If you can think of a reason you would rather play one over the other, name it.
I've played both, play SP exclusively now, but each has advantages IMO.
SP Pro: You're opponents don't quit at the first sign of trouble. This is the main reason I play SP. I'm one of the few who will hang in when things turn against me. In games where I do well, people mysteriously vanish. This gets REAL BORING after a while. I spent months at the Zone trying to put together a bunch who would finish a game to no avail.
SP Con: The game can't BS w/ you between turns. Negociations are very limited.
MP Pro: Humans aren't usually too stupid, the AI is deeply dumb.
MP Con: You are a slave to the schedule.
I've played both, play SP exclusively now, but each has advantages IMO.
SP Pro: You're opponents don't quit at the first sign of trouble. This is the main reason I play SP. I'm one of the few who will hang in when things turn against me. In games where I do well, people mysteriously vanish. This gets REAL BORING after a while. I spent months at the Zone trying to put together a bunch who would finish a game to no avail.
SP Con: The game can't BS w/ you between turns. Negociations are very limited.
MP Pro: Humans aren't usually too stupid, the AI is deeply dumb.
MP Con: You are a slave to the schedule.
I have hopes for the Civ3 AI. I think to some degree they design these games around what the AI's capabilities are. Well, Civ 2 went a bit too far for the AI, (no planes on AI carriers, etc) but the guys that are designing Civ3 will have more experience now, and have a greater understanding of what the AI needs to be.
SP and MP both have their strong points in my view. The big issue everyone is going to personally face is whether to buy the game without MP. Well, to each their own, right my friend?
Comment