had new ways to MP very high up on it. So it clearly should have been a priority.
quote: Just because there current multiplayer might be too buggy to include or whatever doesn't mean that they were going around chopping out everything else. In fact, them cutting out MP means that they are trying to refine the single player. |
Well if something as important as MP is still very buggy or if CivFanatics is correct, just begun in August, then what else is buggy? What else has not been fully completed? What else has not been tested?
I think you will agree that this does leave the possibility to mean that there could be a lot of things not yet finished.
quote: Remember, infogrames probably has them on a strict deadline. |
Yes of course. That is why I am worried. The deadline is forcing Firaxis to cut MP, the demo, and the public beta that they said they would have liked to do. You can't make me believe that if the deadline is effecting those things that other elements of the game aren't suffering as well.
quote: It's better to have a single player game that works out of the box to keep MPers busy until they can patch MP into the game. |
Well if the reviews are bad and players find the AI terrible then it won't be good to not have MP. In fact it will downright kill the series and possibly the TBS genre. Infogrames as well will take a hit not only by sales on this one but also on MOO3. That would mean to me that they would want a hit but I guess not.
quote: I'm not worried, and i'm certain firaxis has everything under control. |
But listen to what they are saying. We are not ready. It seems evident in everything they are doing that they are still in developement. They want more time. But Infogrames won't give it to them. So even if I trust Sid and the gang, I think what they are saying is that its not going to be ready but money is going to rule the decision.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Master Marcus
|
 |
Quebec, Canada
Jan 2000 time: 00:15
|
|
quote: Originally posted by tniem
Well if the reviews are bad and players find the AI terrible then it won't be good to not have MP. In fact it will downright kill the series and possibly the TBS genre. Infogrames as well will take a hit not only by sales on this one but also on MOO3. That would mean to me that they would want a hit but I guess not. |
I partly disagree. I place great hopes for MoO3, in fact it could be theunexpected - I admit, the unexpected - SAVIOR of the TBS genre. Innovative gameplay AND sequel ( non-linear, non-conservative unlike the Civ series ) developed by a different team , but of course they may have the same deadline cuts since its the same publisher. Please, wait for the release next year before a final judgement. In the meantime this is pure speculation...( though I find pleasant to speculate from time to time!).
As for the AI, it cannot be worst than the SMACx one. It could be a lot better of course, but SMACx is a great game: Civ3 can still be an even greater game with just a more versative AI and the same difficulty levels from Civ2. This is within an existing engine the programmers need only to remodel. They may be actually rushed to finish the game without the options we know, but I'm confident that a full-year development for the AI was sufficient. But not optimal.
All in all, they want a $$$$$$$$$hit for a good game ( face it, Civ3 may not become a perfect masterpiece - but it will at least be good ) instead of losing another (un)profitable year in development for all the extras.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
isaac brock
|
 |
Amherstburg, Ontario
Aug 2001 time: 00:15
|
|
I'm sorry if it's hard to accept, but Civ 3 WILL be released by its deadline, and since there's no changing that, I would much rather have them refine the AI for their remaining days and patching multiplayer later. Yes, I DO acknowledge that many people play civ multiplayer. But most people, even if they play multiplayer, aren't above playing SP. So, if (and it is still if, even though it's likely) Firaxis can't release it with MP for any reason, they must release SP for the deadline. If they were to delay until multiplayer, that could mean a six month wait. Since die-hard MPers would be waiting whether they waited to release the game or not, why can't they release SP so that MPers have a diversion, modders can get to work, and SPers can play the game they wanted to play for so long? It is extremely disappointing that it can't be all ready right away, but you cannot change it. So get over it.
|
|
|  |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|