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

[SerapisIV]

Fortunately, Sid and Jeff Briggs agree with the SP crowd (PCGamer Interview):

>>Jeff Briggs: I think the single player experience in Civ III is the central feature of the game, as it has been in all Civ games so far. We do plan to have a couple of pretty fantastic multiplayer experiences in Civ III. I don’t think you will have seen anything like it. The single player will be the focus but there will be multiplayer components.

>>Sid Meier: If we just wanted to go with what sells, we couldn’t taken quake engine and make a massively multiplayer game. We want to be true to the Civilization experience and that’s the approach we’re taking.

MP may be the future of gaming, but it is not at the core of what Civ gaming is. It'll be at least another few iterations before that happens (odds are it won't be Sid game when the money men and lawyers get involved). Civ3 is focusing on SP, as it should be. MP, while part of the game (eventually) is a definite second fiddle to SP.

[tuckson]

Originally posted by SerapisIV
Fortunately, Sid and Jeff Briggs agree with the SP crowd (PCGamer Interview):



MP may be the future of gaming, but it is not at the core of what Civ gaming is. It'll be at least another few iterations before that happens (odds are it won't be Sid game when the money men and lawyers get involved). Civ3 is focusing on SP, as it should be. MP, while part of the game (eventually) is a definite second fiddle to SP.

Did you notice Apolyton being mentioned?

>>Jeff Briggs Right. For example, we got from this site on the web dedicated to Civ II a document of all the things they wanted to see in Civ III, [as well as] lots of fan email daily about what people want to see.

[SerapisIV]

Too bad Apolyton is "just a site on the web" You'd think with all the work guys like Yin put into the list, they'd be willing to drop a few names

[tuckson]

Originally posted by SerapisIV
Too bad Apolyton is "just a site on the web" You'd think with all the work guys like Yin put into the list, they'd be willing to drop a few names

Yeah...
Well, maybe Jeff did but don't the Game mag just like competition for their website?

Well, anyway, at least it can be assumed that the list has had it's influence on the the development of civ3.
That's worth something, doesn't it?

[tniem]

Stormprophet-

But I have no doubt they have the code for MP. They of course have the old code from Civ II gold, and SMAC. SMAC would likely be a closer match.

Well they couldn't use the Civ II gold code, different company. SMAC meanwhile they could have used. But from what I understand is that they a long time scraped most of that code for what they were working on. And if Civ Fanatics is right, they only began work on MP in August, so then the code is probably not done. Sounds a little shaky.

AH-

They never answered my "Is Sid Meir Gay? What does the team think?" question for a start

belinda9-

No, that's not how I see it.
They're taking preorders for this game: I think this puts them under some obligation to tell me ONCE AND FOR ALL if the game I'm preordering is going to have a MP feature that has been previously alluded to, or if they're not going to have it. Otherwise, it's a bait-and-switch, which is not what I call good business ethics.

That is the point. They want me to buy the game now, then they should let me know if it is going to be in the game or not. There silence is keeping me from purchasing the game. I assume that I will buy it soon after release and work on the bug project but silence is the loudest word that something isn't right.

stormprophet-

To say the least, the game looks awesome. And it's what we, the fans, asked for.

Well if the game does not include multiplayer than it does not have everything that I want. In fact to me it has taken a serious step backwards. MP may not be the prefered way of playing due to time limitations, but it is my prefered way to play and it is the only way to get a good challenge. On top of that it is a great way to meet new people and stay in contact with old friends. I am still playing some PBEM SMAC games with people I have not seen in a number of years. So yes I will continue to complain that a vital game feature is not included.

Anukioba-

Most CIVers only play Single Player!!

And so yes SP is important. But there are us MP players and there is a fear that if they are cutting MP that they are cutting other elements or corners. So I am quite fearful of what this means to the game overall.

Wiglaf-

I think you exaggerate the problem. MP will apparantly be added in later, maybe even as a free download. It's not a big deal either way, so don't get all upset about it. I really believe that civ3's AI will be subpar mainly because of SMAC and all the new features that seem to have been tossed in at random, with no concern for the overall play experiance.

First you say he is over exagerating the problem then you say the game is going to have subpar AI. So which is it? And with subpar AI are you going to enjoy SP games. I know I won't. I will only find MP games challenging and fun.

