Will the possible lack of MP support affect your decision to buy Civ 3?

[SmartFart]

Originally posted by CyberShy
this poll doesn't have enough options.
neither of the options apply to me.

Right.

I would add 'You know where you can stick Civ3 w/o MP feature'

[reefer addict]

i enjoy both SP games and MP games.SP is great for quick games or stopping and starting alot where MP games really challenge your civ skills against endless stategies.civ is the only game i play so i will buy it without MP .really makes me laugh at how mad people get over a game enjoy the fact that we even have this tech. and quit all the whinning. MP will be out when its ready and SP players shouldnt have to wait untill then if the rest of the game is ready

[dearmad]

Well MP is still losing in the poll even with all the MPers rousted out of their slumber in the hills.

The attitude of that has come across this thread is yet more proof as to why the MP world can be such an ugly world.

[lockstep]

Originally posted by reefer addict
civ is the only game i play so i will buy it without MP .

However, lukewarm reviews (due to the lack of MP) may hurt Civ3´s sales and therefore doom the whole TBS-genre.

[tuckson]

Originally posted by isaac brock
If you send them a polite but firm mail, that makes it clear that you are angry and won't buy without multiplayer, they may be more likely to give in. I don't think a campaign of friendly inquiries will do the trick. Did women get the vote by ringing up the government and cordially requesting it?

Hmmm...
I always thought Dan M. and some others of Firaxis read these forums. Don't you think they've seen your opnion already? I guess sending them mail adds none to what they already know. I guess "those guys"at Firaxis or the "Jerks"or whatever cute nicknames I've seen for them who actually program the game are just as unhappy with the situation as expressed here. But we all know programmers usually have very few to say about what's in there and what's not. Usually that's a marketing/publishers/management question.

I agree on the fact that it would be nice from Firaxis to shine some light on this.

What I'm afraid of is not that the absence of MP is going to affect my Game play. I hardly use MP. What I do fear is that in all wellknown gaming magazines the game I 've been looking forward to for so long hardly receives a medium grade (or mark or whatever they call this) just because of the lack of MP. Those mags, just as some players here, seem to think that all players want MP and that the absence of it is a crime against gaming humatiy.

And bad reviews mean most of the times sales way below the estimated sales and thus could influence the decision whether to create a Civ4 or not.

[TheBirdMan]

It will indeed.

With no MP, there will probably not be PBEM support either.

And with no PBEM facilities - I will not spend any money on that game.

PBEM is the only way to play if you want a real challenge and like thepossibilities for real diplomacy (and if you want to have a life, then you can have this also with PBEM).

[tishco]

unlike what mags like pcgamer say, not everyone has next to free costs for the net and have rubbish modems and dodgy conections
some people dont have networks so they get super conections.
and i would say something like
but they ...eg.dont count suck at MP
only, i am one.

[blackice]

PLUS, SP people are dead head wankers who wouldn't know true Civ if it bit them on the ass.

So true...I mean lets face it AI is at best a learning tool real opponents offer you a challenge. For you 56k people play PBEM you will soon find out how true the above statement is...you can sign up here: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...955#post457955 give it a try then come back and vote with knowledge...

No MP no buy period I like to have the choice. Each offers a good game but MP and PBEM you play real opponents you really can not get much better than that...

I have posted this in several MP places I think once the MP people hit this spot you will see the graph move...as this information of no MP play is one of the dumbest things I have read in some time...

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by dearmad
Well MP is still losing in the poll even with all the MPers rousted out of their slumber in the hills.

You are all missing the point. The MPers don't have to WIN the poll. We just have to demonstrate we are a sizable and motivated group. If we could take the poll results as an accurate prediction (unfortunatly we can't) then it would mean Firaxis would loose THIRTY PERCENT of their potential profits. That is a HUGE drop.

The poll is to send a message to Firaxis telling them not to ignore a sizable group of Civ players.

[Chronus]

The fact remains that they are trying to milk us for money, and it is wrong.

