I'm getting tired about these whiners trying to force MP down our throat

dennis580 · September 10, 2001, 11:07

You people need to stick with RTS games. Civ has always been a single player game and will always be a single player game. I have saw rediculous threads with people telling me not to buy Civ3 because it has no MP. Heck if I was rich I would buy 10 copies just to support Firaxis for concentrating on the only thing that matters which is the single player game. If anything we should all buy 2 copies to commend Friaxis for not wasting time with MP so they can concentrate on making the greatest SP game of all-time.

Frugal_Gourmet · September 10, 2001, 11:13

I'm getting sick of all these smarmy types who dismiss the importance of multiplayer.

*smirk*

yin26 · September 10, 2001, 11:13

LOL!

Nikolai · September 10, 2001, 11:19

I agree with you, dennis! I'm also tired of this whining, but in the same time, I'm afraid of what the reviewers will say...

Robert Plomp · September 10, 2001, 11:30

you fall in the same category of people that never played civilization and wonder why some people are looking forward that much to singleplayer civ.

It's fine with me that you dislike multiplayer ! And it's fine with me that you will never play it. But why won't you accept it that there are actually people that have played hours of mp games ?

I've spend night playing diplo style 7 player games !
Those are great ! I'm really looking forward to negotiate with yin about trading oil for iron so we both can produce tanks.

You have your singleplayer, that's fine. I love that as well,
but to say that mp doesn't belong to civ doesn't make any sence !
Civ is the perfect multiplayer game !

it's the only multiplayer game in wich you will *really* remark the difference between ai and human.

CyberShy

LaRusso · September 10, 2001, 11:33

well i am really looking forward to negotiating a trade deal with yin. there should be a time limit, though, he is a prolific writer

Robert Plomp · September 10, 2001, 11:37

LaRusso, while you're trading with him I'll attack him in the back.
After that we can both use the oil ! (of course you have to pay 50 gold per turn for it, but hey....... that's a good deal, isn't it ?)

(and if you won't accept that I 'm sure yin will do so we can both destroy you and share the resources, not that I'm making a treat, just warning)

LaRusso · September 10, 2001, 11:39

ah, dutch bastards, always ready to do some fair trade

Nikolai · September 10, 2001, 11:40

Another thing: it's expencive to play with modem/ISDN, how do you handle the bill, Cybershy/LaRusso/anyone playing MP often? And, as I pointed out above: I do understand the issue(I think

), I just don't play it myself, just so you know that!

yin26 · September 10, 2001, 11:42

Quote:

I'll attack him in the back. After that we can both use the oil.

Are you, my friend, saying...perhaps...that I am oily? Hmmm?

{img}3d rendered face of Abe Lincoln spitting out some chew right into the screen{/img}

SlowwHand · September 10, 2001, 11:47

Quote:

Originally posted by dennis580
You people need to stick with RTS games. Civ has always been a single player game and will always be a single player game. I have saw rediculous threads with people telling me not to buy Civ3 because it has no MP. Heck if I was rich I would buy 10 copies just to support Firaxis for concentrating on the only thing that matters which is the single player game. If anything we should all buy 2 copies to commend Friaxis for not wasting time with MP so they can concentrate on making the greatest SP game of all-time.

I doubt any MP give's a rat's ass if you stick to the SP side of it or not.
The complaint is, that in rushing to market, MP enthusiasts get the shaft, again.

Keep to the beginning level called SP if you want.

Robert Plomp · September 10, 2001, 11:50

I've a permanent ADSL connection (1024 kb/sec download, 256 kbsec upload) thus not that expensive

LaRusso, I was kidding about teaming up with Yin, and you know that, don't you ;-)
And to show the positive attitude my people have for your mighty empire I'll give you, let's say, 20 gold.
In exchange I'm sure we would be very happy to receive your help while stealing some of the yinging oil.

Yin, you know that I'm joking, right ?
If you handle me some of the oil I'll attack LaRusso right now and free the cities he has conquered over you !

Master Marcus · September 10, 2001, 11:57

The WAR between MP and SP addicts : no cease-fire in sight?! These pickerings of attrition are unavoidable, but futile since Infogrames is there to make $$$$$$ with its two upcoming TBS monsters. Face it : with MP or not, Civ3 is more destined to traditional TBS SP players who conduct long campaigns. For MP addicts prefering swifter games, I'm afraid to say that the long Civ tradition is over for you. Firaxis may want to catch you next year in order to make more money, while many have already said NO for that "costly wait". You can always choose to switch for Empire Earth, and why not the famous SMAC MP again.

For my part I know I'm gonna stick with Civ3, but I'm gonna wait a week or two AFTER its release.

Earwicker · September 10, 2001, 12:14

I'm sick of all these whiners trying to force a quality product down our throat!

SlowwHand · September 10, 2001, 12:37

What I'm sick of:

The misconception that MP is "quick". Total crap.
The idea that SP is some kind of relic of the past to be treasured.

Nikolai · September 10, 2001, 12:45

Can't you stop with that, SlowwHand?!

You don't like SP, that's all right, but for us that like it, it's very annoying to read the same bull****(sorry for the language, haven't any better to write

) almost in every post from you!

Is that all right? If so, I would be very happy!

Ralf · September 10, 2001, 12:47

Quote:

Originally posted by Master Marcus
The WAR between MP and SP addicts : no cease-fire in sight?!

To describe the debate as a war between "MP-only" and "SP-only" supporters is both pointless and highly contraproductive.

If Firaxis have the slightest ambition of recapture a "best game of all times" award, they pretty much got to add multiplayer-capability as well - sooner or later. The debate should instead be about when to do it - not if.

(below I have copied from one of my previous replies, but I reproduce it here anyway, because its relevant)

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 this can be 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 currently 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.

SlowwHand · September 10, 2001, 12:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Nikolai
Can't you stop with that, SlowwHand?!

You don't like SP, that's all right, but for us that like it, it's very annoying to read the same bull****(sorry for the language, haven't any better to write

) almost in every post from you!

Is that all right? If so, I would be very happy!

Read the thread title, then mouth off.

MarkG · September 10, 2001, 12:51

well, i'm sick of multiple threads on the same issue