 |
|  |
 |
|
vee4473
|
 |
New Jersey
Feb 2000 time: 00:24
|
|
I am interested in hearing what all of you guys (and girls ) have to say about my opinion that the game company would have avoided most negative reviews if they released the single player game and were honest and said that MP needed work so enjoy single player while we iron out MP.
Also, does anyone agree with me that most people who will play MP will spend a bit of time playing single player just to get a feel and hash out strategies? (Before they even think of going into the MP arena). Which will give the game company the month or so that they say they need to polish MP.
I mean, my guess is that very few will buy MOO3 and right away go into MP games...that's just foolhardy.
This is all based, of course, on the reports that the only reason the game is delayed is because of a late game MP bug.
I agree with MasterDave when he says that there may be a deeper reason for delaying...beyond an MP bug.
The game company, from the accounts that i've read, is delaying due to a late game MP bug, which I think is weird because NO software is endlessly worked on until EVERY bug is gone.
My real problem is with these games trying to incorporate SP and MP in the original release. Obviously MP is going to present some problems not encountered with SP, and SP is the heart of all games no matter what anyone says.
Release SP, be honest in not saying that your releasing some magical game that has SP AND MP, and all will be happy.
That's what I say.
P.S. I also think that game companies are falling into a trap if they think that a real-time game (like Warcraft or Starcraft) which is released with MP support fully functional, means that a turn-based game can also do the same...Obviously TBS games present a greater problem in MP than RTS games do...for whatever reason.
I think that TBS game companies feel the need to package their product with the same level of MP performance that RTS game companies do...
Perhaps the two VERY different styles of game need to be treated differently with regards to MP.
What do you think?

|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
habadacus
|
|
I'm with you 100% . I don't even understand why they bothered with Multiplayer at all. All of us who are fans of the series aren't fans because of MP, because MOO never was MP. I don't want play a slow cerebral game like MOO online because when I play TBS I like to pause and think and smoke pot and look at the pretty ships and planets and contemplate weight/damage ratios and walk away and take a pee and get a beer and come back. I think MP is for stuff like half-life and Diablo and maybe some RTS games, but not MOO. I have no intention of playing MOO online, in fact I'm kinda over the whole MP thing in general. I have a screaming fast connection, but quickly grow tired of playing against unsupervised 14 year olds who can't spell faggot or ***** right. So quit making us wait and wait and wait for MP and release the DAMN GAME ALREADY!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Master-Mike
|
|
Well im looking forward to multiplayer. Me and a mate will probaly buy the game at the same time, install it, jump on Roger wilco and talk to each other via our headset microphones, and learn the game together, we have done this on quite a few games, and you learn it alot faster, two heads are better then one. But then again we have been playing against each other for 5 years and yes we do have games which span weeks, like in Birth of the federation, War in Russia, Imerpium galactica series, Eurpoa Universalis series and many many more. So find your self a good friend and you can play games that last weeks, its great you build up alot of pride in the empire you create and taking his planets is a fantastic felling, espicall when he is swearing his head off over the microphone. Anyway single player is very important, but i think i this day and age any company that releases a game with crappy m/p support is doomed to poor sales and reviews. Take as long as you need IG & QS just keep us informed of whats is happening, we dont need a relese date just keep the info comming.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Shnozwangler
|
|
Toronto Area
Aug 2002 time: 05:24
|
|
You asked so I will answer... I have no real intent of playing MP... As all have stated it is too hard to coordinate a full TBS game over the weeks, all you need is one player not to show up and the game is lost. I tried MP Civ3 and found that i played quite a few game beginings but due to lag, connection lost and declining interest most of the competitors were out after 2 hours.
Unless they have revolutionized the MP experience for MoO3 i will prolly not play it.
IMHO
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Alexfrog
|
|
I liked multiplayer in MOO2, becasue the computer was so rediculously easy, even on impossible.
I played about half my games of MOO2 as 2 player hotseat or network games. It was the only way to really test out good races/strategies to find the best one, because anything good would beat the computer easily.
I like to play moderate galazy sizes, and played MOO2 network games in about 4 hours or so, maybe a little more.
I am glad Moo3 will be multiplayer, and hope to play some 2 player games online, on moderate galazy sizes. I think that if Multiplayer was the only bug they had, they shouldve released it, so we could all learn it vefore playing multi, but I suspect there were late game SP bugs too, as mentioned earlier in the thread.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24. Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
top of page
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|