Civ3 MP: Here are your choices...

Steve Clark · September 9, 2001, 11:54

A. Have a playable SP and an incomplete, untested MP version in October

B. Have a complete SP and MP version in May 2002

C. Have a complete SP version in October and a complete MP version in May

You can't vote for D. Have a complete and tested SP and MP version in October because that's not realistic.

I'm afraid with all noise from the immature, shrilling thiefs around here, they might just go ahead and release an incomplete MP version just to shut you up. Then you will climb all over their backs complaining how buggy it is and how it was rushed.

Let them do the best job possible on MP and if it takes until May 2002, then in the long run, the wait will be well worth it.

Slax · September 9, 2001, 12:01

I agree with you Steve. I don't even intend to play MP, but if I later decide to, I don't want some tacked on MP ability. I'd rather wait for one whole well tested game.

Yog-Sothoth · September 9, 2001, 12:14

Since I have never played Civ II multiplayer gold I'm really looking forward to play Civ III multiplayer, but I agree that Firaxis should not release a rushed MP version full of bugs.

However, since I think multiplayer is a vital part of a game these days, the MP add-on should IMO be downloadable for free when it is released.

lockstep · September 9, 2001, 12:54

Quote:

Originally posted by Steve Clark
You can't vote for D. Have a complete and tested SP and MP version in October because that's not realistic.

A quote from civfanatics.com (September 8) to make this point clear:

'According to Jeff Vitous of WarGamer.com, an Infogrames representive told him that Firaxis didn't start working on multiplayer until early August.'

korn469 · September 9, 2001, 13:58

Quote:

You can't vote for D. Have a complete and tested SP and MP version in October because that's not realistic.

that should be a viable option, and it is only through poor planning that civ3 isn't ready to go with both MP and SP...it is unfair to the fans, and a rather poor choice; i don't know who made it (or if they even did make it, we still haven't heard from firaxis)

Multiplayer is a standard feature of Strategy games and in fact most games today do ship with Multiplayer
Firaxis should have planned on including Multiplayer at launch...if they did not then they dropped the ball and they are going to alienate some of their fan base and not win new fans...there are other games that we can spend our money on, and this is a bad decision!

Steve Clark you need to add in an another option

E. Have an incomplete and rushed SP version in October and a complete MP version in May

Capt Dizle · September 9, 2001, 14:15

Knocking Firaxis won't help Korn.

Ralf · September 9, 2001, 14:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Steve Clark
A. Have a playable SP and an incomplete, untested MP version in October

B. Have a complete SP and MP version in May 2002

C. Have a complete SP version in October and a complete MP version in May

I certainly vote for alternative C.

Alternative B is somewhat misleading however. Although an additional 5 months of in-house 10+ staff-member playtesting certainly wouldnt hurt the SP-game (besides developing the MP-part), there is also a very real risk of "overdoing it" *.

Also, you guys have to ask yourselves: what is most valuable for the Civ-3 game? If they release a complete SP-game by october-01, that means by the time the expected crossfire-style expansion-pack (bundled with complete MP) is released, the previously released SP-game have had 5 whole months of public playing, scrutiny & feedback on several hundredthousands of different hardvare/software-configurations, with countless of contrastingly different playingstyles. There is simply no way on can compare that with 5 months of continued "in-house 10+ staff-member play-testing".

IF Firaxis really feel secure & confident with a october-01 SP-release (and only Firaxis staff-members knows if SP feels "rushed"; "uncompleted" or not - not Yin26, nor anybody else), then having that 5 months worth of public playing, scrutiny & feedback is a godsend for the SP-part, and for the expected expansion-pack as well. If above is true, then alternative C, really IS the best possible choice.

* In the art-world theres an expression that says: every artist must know when its time to "kill his darlings". By this they mean, that he must know then it time to stop repaint and overpaint the same favourite painting over and over again, and instead thinking "overall" and "ahead".

Quote:

Originally posted by Korn469
E. Have an incomplete and rushed SP version in October and a complete MP version in May

Are you psychic?

Can you somehow "see" exactly how Firaxis staff-members feels about an SP october-release, and exactly where the SP-part is positioned in its planned development-schedule?

tniem · September 9, 2001, 15:04

B.

dainbramaged13 · September 9, 2001, 15:09

Quote:

Originally posted by tniem
B.

DID YOU EVEN READ RALF's POST!!
hes right you know...
why delay SP just so it can come out the same time as MP? Then in the expansion with MP, it will be much better. IF you want to WAIT to buy the bundled game+expansion in May, thats fine with me, but releasing the SP-only version now instead of waiting seems SO much better!

MarkG · September 9, 2001, 15:15

can we please have a few less threads on the issue?

thanks