How long from release of civ 3 to when we get Civ 3 MP???

TCO · September 30, 2001, 05:49

Remember how long it took from Civ2 to Civ2 MGE (Ultimate civ2). This despite the rumored MP hooks in civ2 and the known existence of civnet!! It seemed like about 3+ years. And the stop wasn;t technical,. it had to do with marketing. Getting the max bang for the buck!!

So what do y'all think??

TCO · September 30, 2001, 06:11

I voted 6 months to a year. I think the game will be les popular than civ2 so they will need to release the add ons earlier...

Dauphin · September 30, 2001, 06:11

Forget to add a poll first time around?

TCO · September 30, 2001, 06:15

Yeah. Been drinking tonight. BTW (to keep it on topic) I think it will be close to 6 months. What do you think?

Dauphin · September 30, 2001, 06:19

Not sure, hoping for 3-6 months so that it will come as a patch. Any longer and it will most likely be an "Expansion pack" requiring more cash.

Alex 14 · September 30, 2001, 07:13

3-6 months is good, and it better be downloadable.

Solver · September 30, 2001, 07:18

1) If MP costs extra money, I won't buy it
2) If MP is a patch, I'll download it
3) Don't care about MP now, since SP is going to be so amazingly great!

Earthling7 · September 30, 2001, 07:45

It is all rather boring, but hey, MP talk it is, so here are my 2 cents. I said 3-6 months, but it'll be closer to six. For the rest, I agree with Solver.

Patriqvium · September 30, 2001, 11:16

The semi-official comment about multiplayer is that it will come in May 2002 (in other words, 6-7 months after the initial release)...

TCO · October 1, 2001, 00:43

Where did you hear that?

ColdWizard · October 1, 2001, 01:03

i picked 6 mo. to a year and i'll bet that it will cost money too

Swissy · October 1, 2001, 01:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Patriqvium
The semi-official comment about multiplayer is that it will come in May 2002 (in other words, 6-7 months after the initial release)...

That is being attributed to Firaxis' Marketing people answering an email. It was what initially caused all the comotion about no MP on release. It does make sense; Civ3 is the 2001 4Qtr product, MOO3 the 2002 1Qtr product, Civ3 MP/Expansion Pak the 2002 2Qtr product.

mactbone · October 1, 2001, 01:19

I voted "before SP Civ3". It WILL be in the game. My theory is that they know that everyone at Aployton will go nutso about it and this is all part of a sociological experiment to see what happens when people are given little to no information. Will they believe
A) Little to no info. = it's not in or
B) Little to no info. = it's in or
C) It doesn't matter, the WORLD IS ENDING and CIV3 WILL SUCK!!!

Obviously right now we know that A and C are the big winners.

FuFu15 · October 1, 2001, 01:21

sorry if i'm being cynical, but

this is the stupidest poll ever

TCO · October 1, 2001, 01:22

Well...why the huge delay between Civ2 and Civ2MGE? And then why should the gap be closer wrt to Civ3 and Civ3 MGE (as we seem to expect)?

1. Bigger gap between previous MP and next game. (i.e. with civnet/civ2 released close to each other. While civ2 MGE and Civ3 are further apart.) Thus previous generation MP sales already exhausted.)

2. Less development time needed. (Hard to say here.)

3. civ3 sales overall less strong than civ2, so need to do follow-ons quicker.

TCO · October 1, 2001, 01:24

Quote:

Originally posted by FuFu15
sorry if i'm being cynical, but

this is the stupidest poll ever

Could you explain why? I find it fascinating...

TCO · October 1, 2001, 01:26

Quote:

Originally posted by MacTBone
I voted "before SP Civ3". It WILL be in the game. My theory is that they know that everyone at Aployton will go nutso about it and this is all part of a sociological experiment to see what happens when people are given little to no information. Will they believe
A) Little to no info. = it's not in or
B) Little to no info. = it's in or
C) It doesn't matter, the WORLD IS ENDING and CIV3 WILL SUCK!!!

Obviously right now we know that A and C are the big winners.

You probably also beleive Chandra Levey is alive and well and having a little joke on us all...and that OJ will find the real killer of Nicole and Ron...

mactbone · October 1, 2001, 01:30

Personally I think the poll about the position of the date was the stupidest ever, but that's just my opinion. Oh, and get rid of the stupid ass big font, it makes you look like a moron.

TCO · October 1, 2001, 01:38

Me or him?

And are you talking about my poll being stupid? I hope not? I think this is a fascinating marketing problem...(as a business consultant).

Jamison · October 1, 2001, 02:01

Quote:

Originally posted by GP
Me or him?

And are you talking about my poll being stupid? I hope not? I think this is a fascinating marketing problem...(as a business consultant).

Agreed, about the marketing problem. Just goes to show you to what ends coperate america will but ram the common Joe Smith on the street.

connorkimbro · October 1, 2001, 02:41

Quote:

Agreed, about the marketing problem. Just goes to show you to what ends coperate america will but ram the common Joe Smith on the street.

I hate this argument. If it makes you unhappy, then don't buy it. If it's not worth your money, then don't buy it. They're not forcing you to buy it. They are the ones making the product, they get to set the price. YOU, the consumer, get to decide if you like the price or not. Why should they ask one cent less than you are willing to pay for it? If they ask too much, and people don't buy it, then it's their loss, but so what? It's still their right to set the price. Marketing is about finding the point where profit is maximised. It's not about "how to get this product to whoever wants it for free." This argument is like them setting a price, you NOT buying the game, and the firaxis complaing, saying that it's not FAIR that you didn't buy the game, after they put all that hard work into it.

bah, this is a thread for the off topic forum. but you people are morons.

ColdWizard · October 1, 2001, 11:36

Quote:

Originally posted by connorkimbro
bah, this is a thread for the off topic forum.

no the thread is properly placed with respect to the original subject, the current tangent belongs in the OT

Quote:

but you people are morons.

all of us or just some of us?

Dauphin · October 1, 2001, 14:18

I think this is a fascinating marketing problem

Indeed, how to sell spam as bona fide posts.

TCO · October 2, 2001, 02:14

Actually a decent discussion of the economics of game marketing would be way more interesting than most of the threads on this board...

KrazyHorse · October 2, 2001, 02:27

Not really, and to humble you even further

, you're competing with 16 year-olds.

TCO · October 2, 2001, 02:32

Ozy...is an adult. And only the 16 year olds think of it as competition...rather than discussion. And there is at least one dude on these baords who has a great handle on the actual market performance of gaming companies. Almost like a Wall Street Analyst.

Now quit "poking the bear!"

KrazyHorse · October 2, 2001, 02:35

Quote:

Originally posted by GP
Now quit "poking the bear!"

You really don't want to say things like that when I'm around

KrazyHorse: Reading too much into things for 4 months

Kc7mxo · October 2, 2001, 11:23

ook, ook OOK! (Translation: where's my bannana!)

Roman · October 2, 2001, 11:29

I fear to guess on this.

Sabre2th · October 2, 2001, 11:33

I think there is a good chance civ3 will ship with MP. If it doesn't, I won't lose any sleep over it.