No Mp It's Official! - Page 2

VetLegion · October 10, 2001, 18:52

Whitestar, I am just reading the other thread, but I have to say

Quote:

I'm sorry, but that excuse is unacceptable, whether it be true or not. It seems to be a very popular excuse coming from developers releasing unfinished product. Developers CONTROL who they sign with. Developers AGREE to a product deadline. If they can't deliver the full product in the timeline they agreed to, then the management team is not doing their job and must accept at least some of the blame.

To just say, "The publisher made us do it; we have no control" is extremely weak IMHO, and makes me question the ability of these developers to own up and accept responsibility for their actions. If developers can't deliver on their promises by a mutually agreed upon deadline, then DON'T SIGN THE DAMN CONTRACT!

I agree with you 100 % !!!

you hit the nail on the head with that one.

Inverse Icarus · October 10, 2001, 19:07

tje old rumors said no MP till late Spring at the earliest. if these hold up theres a chance that they'll give a downloadable patch, but i doubt it.

they'll squeeze me for every dime i'm worth. thats how capitialism works isn't it?

CobraA1 · October 10, 2001, 19:15

Yeah, I'm sure all of you can meet your deadlines with 100% accuracy also

. That's simply not the way making a game works. There's no method to predict how long it'll take.

I would

to see any of you predict how long it'll take to finish your big projects with 100.00% accuracy.

As far as MP goes, I don't play it too often. It's better to release a good implementation later than to release a horrible implementation right now. So you play SP for a few months? You'll need the practice anyway, as they've rewritten the AI from scratch this time

, and implemented culture

. It should keep you busy until they have MP finished

.

And since they've rewritten the AI from scratch, I don't want to hear any complaints until somebody has played it

.

Hopefully, it will be a free patch

. Then nobody can complain.

Provost Harrison · October 10, 2001, 19:21

I agree with CobraA1. I was more than entertained with just playing the AI on civ1 and civ2, so I am sure I will cope on civ3. And even then, I found coordinating with other people, problems of people getting disconnected or just not getting the computers to work together to be a phenomenal pain in the arse with MPs, and as it takes so damn long to play a TBS MP, I never considered it worth the effort. So unless there is some ingenious idea up Firaxis's sleeve, I am not too concerned about the delay

VetLegion · October 10, 2001, 19:21

Cobra I dont feel like arguing

but there is the issue of being straightforward and fair to the fans. How about telling us in advance, so peole dont preorder something they dont know about?

or confirming now?

Alexander's Horse · October 10, 2001, 19:26

Speaking as someone who plays Mp exclusively I'm very disappointed

Of course the SP posters don't want the game release delayed so we can't expect much sympathy or support from them

But I think Firaxis/infogames has made a big marketing error which they will regret.

SteveJH · October 10, 2001, 19:28

Quote:

Originally posted by VetLegion
Cobra I dont feel like arguing

but there is the issue of being straightforward and fair to the fans. How about telling us in advance, so peole dont preorder something they dont know about?

or confirming now?

The multiplayer feature was removed from Amazon's description of the game a while ago, and people who really care that much can cancel their order anyway.

CobraA1 · October 10, 2001, 19:43

If you're really a hardcore MP, then you can wait. You probably don't want to get a half-written implementation anyway.

If bad AI is the reason you play MP, they've re-written it, so you no longer have an excuse

.

VetLegion, I think the GameSpot article confirmed what we need to know for now - they're working on it, but they're probably not sure of the implementation themselves. They've been pretty open about everything else, so I'm sure as soon as they have something they'll tell us. Now is the time to get your own ideas in

.

FuFu15 · October 10, 2001, 20:08

This isnt 1994...to ship a game without multiplayer can only mean that they're in this for the money .

JellyDonut · October 10, 2001, 20:10

Great news, this no MP!

Not being an MP player, I'm happy that Firaxis has spent all this time on SP, which should mean the SP is that much better!

Inverse Icarus · October 10, 2001, 20:10

the fact of it is that they said they had multiplayer (it was in advertisements on amazon.com) and they don't. thats false advertising on someone's part.

and to make it even worse, they didn'y say one thing about it.

they tiptoed around it on the forums, and regurgitated information that revealed no information over and over when cornered.

and now they just say its out. flat out. when is it comming? am i going to have to pay for it?

wtach them dance around it again until civ3 mge comes out with MP a few scenarios and maybe a leader or two

BigBear · October 10, 2001, 20:12

Everyone who is saying "If they charge for MP I won't play" are so full of it. You know damn well that you will dish out the extra cash (if you have it) as soon as they release it. And if not, you'll wait till you do have money.

JellyDonut · October 10, 2001, 20:14

Quote:

Originally posted by FuFu15
This isnt 1994...to ship a game without multiplayer can only mean that they're in this for the money .

Well obviously! If Firaxis didn't do it for the money, why isn't it free? Firaxis is a corporation. Corporations make all decisions based on which option will maximize their profits. Wake up and realize that capitalism serves to those who want to maximize profits and not to the good-natured people.

