 |
|
FuFu15
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Bleyn
2. A lot of the people complaining about MP seem to forget that it takes a LOT more effort to make a great SP game than it does to make MP work. Their choice to delay MP shows that not only do they want MP to be the best it can be, they want the SP to be really good as well. There are trade-offs that have to occur in the development of a computer game and as things go, I don't think this is all that bad of one.
|
k here's a revelation that came in my dreams last night. TAKE THE NETWORK CODE FROM SMAC, and IMPLEMENT IT IN CIV3. OH MY. It's not like that could take more than a couple weeks to tweak it up to civ3 par. then release all your revolutionary "multiplayer tweaks" in the expansion pack.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
squid
|
|
quote: Originally posted by FuFu15
k here's a revelation that came in my dreams last night. TAKE THE NETWORK CODE FROM SMAC, and IMPLEMENT IT IN CIV3. OH MY. It's not like that could take more than a couple weeks to tweak it up to civ3 par. then release all your revolutionary "multiplayer tweaks" in the expansion pack. |
you clearly do not work in software development. for one, the network code was most likely adapted and optimized to SMAC. usually this happens with the knowledge it will not be used again, since code portability to new architectures tends to make things inefficient and slower to develop. Even so, testing of a MP component would be radically different than testing the SP component, and this alone would take several months to iron out.
Firaxis made a design decision to do it right the first time rather than releasing a bad version and having to support it. I applaud that. It takes a good company to have the courage to say "no" to features when they do not have the time. Anyway, if you don't have the time to do it right the first time, you don't have the time to do it twice.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ozymandous
|
 |
Atlanta, GA
Aug 2001 time: 00:15
|
|
quote: Originally posted by squid
Firaxis made a design decision to do it right the first time rather than releasing a bad version and having to support it. I applaud that. It takes a good company to have the courage to say "no" to features when they do not have the time. Anyway, if you don't have the time to do it right the first time, you don't have the time to do it twice. |
It also takes a good customer to not pay twice for the same product. Would you buy a car that had non-changable tires that could only travel 10.m.p.h. on and couldn't drive more than 2 miles from your house only to have to pay more to get the "upgraded" tires with a pair of fuzzy dice later? Heck no.
If people want to pay double for a game because a game company couldn't pull it's head out long enough to build and sell the entire game in the first place then go right ahead, some of us will wait and see if ALL the promised features are included and if not, wait and buy the whole package later.
If the game ships with all promised features, including MP and isn't buggy then people will buy it, when people buy a game that doesn't have all it's features they are essentially telling a game company it's ok to shaft customers. I don't like to be jerked around and think it sends a bad signal for the gaming industry (whose credability is already thin). I don't like being a beta tester when I pay for a game and I sure as heck don't like paying double for a game that should have been sold as one piece to begin with. It's not a problem of money, I buy 3-5 games a year on average, but it's merely that I am tired of being lied to and being sold crappy product.
It's the principle of the matter. You want to be rewarded for doing a good job then when you have finished the job I'll be happy to reward you, no payment for poor service or product, it's that simple.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
HalfLotus
|
 |
ATL, shorty.
Sep 2001 time: 00:15
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Ozymandous
It also takes a good customer to not pay twice for the same product. Would you buy a car that had non-changable tires that could only travel 10.m.p.h. on and couldn't drive more than 2 miles from your house only to have to pay more to get the "upgraded" tires with a pair of fuzzy dice later? Heck no.
If people want to pay double for a game because a game company couldn't pull it's head out long enough to build and sell the entire game in the first place then go right ahead, some of us will wait and see if ALL the promised features are included and if not, wait and buy the whole package later.
If the game ships with all promised features, including MP and isn't buggy then people will buy it, when people buy a game that doesn't have all it's features they are essentially telling a game company it's ok to shaft customers. I don't like to be jerked around and think it sends a bad signal for the gaming industry (whose credability is already thin). I don't like being a beta tester when I pay for a game and I sure as heck don't like paying double for a game that should have been sold as one piece to begin with. It's not a problem of money, I buy 3-5 games a year on average, but it's merely that I am tired of being lied to and being sold crappy product.
It's the principle of the matter. You want to be rewarded for doing a good job then when you have finished the job I'll be happy to reward you, no payment for poor service or product, it's that simple. |
In game terms I think Civ3 (SP) will be far better than "a car that had non-changable tires that could only travel 10.m.p.h. on and couldn't drive more than 2 miles from your house".
Multiplayer has never been PROMISED to ship with first release. Who are you to decide what the COMPLETE game is? Are you programming the game? Do you work for Firaxis? Didn't think so.
I believe CIV3 with only SP will be well worth the money I pay for it. It would be nice to have MP, but Civ 3 will be worth it's weight in gold.
You now, but I'll bet you buy Civ 3 and love it.
Last edited by HalfLotus on 01-10-2001 at 00:31
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Ozymandous
|
 |
Atlanta, GA
Aug 2001 time: 00:15
|
|
quote: Originally posted by HalfLotus
In game terms I think Civ3 (SP) will be far better than "a car that had non-changable tires that could only travel 10.m.p.h. on and couldn't drive more than 2 miles from your house".
Multiplayer has never been PROMISED to ship with first release. Who are you to decide what the COMPLETE game is? Are you programming the game? Do you work for Firaxis? Didn't think so.
I believe CIV3 with only SP will be well worth the money I pay for it. It would be nice to have MP, but Civ 3 will be worth it's weight in gold.
You now, but I'll bet you buy Civ 3 and love it. |
Well... The analogy was that you're buying a semi-functional product and having to pay more to complete the whole product at a later time. Sorry you couldn't quite piece that together.
I believe SP has the potential to be very good for the game but shipping it (potentially) with only SP and no MP to charge MP later would be wrong, IMHO.
Oh, and regarding this "MP was never promised to ship with the first release" BS. since when? When the game was first advertised there were numerous references to "ground-breaking MP", etc. Since word leaked out several weeks ago about MP not being included (and not denied by Firaxis) most of the web sites that used to include "ground-breaking MP" as a feature of the game on initial release have since changed their ad's. If you followed the game development closer you'd know this.
I hope that SP will be worth the money people pay for it, and I hope they like to shell out additional dollars if MP comes out with an add-on pack (of which >50% of the scenarios will come from the Internet anyway), but I can guarentee that I will wait to buy them both together, if at all based on real reviews a month or two after it's released.
I rant now? Nah, not really, because I loved the firct Civ and have already had my expectations shattered when Civ2 was nothing but Civ1 with better graphics. I doubt Civ3 will be that much different than Civ2 except for soime minor things. If it is radically better with adaptive AI, better unit design and if the "added" features like culture and hero's actually make the game better then fine I may get it, provided it all ships in one piece.
In all honesty I do hope the game is great and ships with MP (as originally promised) because I'll join the rest of the lemmings in buying it, otherwise I'll buy Stronghold and/or Pool of Radience and be happy with those until MOO3 comes out and then I may buy Civ3 when the gold edition comes out.
Civ3 is not the end all-be all, of my life or my computer gaming experience unlike some folks here apparently. 
|
|
|  |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|