MP no longer mentioned in Amazon advertising.

[tniem]

Originally posted by Earthling7
This makes perfect sense. 16 civs SP. Sell the baby.
Six months later, sales are dropping. CivIII Add-On. Included is four extra civs, 10 scenarios (5 Firaxis/5 hijacked off the Internet) and multiplayer support.
A year later, CivIII MGE. Everything put together in the same box with a few extra scenarios.
A year after that, the whole thing is sold for 1/2 price. Then it's prime time for CivIV.

This is not the early 90s. As Sid said in his interview with GameSpot during their The Sid Meier Legacy Feature, he now understands that MP is important. All Firaxis games have seemed to understand that. SMG and SMAC had many MP gamers and it Civ3 is going to have even more. For heaven's sakes it is 2001! MP is important to a game's rating and that does influecne sales to a degree.

Oh, come on... Everyone who *****es about the price of Civ3 only does so because of the totally arbitrary pricing structure of computer games that dictates that new product must be $40 - $50 for every player no matter how much utility (time or enjoyment) he or she gets from the game.

I am currently paying for college. $40 to $50 to me is a lot of money. Sure I am willing to pay that much but I do have a problem with spending the money on a game that is a downgrade from SMAC. At least that game I am still playing PBEM games. So to shell out a ton of cash for a game that I have been playing since 1991, just makes absolutely no sense to me. I mean the AI probably will be nothing for me. Beat it within two weeks and then I have wasted $50. Sure you could argue I was paying for past joy, but since I already bought those games, I might as well just pull those out and play against a decent opponent, my friend down the hall.

[TCO]

Originally posted by randomturn
Oh, come on... Everyone who *****es about the price of Civ3 only does so because of the totally arbitrary pricing structure of computer games that dictates that new product must be $40 - $50 for every player no matter how much utility (time or enjoyment) he or she gets from the game. The theoretical "optimal" pricing point for a game would differ from player to player depending upon utility; and every single person on this board would pay more than $50 for Civ3 if it weren't for the anchor of arbitrary pricing standard.

In other words, in an alternate reality where games aren't released nationally or carried in stores, but are instead sold in limited runs on a not-to-be-exceeded, first-come, first-served basis to a pre-defined number of, say, 5,000 users who pay, say, $200 each, I think it's pretty obvious that virtually everyone at Apolyton would gladly be on that list of 5,000. It is irrational to complain of a lack of fairness in what is clearly an arbitrary pricing structure in what is clearly a very tough industry on the supply side in which you the consumer have perfect freedom of choice and in which you, specifically, the self-selected Apolyton gamer (who will get far more than "average" utility from the product) will nonetheless "unfairly" pay just an "average" price.

And to any idiot who is tempted to flame me for "saying that Civ3 should be $200": (A) that's not what I'm saying, and (B) try learning something about theoretical economics.

This is what I was saying (better phrased)...

[TCO]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
Why don't they release it with MP and then release an enhanced MP later? Best of both worlds.

Do they really want the multiplayer community bashing the game before and after release? Its a vocal community.

Oh...MY GOD!!!

Do you think people really listen to your whining? THat they care? That they are intimidated?

Pshaw.

[TCO]

Originally posted by tniem

This is not the early 90s. As Sid said in his interview with GameSpot during their The Sid Meier Legacy Feature, he now understands that MP is important. All Firaxis games have seemed to understand that. SMG and SMAC had many MP gamers and it Civ3 is going to have even more. For heaven's sakes it is 2001! MP is important to a game's rating and that does influecne sales to a degree.

Quote:

Oh, come on... Everyone who *****es about the price of Civ3 only does so because of the totally arbitrary pricing structure of computer games that dictates that new product must be $40 - $50 for every player no matter how much utility (time or enjoyment) he or she gets from the game.

I am currently paying for college. $40 to $50 to me is a lot of money. Sure I am willing to pay that much but I do have a problem with spending the money on a game that is a downgrade from SMAC. At least that game I am still playing PBEM games. So to shell out a ton of cash for a game that I have been playing since 1991, just makes absolutely no sense to me. I mean the AI probably will be nothing for me. Beat it within two weeks and then I have wasted $50. Sure you could argue I was paying for past joy, but since I already bought those games, I might as well just pull those out and play against a decent opponent, my friend down the hall.

1. college students = cheap bastards. Sorry.

2. If you don't want it...don't buy it. I think Infogrames is looking at the overall market and knows that Civ3 can sell for a lot of money prvide they break it into different parts...

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by GP


Oh...MY GOD!!!

Do you think people really listen to your whining? THat they care? That they are intimidated?

Pshaw.

I have 2 answers to that -

If its bluff, be a good sport GP and don't spoil it

Otoh, I hope you didn't hold onto your Activision shares

On a slightly more serious note, no company wants bad publicity going into a major release like this - especially one which should be an unvarnished triumph.

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Sun: you're free to buy or not. That's the only freedom guaranteed by a consumer society.

That was the old view of consumer society. Now you can see plenty of plans about "Customer Care", "Customer Satisfaction", "Customer Fidelization", "Customer Relations"...
ask to any succesful manager.

It's 2001, many companies must take care of their customers or die in the market.

I can live without MP for Civ III, but many players take MP for granted in these days.

Is Firaxis asking for troubles, if it will charge money for the MP version? Yes, if Firaxis won't add any value to the MP version. If they add some server supported MP, and ask to the player to pay a fee for the use... may be the Ultima model can work with Civ III too.