Inverse Icarus · October 10, 2001, 20:15

i told you. they got you good. and you're going to bend over and buy what they tell you to buy.

a viking fan? they'll put out a viking patch for a price. you betcha.

keep bending and take it in some more.

SteveJH · October 10, 2001, 20:16

Quote:

Originally posted by FuFu15
This isnt 1994...to ship a game without multiplayer can only mean that they're in this for the money .

What company isn't???

ColdWizard · October 10, 2001, 20:36

Quote:

Originally posted by BigBear
Everyone who is saying "If they charge for MP I won't play" are so full of it. You know damn well that you will dish out the extra cash (if you have it) as soon as they release it. And if not, you'll wait till you do have money.

not me, i think i'll buy a new car instead

CobraA1 · October 10, 2001, 20:39

Quote:

Originally posted by FuFu15
This isnt 1994...to ship a game without multiplayer can only mean that they're in this for the money .

Quote:

Wake up and realize that capitalism serves to those who want to maximize profits and not to the good-natured people.

Dare I ask, are the two mutually exclusive?

They could've easily released the game with about as much (or even less) customization as Civ II, but they're boasting that it's more customizable. This is a stance that I've noticed that other companies do not neccessarily share - most want to prevent people from changing their game.

But you are absolutely correct to point out that most companies are out for profit. I question, however, the choice to leave people in the dark, possibly to lose them. Maximizing profits usually means gaining customers, not losing them

.

Which begs the question - why is Firaxis really doing this

? They're kinda putting themselves in a lose-lose situation here. Unless there's someting I'm not getting here . . .

If you have some evil up your sleeve, Firaxis, it will catch up to you. I do not recommend doing anything rash at this point.

Simpleton · October 10, 2001, 20:59

I say no MP is a good sign from Firaxis. They held off on including an unfinished half-a$$ed MP version and decided to do it right! This shows a lot of class.

They could have shot it out the door with a buggy uninspired MP like some companies (ie Craptivision -- CTP2) but they said no we want to make a good game!! RIGHT ON!!

.
Sure it's disappointing for some not to have MP but wouldn't you rather have a good finished MP released in a couple months rather than something that doesn't work? I would.

And imagine the uproar if they had delayed Civ3 till the new year because MP wasn't done!!! Yikes! Then you would really have a MP vs SP player war.
I say thank you Firaxis for having the integrity to do it right!!!

d4rkl0rd · October 10, 2001, 21:39

I'm not going to flame anyone.

I just want to express my deep disappointment. I can see that the vast majority of people here are focused on SP, but not me. I've been playing the Civ series for about 10 years now, and it is /by far/ my favorite game of all time.

For about the last three years, the Civ2 AI has posed no challenge whatsoever. However, since that time I have played MP with a regular group of friends (who are not technically inept and can play the game without dropouts) and have vastly improved my Civ skills because of it.

I don't doubt the AI is significantly improved. I also have no doubt that I will have it beaten soundly in short order. Like Soren, I have studied AI (neural networks, genetic algorithms, etc.) at school and implemented them professionally. I'm quite familiar with the state of the art technology. It's nowhere close to presenting a lasting challenge to a mature human game player. That's why MP gaming has been the centerpiece of recreational software over the last few years.

If advertisements hadn't promised a phenomenal MP implementation, it wouldn't be so bad, but to be built up and then let down is a hard thing to take, and it will certainly color my feelings towards Firaxis and Infogrames in the future.

I admit, I will buy the SP game when it comes out. I will buy the MP game when it comes out. But I will be unhappy about it, and it /will/ affect my feelings towards purchasing any other games that those compaines produce. There's a difference between marketing a product and reaping a fair profit from it and gouging consumers. To me, MP support is as important as support for the game concept of military conquest. Without it, it's a novelty. With it, it's complete.

Lee Johnson · October 10, 2001, 21:54

Quote:

But I think Firaxis/infogames has made a big marketing error which they will regret.

I disagree, if only for the reason that the majority of the Civ market probably doesn't care about MP. The regular posters here do not constitute a representative sample of the game-buying public.

CobraA1 · October 10, 2001, 22:16

Have you been paying attention? They've complely rewritten the AI! Stop comparing it to Civ2! STOP!

I don't disagree with all of your points, though: It is extremely difficult to make an AI that is challenging to a human. But we're still making premature judgements.

Quote:

Originally posted by d4rkl0rd
I'm not going to flame anyone.

For about the last three years, the Civ2 AI has posed no challenge whatsoever. However, since that time I have played MP with a regular group of friends (who are not technically inept and can play the game without dropouts) and have vastly improved my Civ skills because of it.

