Why can't we discuss the lack of multiplayer in Civ III in the Civ II MP Forum?

[TCO]

Originally posted by rah
As long as you don't dismiss MP as being unimportant, I think people will welcome your opinion. That's the real issue here. The MP forum is 95% MP players. When I'm discussing MP whether it be civ2 or 3, I prefer to discuss it with people that care about MP. That is more likely to happen in the MP forum.

I don't mind SP players, just the ones that don't care about my MP concerns because to them it's an after thought.

RAH
It's nice to see a lot of the MP posters supporting that opinion in this thread. But I haven't seen Mark respond in many days, which is dissapointing. What's the harm Mark?

I'll be aware of the social dynamic on those threads. I may make some points regarding the economics of supporting feuatures enjoyed by a minority of the community. I lurk on the MP boards since I like the community of players. I don't post that much, since I don't have the game. But every now and then I stick my nose under the tent skirt...

[SITS]

On the 21/9 MarkG posted this in a thread he closed in CIV2 MP...

sits, thank you for the response in the apolyton forum and the initiative to start these threads in the civ3-general forum. if the amount and the diversity of discussions about mp increases, we will make the civ3-mp forum sooner than scheduled

The threads I started in CIV3 - General have been lost in all the chatter which is a shame...

[SITS]

I also got annoyed with a SP'er moaning so I wrote this in a thread...

You are right - the MP crowd should have their own forum.

New research out shows the MP'ers have greater social skills and are able contribute to society in a much more positive way than their SP counterparts. SP'ers tend to be more selfish, complain about things much more, often fail to offer solutions but are able to create endless problems and tend to have an enormous amount of games that they have bought which filled their attention span for the 11 minute capacity that TV has trained them for since childhood.

The research carried out by Dr M. P. Layer also found that SP'ers tend to have a marked lesser brain development compared to apes of the same age. The research was carried out by observing each group as they tried to solve a maze. The MP'ers were able to co-operate together to quickly find their way out. Their superior social skills had been turned in a survival mechanism. On the other hand several SP'ers starved to death as they refused to read the instruction to receive food pellets and a large proportion were unable to comprehend the concept that simply spitting their dummy out didn't instantly remove them from the maze.

Dr Layer concluded that a huge evolutionary advance was needed for a SP'er to reach the same standard of MP'ers which usually requires them to read the manual. As this was unlikely Dr Layer recommended that the interaction between these two diverse groups should be kept to a minimum to reduce the aggression that SP'ers seem to express every single emotion.

Not that I'm against SP'ers just the ones who seem to make the most noise.

Mark closed the thread shortly after that saying...

if you dont like MP discussions, dont read them and even better, dont participate in them!

Which to me sounds like Mark is supportive of the idea of a Civ3 - MP thread but it will take a little time....

[Alexander's Horse]

I'm certainly having fun on the civ III forum

And will continue to do so

But I would appreciate an INFORMED discussion on civ III with my civ 2 MP friends now and then. Some of the best, most knowledgeable and/or hard core civ players hang out there.

Hi guys

Come on Mark don't be a Taliban about this

[rah]

Thanks, connorkimbro and GP.
Sometimes when I get angry, I don't make myself clear, and I appreciated the opportunity to clarify it.

LOL AH, and SITS
Where is Mullah Mark?

I'm personally hoping that he is ignoring this thread AND some of the CIV II MP threads that stretch the definition.

RAH

[Fiera]

Re: I'm certainly having fun on the civ III forum

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
And will continue to do so

Oh, aren't you happy enough with your trilogy? Ambitious horse...

[rah]

Since Mark seems to be refusing to answer us here.

Please post your comments about censorship here.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=27651

RAH

[Alexander's Horse]

I think its probably because I raised it

*sob*

Don't you like your old friend horsie any more Mark?

[Ming]

Re: I think its probably because I raised it

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
*sob*
Don't you like your old friend horsie any more Mark?

Old friend
Yeah... right...

[Alexander's Horse]

He only ignores me because he cares

[MarkG]

Originally posted by rah
Since Mark seems to be refusing to answer us here.

Rah, first you hope that i'm ignoring the thread, then you complain about me not posting....

anyway, sits quoted my response on the issue

i havent seen any new arguments, so....

[rah]

Correct, then I saw your high and mighty troll on censorship at the VOA. How many sides of your mouth can you talk from?


While you may not have seen any new arguements (all of which where valid, as if you care) More people from the MP forum have posted their support of discussing it there here, than all the people that post in the CTP2 forum in total. I could probably look at a few other forums and make the same comment.

So maybe this is a customer service issue. It looks like your customer has spoken. Are you just being stuborn because you've already made a decision and don't want to look foolish by changing it. If that's the case, that shouldn't matter, because you already look foolish.

Again I ask, what possible harm can it cause? You have yet to answer that one. Or just open up an CIV3 MP forum. But since one solution requries you to do absolutely nothing, which would satisfy us, IT SHOULD BE A NO BRAINER.

What I don't understand, is that in the past, you've shown yourself to be flexible and responsive to posters to make this a better place. WHAT HAS CHANGED. Please don't say pride. We've already seen what that leads to. Heck, even the mod for that forum has posted his support.

AND IF YOU"RE gonna post the same lame tired ass response from above, DON"T BOTHER. Just reread the whole damn thread and see just how many people would like this.


RAH

And I know that this type of tone doesn't win arguements, but since you've even stated that you've stoped listening, you have left me no recourse. I would like to follow my own advice, but sometimes I can't. (see below)

[Bird]

Hehehe. What's up rah? Bit of a hangover, or perhaps missed a few too many two foot putts? We all know Mark's not stubborn, so that can't be it.

[MarkG]

rah,

after seeing the response to sits' threads in the civ3-general and the civ2/civ3 threads in the civ2-mp i still think there isnt enough actual interest to open the civ3-mp before it's time

beyond that, i'm wondering if you have any idea why there are no requests for the civ3-stategy or the civ3-creation forums to open earlier, even though there is much more info on these areas than multiplayer....

[rah]

Ok, a discussion, GREAT.

I've stopped going to the CIV3 forum, over this issue, so I can't really comment on that. I think you're right, not enough to open up a CIV 3 MP yet. So just don't close any MP discussions in the MP 2 forum. That's all we ask. In fact, I hope you've already seen the light on that one since there are still three poorly disguised threads there already that aren't closed.

All we ask for now, is that you do nothing. Let us discuss a few 3 issues in the 2 MP forum. You can even use the activity there to help you judge when there's enough material to start a CIV 3 MP forum.

THANK YOU, for doing nothing.

RAH

And I was really hoping you'd take the bait in the VOA thread, But alas, you're smarter than the average bear.