Wrong? Says who? You?

Why is this argument always brought up in regard to the corporate entity. Businesses exist to MAKE MONEY. There is nothing illegal or unethical in releasing SP and then charging a small fee later on for MP. Let's put this into perspective: we are not forced to buy anything here. I don't agree with the wisdom of leaving out MP . . . but to call it wrong is incorrect.

With that said, I plan on waiting for the MP version before buying Civ III, unless the SP version gets astronomically good reviews from the players (I won't bother with the magazine reviews). If I recall correctly, Civ 2 MP was the same price as SP, so it's just a matter of waiting. But don't wait too long Firaxis, my interest in computer games is waning as I get older.

Who says you can't play with a slow modem? For most of my time on here I played on a 28.8 connection. In the last year here I got a 56K connection and I've been able to play tons of games.

[tniem]

Am I the only one that sees the cutting of MP foretell many other vital parts of the game to also be cut?

'That is why I am so concerned, they promised a great MP and are cutting it what about AI? What about balance? What about a good game?

[Leonidas]

I don't play multiplayer, so that part does not bother me.

What does worry me is, if they are cutting multiplayer because of deadline dates, then what else will be cut and/or be buggy because of this rush for the release date?

I can't believe that Sid would allow his flagship game - THE GREATEST STRATEGY GAME OF ALL TIME - to be released before it is properly finished. Yet that is what is happening.

This game is going to take some major hits in the reviews after it is released because of this omission. Shame on you Firaxis.

I also find it interesting that Firaxis didn't tell their loyal fans in public about this. What else aren't they telling us, hmmm?

[Master Marcus]

Originally posted by Leonidas
What else aren't they telling us, hmmm?

perhaps a weakier AI programming than expected, forcing us ( at least the most meticulous empire builders ) to micromanage everything. I like micromanaging ( unless it takes too long ) , while others do not. But at least it would be great to have the choice to do micro or more macro ( letting the AI to manage some cities ) with the same challenge level . I doubt that, though I'm still a confident civer.

[Lung]

Originally posted by blackice

I have posted this in several MP places I think once the MP people hit this spot you will see the graph move...as this information of no MP play is one of the dumbest things I have read in some time...

I'm one of them! You're absolutely right, BlackIce. Now that it has been posted on the Call to Power PBEM forum, there will be plenty more no votes

This is good news only for CtP PBEMers, as it is not destined to die in a few weeks from now. However, it's not the six month wait for Multiplayer that gets me, but the prospect of having to pay extra for the priviledge! It was reported on the CTP Multiplayer forum that CivIII was going to cost a whopping 60 bucks, and the multiplayer would cost another whopping 30 bucks!! If this is true, then this is outrageous!!

That means that in Australia, CivIII will cost a massive $120! It's so expensive, that i have actually been saving for CivIII. Spending another 60 bucks just for multiplayer is simply not an option. I will buy CivIII because i am a civ addict , but if i have to pay another 60 bucks for multiplayer, i will get a pirate copy - not only on principle, but also because i can't afford it.

So perhaps we should have another poll to see who will buy a CivIII gold edition? Not this little black duck!!

[blackice]

Put another way if you did not have a sucky connection or are planning to upgrade would you not want a complete game? Or is it complete AI and all Make it complete please wishy washy we have seen already...

[Deity Dude]

Where did this rumor come from and how reliable is it. I won't buy it w/o multiplayer. Whats the point - we'll have the AI figured out in about a month - then it will be all about gimmicks.

[korn469]

Deity Dude

i don't think that this rumor will pan out...but if it does then it is like a dark cloud on the horizon

[TCO]

Originally posted by Rasputin



I am not advocating DL the Game I am advocating Stealing the Patch... No game not Software should be released and then have people have to pay for the patches !!!! The fact that they know the players want MP they think they can charge what they want....

I hope any software programmer reasding this takes note and releases bug free programmes or free patches.. Dont remove part of the software because you not sure if it will work or not and then charge more for it .....