I don't doubt the AI is significantly improved. I also have no doubt that I will have it beaten soundly in short order. Like Soren, I have studied AI (neural networks, genetic algorithms, etc.) at school and implemented them professionally. I'm quite familiar with the state of the art technology. It's nowhere close to presenting a lasting challenge to a mature human game player. That's why MP gaming has been the centerpiece of recreational software over the last few years.

Alexander's Horse · October 10, 2001, 22:32

That's a plus

If the MP isn't complete, I wonder what else is sloppy. Maybe the SP chauvinists will be disappointed too.

It seems to me this release date is all about maximising Christmas sales. They've done better than Activision by giving themselves time to patch any problems before the Christmas rush but if MP isn't in, a standard feature in most TBS games, what else isn't finished?

The "I'm alright Jack" attitude of some Sper's really makes them look bad. I guess it reflects their maturity level. Mper's have every right to be disappointed and most of them haven't slagged off SP.

tniem · October 10, 2001, 22:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
That's a plus

If the MP isn't complete, I wonder what else is sloppy. Maybe the SP chauvinists will be disappointed too.

AH,

That has been the point I have maintained since day one. Something smells fishy and it aint just the no MP.

Quote:

It seems to me this release date is all about maximising Christmas sales. They've done better than Activision by giving themselves time to patch any problems before the Christmas rush but if MP isn't in, a standard feature in most TBS games, what else isn't finished?

Unfortunately you are probably right.

It is a shame that this is happening, even though I knew it would, I was wishing for a change of heart from Firaxis. To me this is a downgrade from SMAC and so it is not something I am taking lightly as I weigh whether to buy it or not.

Lee Johnson · October 10, 2001, 23:11

Quote:

The "I'm alright Jack" attitude of some Sper's really makes them look bad. I guess it reflects their maturity level.

Say what!?

Really, what do you expect? Mass rallies of solidarity? SP players and MP players standing shoulder to shoulder and demanding, "Give us MP or give us death"? If they don't have any use for it, how can you expect them to be passionate about it?

I said what I said because I believe that the MP market for Civ is well in the minority. I didn't say that Firaxis shouldn't bother with MP at all. It will arrive. Eventually. The whole release schedule is being driven by business considerations. Doing MP right would add months to the release date, missing the vital holiday shopping season. I feel that the sales that Infogrames will lose by not including MP in the box are far fewer than the sales they will lose by being late to market. Infogrames probably feels so, too.

I understand your disappointment, guys. I just don't happen to share it.

Has Firaxis cut corners on SP? Maybe. We'll find out soon.

-- Lee

Zanzin · October 10, 2001, 23:48

Well, here's my 3 cents -

Having never played Civ1 or 2 MP, I'm really not that upset about the decision to not include MP in Civ3 in it's initial release. As an SP, I'd prefer the game now, rather than later.

But for all you diehard MP's out there, you have my heartfelt sympathy. This must have come as a great shock to you all

FuFu15 · October 10, 2001, 23:52

Quote:

Originally posted by JellyDonut

Well obviously! If Firaxis didn't do it for the money, why isn't it free? Firaxis is a corporation. Corporations make all decisions based on which option will maximize their profits. Wake up and realize that capitalism serves to those who want to maximize profits and not to the good-natured people.

what the ****? do u think i'm a ****ing idiot? "oh civ meier are bad men because they want to make money!" no, its ****ing OBVIOUS its capitalism at its finest. WOW THANKS FOR ENLIGHTENING ME.

point is: we can still ***** and moan about it.

FuFu15 · October 10, 2001, 23:55

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveJH

What company isn't???

Well on the basis of multiplayer:

Blizzard
Westwood
ID
Sierra
microsoft
Hasbro
Smilebit
Ensemble studios
EIDOS
EA
hell..even sega
(go to ebworld.com for a complete listing)

d4rkl0rd · October 10, 2001, 23:59

On the contrary, it is /you/ who have missed /my/ point. I have been paying close attention. My whole point was that it doesn't matter *how* much they rewrite the AI, and I am not comparing it to Civ II's AI. I was saying that the technology doesn't exist in our day and age to make a competitive AI for a game as complex as Civ I, Civ II or Civ III. Therefor it is not a premature judgement. After some short initial learning curve, the only challenge in a game like this for many of us is to play other human beings. And we have been forsaken, to a large extent.

Quote:

Originally posted by CobraA1

Have you been paying attention? They've complely rewritten the AI! Stop comparing it to Civ2! STOP!

I don't disagree with all of your points, though: It is extremely difficult to make an AI that is challenging to a human. But we're still making premature judgements.

Alexander's Horse · October 11, 2001, 00:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Lee Johnson

Really, what do you expect? Mass rallies of solidarity? SP players and MP players standing shoulder to shoulder and demanding, "Give us MP or give us death"? If they don't have any use for it, how can you expect them to be passionate about it?

Er never mind, an appropriate response would require some higher sensitivity on your part

KrazyHorse · October 11, 2001, 00:19

I'm with the Berliner on this one. Sucks to be an MPer, don't it?