[Ozymandous]

Originally posted by randomturn
Oh, come on... Everyone who *****es about the price of Civ3 only does so because of the totally arbitrary pricing structure of computer games that dictates that new product must be $40 - $50 for every player no matter how much utility (time or enjoyment) he or she gets from the game. The theoretical "optimal" pricing point for a game would differ from player to player depending upon utility; and every single person on this board would pay more than $50 for Civ3 if it weren't for the anchor of arbitrary pricing standard.

The "complaints" aren't about having to pay $50 for the game, it's about the possibility of having to pay $50 for part of the game and then have to spend another $25+ on the rest.

I highly doubt anyone on this board would utter a peep about the price of the game if it ships with ALL promised components (of which MP was one).

In other words, in an alternate reality where games aren't released nationally or carried in stores, but are instead sold in limited runs on a not-to-be-exceeded, first-come, first-served basis to a pre-defined number of, say, 5,000 users who pay, say, $200 each, I think it's pretty obvious that virtually everyone at Apolyton would gladly be on that list of 5,000. It is irrational to complain of a lack of fairness in what is clearly an arbitrary pricing structure in what is clearly a very tough industry on the supply side in which you the consumer have perfect freedom of choice and in which you, specifically, the self-selected Apolyton gamer (who will get far more than "average" utility from the product) will nonetheless "unfairly" pay just an "average" price.

While the price of the first part of the game and the possibility of having to buy the X-pack for the rest wouldn't be that big a deal to most, the principle is what's important. Say the game ships without MP for $50 and then the X=pack ships with MP for an additional $30. That's $80 that people would pay for well over 20 hours of play (assuming people would play for at least 20 hours). Breaking the cost down into enjoyment cost would be $4 an hour, well under even the minimum wage.

The cost isn't the issue, IMHO, it's about shipping the game for a price then charging for the rest of the game, to make it as it should have been initially.

There is a difference.

And to any idiot who is tempted to flame me for "saying that Civ3 should be $200": (A) that's not what I'm saying, and (B) try learning something about theoretical economics.

Not flaming you for saying it should be $200 because I am sure most would get more than 40 hours worth of play fun from the game (at less than minimum wage $5 an hour) it's about how more and more game companies deliver less and less content and functionality into their games only to charge people for the dubious pleasure of buying additional components.

IMHO, if game companies want to break games into parts then they should sell ($20) the basic engine with small scenarios and then distribute the rest in add-on packs for $10 or so. THis way people could mix and match the parts they want for the functionality they desire. This model would be much better and better represent other industries.

[randomturn]

The way Civ2 released Multiplayer in stages wa somewhat accidental and circumstantial. At that time MP wasn't what it is today. Every game comes with MP now; the market has come to demand it. I personally would be willing to pay for both SP and MP (and so would lots of other folks here, though they wouldn't be happy about it), but I don't think the larger market can bear it. Anyway, I got the feeling from one of those Firaxis interviews that they were going to sell the SP now and releases MP as a patch when it was ready.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse


I have 2 answers to that -

If its bluff, be a good sport GP and don't spoil it

Otoh, I hope you didn't hold onto your Activision shares

On a slightly more serious note, no company wants bad publicity going into a major release like this - especially one which should be an unvarnished triumph.

Ok...AH...I'll back up your bluff. I'm sure the trhiving MP community which payed for the game after the Civnet fiasco does nothing to make Infogrames think that they can get away with a separate launch...

[tniem]

Originally posted by GP
1. college students = cheap bastards. Sorry.

Well if you want to either pay my tuition or purchase Civ3 for me then go ahead. Until then I really don't have the money to buy an incomplete game. If that makes me a cheap bastard, then I am guilty as charged.

2. If you don't want it...don't buy it. I think Infogrames is looking at the overall market and knows that Civ3 can sell for a lot of money prvide they break it into different parts...

And all I am saying is that by them not caring at all for the consumers that they are alientating potential buyers of their games. Make no mistake I will probably buy Civ 3 soon after release, I have been playing the orignials for to long not to get the newest version. But that does not mean I will pay full price or get anything else from this capitalistic company that cares nothing for those shelling out the dough.

[TCO]

Originally posted by tniem

Well if you want to either pay my tuition or purchase Civ3 for me then go ahead. Until then I really don't have the money to buy an incomplete game. If that makes me a cheap bastard, then I am guilty as charged.


And all I am saying is that by them not caring at all for the consumers that they are alientating potential buyers of their games. Make no mistake I will probably buy Civ 3 soon after release, I have been playing the orignials for to long not to get the newest version. But that does not mean I will pay full price or get anything else from this capitalistic company that cares nothing for those shelling out the dough.

1. Hey...nothing wrong with being a cheap bastard. College students just fall into this market segment.

2. I highly doubt consumers will really punish Infogrames for pricing this game in a common sense business way. (Some will whine...but sales will still occur.) What Infogrames needs to worry about is if the game is not fun.

[tniem]

Originally posted by GP
2. I highly doubt consumers will really punish Infogrames for pricing this game in a common sense business way. (Some will whine...but sales will still occur.) What Infogrames needs to worry about is if the game is not fun.

Unfortunately you are probably correct.

[Melios]

Originally posted by GP
Looks like MP will definitely be out.

Then why hasn't there been an official statement to that effect? If they're officially delaying it wouldn't they announce it?

Melios,
Your level of optimism would be dangerous in real life. If several NYPD officers are walking towards you with plungers - please do not assume they are there to fix a toilet.

[Moral Hazard]

Laughing @ Mr. Pleasant

Oh and AH: Are you talking about the same Activision shares that went from around $13(at the release of CTP2) a share to their latest close of $30.02. They were higher over the summer.

Unfortunately I didn't have money to invest I did tell my brother that it was definitely a buy when he asked me about it when it was trading down at $8. Unfortunately he didn't share his profits