Mike Breitkreutz, now you're here, can you please say something about MP ?

[Wiglaf]

I have not seen any evidence to support your claim that AI will be poor merely because there's no MP.

It's common sense. We've had an information drought regarding AI, other than little teasers like 'it decieves you' or 'it's cunning'. Typical marketing ploys. Then we get another ploy, the Limited Edition. For $20 more you get a pretty case and some Monopoly-like Deluxe Edition.

And then we get word there isn't any MP. There's no evidence the AI will be good, let me put it that way. Judging by the above, it only gets worse.

In fact, I think they did the single player first and, when satisfied, got going on MP.

"In fact" "I think" .... PR nonsense

Since they are on a deadline, I would rather have a game that has a solid single player experience (with an MP patch to follow) than a disappointing combination of both.

they aren't forced to release the game in October. It's all about the money, and it's becoming apparant the gameplay will have to suffer.

[isaac brock]

Oh, boohoo! "It's all about the money!" What the hell did you think they were making the game for? They aren't getting paid in goats, here.

It is not the deadline of firaxis. They didn't set it. Firaxis is not out to get you or anything. It simply isn't possible to ship on time with MP in the game. And if i am spewing PR, thats okay, because all this anti-firaxis rhetoric should be responded to with the opposite end of the spectrum. Otherwise this turns into a whole thread of "I agree" and nothing else

[SerapisIV]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
they aren't forced to release the game in October. It's all about the money, and it's becoming apparant the gameplay will have to suffer.

No they are forced by publishers to put out a game that is satisfactory to the majority of players/customers in a reasonable amount of time. "Reasonable amount of time" being defined by the publisher. By Jeff Briggs own words (quoted earlier in this thread) the Firaxis concept of majority of players is SP players.

So far everything has run according to plan. October is a reasonable amount of time as their release date is about 1.5-2 years since Civ3 development began, two years being expected by Jeff Briggs (in the same interview). And they are releasinng a full retail version of SP, which by Firaxis' own words is their philosophy for "majority of players"

Firaxis is fulfilling their expectations as laid out by themselves and publisher. If you want to argue, don't complain that gameplay is going to suffer, complain that their philosophy is wrong. The only difference between SP and MP is who controls the enemy Civs. Gameplay doesn't suffer if the the game mechanics remain the same. Only the challenge, Even today, not everyone is able to beat the Civ2 deity level. Just because many people on Apolyton can doesn't mean that the majority of Civ players can.

[SerapisIV]

Originally posted by DanS
It just boggles my mind that anybody on these boards wouldn't want MP fiercely. I'm forced to think that most who think this, haven't tried it.

I haven't tried it because my work load varies so much. I'll go 2 weeks without anything to do but be a couch potato, be able to play all the video games I want, then go another 2 weeks and be so loaded down with work that I'm happy just to go to bed, let alone play even solitaire on the computer. Who wants to play PBEM Civ or any other long drawn out internet game with someone like that? Then throw in the fact that my opponents would have varied schedules and might not be available to play when I am, it's just not worth the hassle. I play video games to have fun and relax. I don't want to play games because I feel forced too, because I haven't emailed some guy on the net recently my turn yet because I'm busy. Video games are a diversion from life, school, work. I don't want them to become a chore, which is what MP Civ would be because of the enormous time commitment required to play. I stick to SP, because I can play it on my schedule, at my pace, on my time, and at my leisure, and am not restricted from play because someone else has a different schedule. I usually play Civ in 3-4 hour minimum marathon sessions, a play style that is impossible in MP.

[mactbone]

Most of these posts assume no MP... there's no confirmation of that. Why wouldn't Firaxis release info on MP you ask? Well since I don't design games or work in the industry I can only give you my educated guesses.

1. They're BUSY, they're trying to meet a deadline and they don't want to bother with telling everyone that there is in fact MP. (admittedly this one's weak)

2. They want to create tons of mystery about it and make people think there won't be MP, so that when they release it and everyone realizes it has MP they'll all love it no matter how good/bad it is.

3. They want to create mystery because this is the only way for them to get entertainment. ("Hahahaha, look at those guys siding with Yin!" "OMG we've really got 'em going don't we?")