Geeze Ras...are you this childish? Firaxis has every right to sell the game SP and then charge for MP. Just like they have every right to charge $200 for the game. If you don't like it, don't buy it. if you pirate it, you're a theif. And a miserable self-justifying whiney little spoiled computer geek of a thief.

[SlowwHand]

SP is so easy compared to MP.
You SP players are sheltered babies.

[monkspider]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
SP is so easy compared to MP.
You SP players are sheltered babies.

Obviously

[aaglo]

I propably wouldn't even have time for MP, so SP will do fine for me. I know it

[Hydey]

I would still buy the game as long as I know that MP is coming . I always play the games single player before advancing on to humans.

[Tiberius]

I'm not really interested in MP, so a SP only version is OK for me.

On the other hand, a hot-seat feature would be nice!

[Guynemer]

SP is so easy compared to MP.

You SP players are sheltered babies.

Gosh Slowwhand, when you put it that way... by gum, you're right. I can't believe I've been wasting my time with SP, when I could be playing MP with such pleasant, friendly people like yourself. I've been such a fool.

Troll.

[SlowwHand]

SP is bush league.

[FrostyBoy]

I never play MP, but I know bad publicity. Once you look bad in the eyes of the players, your future sales with future games will drop and continue to drop until you are bankrupt. This is exactly what has been happening to so many other game developers out there just recently.

Firaxis, all I will say to you now is that us gamers are not stupid at all. You need to DO good in order to LOOK good, if you don't look good, then I can guarantee you now, you will lose respect, very very quickly. No respect = No money.

The gaming industry is rapidly changing, especially the players themselves, their attitudes towards games can change within a matter of a few news snippets and word of mouth. Suddenly you have the majority of the gamers on the Internet laughing and KNOWING what that company is now like - and from the Internet to the rest of the world.

I don't play MP at all, I never think of it. But that is totally irrelevant. If you can't include MP in a FULL RELEASE of CIV3, and then THINK YOU CAN GET AWAY with selling MP as an 'addon'. - WELL, you'd be lucky to get away with that, VERY LUCKY. - This is like firing a gun at Firaxis and hoping there's no bullet inside.


I can think of one company that I respect most and that is Blizzard. I don't even play their games or take interest in the type of stuff they produce. But I RESPECT them. Whenever I hear Blizzard, I ALREADY KNOW its going to be good. This is the BEST type of publicity you could ask for. If I was interested in Orcs, goblins, rts, etc I would actually buy their games, all of them!

But I would never buy anyone else's, because I simply don't respect and trust that they deliver good software. I will just download it to be safe. Because who wants to buy a bad game? YOU?
Do I feel guilty about it? Hell No! I want to rid the world of bad game developers and support the good. Who wouldn't?

It makes me believe that Blizzards PR guy/girl is probably just some nobody who knows lots of people and never studied PR in his/her life. - The Best PR person you could get. Like I said, we're not stupid.

Bottom line, Civ3 without MP is like a TV with one channel and then expecting us to buy another TV just to get a second channel.

[lockstep]

Originally posted by Sn00py
If you can't include MP in a FULL RELEASE of CIV3, and then THINK YOU CAN GET AWAY with selling MP as an 'addon'. - WELL, you'd be lucky to get away with that, VERY LUCKY.

Perhaps I´m too optimistic, but there´s also the possibility that Firaxis releases a MP upgrade as a free patch.

[Mahdimael]

I'm not too concerned about multiplayer. I'd much rather have an innovative style of MP a month later than the same boring 15-hour game MP that's available. MP doesn't work with TBS in most cases.

I forget who posted earlier, but they're correct. I don't need 12 year olds kicking me from a game because I don't trade them iron, or people dropping connections when they start losing or whatever. I'd prefer the computer. Civ1, Civ2, MOO, Star Control 2..all my favorite games, and none had network multiplayer. I don't need to wait 10 minutes for the one guy who's idled out.

Even if it does ship with MP, I probably won't use it much, if at all.