Am I the only one that thinks it's a good sign they didn't start on MP til August

dennis580 · September 10, 2001, 16:33

This along with only having 8 playable civs in the game proves the game is not being rushed. Since they didn't even get around to starting work on MP til last month this along with only having up to 8 playable civs, means that Firaxis has been taking thier time so they can create the greatest AI the world has ever known. I think this game is the excate opposite of being rushed.

SerapisIV · September 10, 2001, 16:38

I do. Worrying about MP late in development means that they actually cared about the AI. If the developers were all busy playing against a computer for the past 2 years, it means that they have been making the AI less-buggy and more intelligent, not trying to outwit another human who will always be more intelligent then the AI. If Firaxis has spent the past 2 years playing Civ3 till the AI is still super-difficult for them, then I very hopeful that it will be way superior to current AIs.

dennis580 · September 10, 2001, 16:41

Yea and having only 8 playable civs also indicates this too. It would be much more diffcult and time consuming to program good AI for 16 playable civs.

Ralf · September 10, 2001, 16:51

Quote:

Originally posted by SerapisIV
I do. Worrying about MP late in development means that they actually cared about the AI.

I belive its a good sign also.

But at the same time I truly believe that they are planning something out of the ordinary in terms of multiplayer also. Just give them some slack. It will come.

Andrew1999 · September 10, 2001, 17:35

One possibility is that they release Civ 3 in October with basic multiplayer support. Then in May they release "Civ III Team Arena"

with a bunch of specifically multiplayer scenarios and maps, and some of the more exotic gameplay changes that have been proposed, like simultaneous turns.

Provost Harrison · September 10, 2001, 18:08

Perhaps so, but all this should have been coordinated and done at the same time. And I would have liked to see more than 8 civs at a time. Some of these things that are peripheral and wouldn't affect the gameplay (you can still chose less than 16) would not throw the game off whack. Yeah, perhaps they have sorted out some things well, but this is still no excuse for neglecting another area of the game. Still, all of this seems to be nothing but speculation anyway...Firaxis have always been quite proud of the MP on Civ3 and have mentioned it on occasions. But on the other hand, they have been conspicuous by their absence...