4. There is no reason, they are Firaxis and we obey...

[isaac brock]

I have never assumed MP was in. It's just easier to argue if you humour them and share that common ground

[Swissy]

Originally posted by SerapisIV
The only difference between SP and MP is who controls the enemy Civs. Gameplay doesn't suffer if the the game mechanics remain the same. Only the challenge, Even today, not everyone is able to beat the Civ2 deity level. Just because many people on Apolyton can doesn't mean that the majority of Civ players can.

Yes, not everyone can beat civ2 on deity. Those are the players that get chewed up and spit out in an MP game. There are those who found the civ2 AI so weak that they play a one city challenge, limiting themselves to a single city the entire game, and still trash the AI at diety. I assure you that there will be a significant number of civers who will have the game figured out by the end of november, and will be modding the game to get a challenge. Despite what Firaxis says about the AI, to make a really challenging AI would drive up the system requirements and lengthen the turn processing time. These are two things that would narrow the appeal of the game, thus hinder sales. So firaxis now says the AI will be deceptive and cunning, to me it means built in AI cheats.

[isaac brock]

In civ 3 there is absolutely no AI cheating except for impossible level.

[Wiglaf]

Originally posted by isaac brock
Oh, boohoo! "It's all about the money!" What the hell did you think they were making the game for? They aren't getting paid in goats, here.

:sigh: I never argued they needed money, I'm arguing the gameplay is suffering for it. That's what this whole topic is about....

It is not the deadline of firaxis. They didn't set it. Firaxis is not out to get you or anything. It simply isn't possible to ship on time with MP in the game. And if i am spewing PR, thats okay, because all this anti-firaxis rhetoric should be responded to with the opposite end of the spectrum. Otherwise this turns into a whole thread of "I agree" and nothing else

It isn't possible to ship with MP? Why not? The deadline, whoever set it, is there for money at the gamer's expense.

Firaxis is fulfilling their expectations as laid out by themselves and publisher. If you want to argue, don't complain that gameplay is going to suffer, complain that their philosophy is wrong. The only difference between SP and MP is who controls the enemy Civs. Gameplay doesn't suffer if the the game mechanics remain the same. Only the challenge, Even today, not everyone is able to beat the Civ2 deity level. Just because many people on Apolyton can doesn't mean that the majority of Civ players can.

ok, but civ2 isn't civ3. As I've said before, the AI will have to be improved 100x from the past game in the series in order for it to be a challenge because of all the new stuff. Look at alpha centauri, a game made purely by Firaxis. So so AI. Civ3 = magnification of the problem, and we all know why.

I'm not an anti Firaxis guy, brock. Actually I own almost every game they've released. Does that mean I have to support them on such a ridiculous marketing move? No, and that's where our opinions branch off. I don't give my absolute support for everything they do, and hopefully you don't either.

[isaac brock]

Again, you are not blowing the lid off some conspiracy. Of course the money is at the gamer's expense? Where do you think they get their money?

It is not possible to release it immediately and have MP because it isn't ready and they have a deadline. Without deadlines, the world would sit on it's ass and accomplish nothing. besides, in the PC Gamer article my good friend SerapisIV quoted, Jeff says that the game is mostly about a satisfying single player experience, not the needs of 10 people who exploded because Mister Pleasant started a fun little rumour.

[mactbone]

The deadline, whoever set it, is there for money at the gamer's expense

So developer's should never release games??? I've said it and so have a few others, without a deadline not much would get done. Or to put it another way, games, like pieces of writing, are never finished, they're just let go of. Hmm, I hope you get my drift, that if designers and writers had their way there would always be "one more thing" to tweak or "one more feature" and games would never get released.

[Wiglaf]

a rushed game is different from a game that's finished and is being tweaked to no end.

[DanS]

The deadline was known well before this evening. Firaxis had ample time to plan appropriately for multiplayer--to put those cool ideas into action. Indeed, they've done MP without much problem in the past.

[isaac brock]

They've done MP without much problem in the past. But before they weren't doing some interesting new MP formats. this time they're trying to do that at the same time as make an immersive single player, which is all the majority of civ players want anyway.

[DanS]

"But before they weren't doing some interesting new MP formats."

Yes, they've also never had the graphics that they have in this game. So we can get a patch for those, too? Really, I'm not impressed with the reasoning.