What will Multiplayer be like in Civ3?

allbad · November 21, 2001, 13:33

Hello all. I'm probably one of the original addicts of this series, having played Civ on an old 8086 computer back in '91. I've always wondered what the multiplayer would be like for this series. Although I had played CivII, I didn't get the multiplayer expansion, so I have no clue how MP is going to work. Do you think it will be a hotseat type multiplayer, kind of like the way it is now with the computers. Or will it be a simultaneous movement type multiplayer - like Diplomacy, Stars! or VGA Planets. I for one can only imagine a simultaneous style of multiplayer, since hotseat would be very difficult to get everyone to do their turns in order and on time. But, then all the movement/combat/exploration etc. rules will have to be changed to accommodate for a diffent type of multiplayer. Also, I wonder how the diplomacy would function in a multiplayer setup.

TCO · November 21, 2001, 14:40

I think it will be pay per play on a dedicated server. With no ability to play MP otherwise.

allbad · November 21, 2001, 14:48

barf! I don't like the sound of that at all.

TheDarkside · November 21, 2001, 14:54

I think it will be avoided like the plague, at least by me! Who's gonna wait 5 minutes for the AI to take it's turn and transmit all it's senseless patrolling moves accross the wire.. and 1v1 is boring. Maybe multiple human players would be fun but with a game like this it will be difficult to finally get a game stated and somone will soon leave for dinner, errands, bored, or to just plain piss the rest of us off.

TCO · November 21, 2001, 14:55

I think this is the best way for Firaxis to make money off MP. Markos should also offer to do an Apolyton tie-in.

kmj · November 21, 2001, 14:58

Quote:

Originally posted by GP
I think it will be pay per play on a dedicated server. With no ability to play MP otherwise.

If that's the case, I'm glad they didn't waste time on it. For me, it's not worth anything unless it can be set up on a LAN. 'Course, this is all guesswork. ...unless you know something I don't?

Freeze · November 21, 2001, 15:01

Beautiful.

Note to self: Never hand GP a straight line (before supergluing the handle)

Rasbelin · November 21, 2001, 15:21

I assume it would include TCP/IP MP over LAN and Internet.

TCO · November 21, 2001, 15:32

With a dedicted server and pay per play. One can make far more money than by merely selling an expansion or bundling MP into the base game.

If MP expansion sold 500,000 copies at $30 a pop, that's 15 mil revenue.

The channel and distribution takes at least 2/3 of that. So say about 5 mil for Infogrames. That is the budget that has to cover advertising and development costs (and production.) Whatever's left over is profit.

If they can get 200,000 fans playing 100 hours per year (probably have over a million players at least trying out the MP, but some will only play for a couple hours) at $1 an hour, that translates to 20 million revenue. There is no "channel" here. Development and advertising costs will be similar. So consider that a wash. There is no upfront production cost (publishing cost) but there is server maintenance required. Figure 50K/year for dedicted computers and 300k/year for technicians. It's still well under a million and is likely to be comparable to production costs for CD's/packages.

Hard to know exact figures, but the difference might be as big as 15M vs 2M in favor of going the dedicated server route.

There are a few other issues to consider. You can run the server for about 2 years, before you need a new game. But the MP expansion is a one time hit. The "captive audience" can also be exploited with tie-in advertising from Infogrames or the eyeballs can be "sold". At least in terms of a "flash screen" similar to AOL startup.

If people will pay $3.99/minute for phone sex, they'll pay $1/hour for civ. (especially with a good king chat feature.)

allbad · November 21, 2001, 15:33

Well, as far as MP goes, I was thinking more along the lines of Play by email. I'm used to the stars! and VGA Planets model where you do one turn a day, games taking months to finish.

TCO · November 21, 2001, 15:42

Quote:

Originally posted by allbad
Well, as far as MP goes, I was thinking more along the lines of Play by email. I'm used to the stars! and VGA Planets model where you do one turn a day, games taking months to finish.

This is not the game for you. Civ3 MP will be like sex with a great hooker while snorting cocaine. It's gonna make a bundle!! And have lots of happy customers. (The server format is far superior technically and in tersm of reducing bugs.)

z0dd · November 21, 2001, 16:15

I definitely won't pay for a pay-for-play Civ3 MP.

Leave those to expoanding worlds like EQ and AC. Damn money grubbers! The reason we don't have MP now is because they realised they can suck the customers for more $$$!

allbad · November 21, 2001, 17:14

Besides, I'm already throwing $10/month to Sony for Everquest. I can see how EQ is a great addictive model for making people pay month after month. But, Civ3, I just don't see it. Not the same thing at all.

TCO · November 21, 2001, 18:26

Quote:

Originally posted by allbad
Besides, I'm already throwing $10/month to Sony for Everquest. I can see how EQ is a great addictive model for making people pay month after month. But, Civ3, I just don't see it. Not the same thing at all.

120 per year. Sounds good!!!

CIV3MP here we come!!!

fanatic civver · November 21, 2001, 19:26

lol GP is just being sarcastic about that pay to play thing.

Civ 3 will be just like civ 2 in its current implementation of multiplayer - slow and boring (in my opinion)!

Firaxis reckon they have some ideas to make multiplayer fun. Personally I think spending time on multiplayer is a waste of time when you consider that multiplayer will never be played as much as counter-strike. However if they think they have a really good idea to make it fun and can make money off it then good for them!

EQ, AC etc need pay to play because their support staff and servers are expensive to maintain...but I'm sure EQ could be $5 a month and sony would still make a very handsome profit

TCO · November 21, 2001, 19:37

Quote:

Originally posted by fanatic civver
EQ, AC etc need pay to play because their support staff and servers are expensive to maintain...but I'm sure EQ could be $5 a month and sony would still make a very handsome profit

But do they make more profit at $5/month or $10? Anyway having 50% net margins is a pretty damn good argument to me for taking Civ3 pay for play.

Just wait...I predicted that Civ3 would ship without MP. I predict pay for play, next.

I just hope there's some way to get some good money for Apolyton out of it.