Stormprophet-

The same is true of Mplayer. If the game sucks, it sucks, mplayer isn't going to change that.

But if only the AI or the computer's decisions suck then MP will fix it. This game is definitely going to be good at least conceptually. It is an addition to the games that we have all loved. So we look at the game and see that it will allow us to do a lot of things. It will also allow the AI to do a lot of things. So it will be fun to do these things but if the AI cannot do them then there will be no challenge. The game in SP mode will suck. Now you play another human that will also be able to do a lot of things, now you have a challenge. So yes MP can rescue a game that has poor AI.

Quit mentioning CTP as if it actually had some credibility. That game is a software whore.

If you have played MP CtP then you would respect it. If you played Wes's med pack you would like it. So until you do, stop critizing the game. In fact I don't believe you have ever actually bought the game. So until you give it a chance, do yourself a favor and keep your mouth shut.

Serapis-

Too bad Apolyton is "just a site on the web" You'd think with all the work guys like Yin put into the list, they'd be willing to drop a few names

It would be nice.

[Wiglaf]

And if anyone noticed in the Making of Civ III video. It was mentioned that the AI will trick, and raw deal you. Because of their character reactions you may think one thing about the leader but they are thinking something completely different.

ok, but that still tells me nothing about how it actually works in managing 99% of what really matters: the game. And even that little feature might fail and become predictable. truth of the matter is we don't know anything for sure right now, but things are looking more and more like civ is a rushed product (no MP, little AI info, two different versions for the holidays). I hope firaxis has the game polished right now and in perfect condition, as one month from launch is hardly a good time to be tweaking and adding in the AI.

[isaac brock]

MP is not in because they spent so much time on AI that they only started MP fairly recently. I don't think that the AI will be bad merely because of "little AI info." What does firaxis need to tell you about the idea other than "it's good"? And why does two different versions for the holidays make it look rushed? Because they sell another fancier, more expensive version? Its the same game, with a bonus scenario in it! You just want to be pessimistic about everything because you want us to wait for civ 3 until they have multiplayer. the SP is ready, I don't need to wait for a patch I don't need. And, I've said it before and I'll say it again, you have no proof that MP won't be in it! Your argument has little to back it up.

[DanS]

The thought that "most people want to play SP" hasn't at all been established. 2/3 of people in the US are now internet-ready. This was never the case in the past.

[isaac brock]

Yeah, and the figure's even higher in Canada, but it doesn't mean that all of those people play games, much less online. And it doesn't mean those who play games online play civ 3 online. I, obviously, have an internet connection, but you'll note I'm not tempted to play civ3 online. I am not the only one who feels this way. in addition, people who would play civ3 online are over-represented on these forums. And that figure, by the way, does not in anyway challenge a thing i've said in my previous post, so i don't understand what point you're trying to make.

[DanS]

Isaac: have you even tried it? I have played many hundreds of hours of internet MP. It is now integral to my Civ experience. I couldn't give a fig about the AI, because I know that it will be an insufficient challenge for at least a couple of years.

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.

[isaac brock]

The answer is of course, no. But that proves my point that people simply don't care about MP. Maybe I'll enjoy it someday. I guess I'll just have to wait for the patch to find out, won't I?

Also, it may very well be true that AI will be an insufficient challenge for a few years (though I bet Impossible is a lot more difficult than Deity ever was). I think it will be a sufficient enough challenge for six months or however long an MP patch takes. You would be willing to wait 6 months for them to release the full game with MP, wouldn't you? So why mind being able to buy it single player so you can play and possibly even mod for six months then get the patch? If you want to pretend to have bought the full game, download the patch when its released, then while it's loading buy a copy of civ thats been out since oct. 31. Then enjoy it and never think about these foolish squabbles over multiplayer again.

[DanS]

You know, nobody cared about Civ, either, before they played it. So even if it's true that those who haven't played MP don't care about MP, it makes absolutely no difference. For me, the game, until patched, has a training mode only.

You'll find precious few who have played MP, and don't see the fun in it. You'll get a lot of people who are frustrated about certain elements (both human and game-wise), but only because they've played it so much!

edit:

"You would be willing to wait 6 months for them to release the full game with MP, wouldn't you?"

I'll not buy an incomplete game, and will actively encourage those who I know to do likewise. A game without MP, in this day and age, is incomplete. Firaxis knows better--this isn't 1991 or 1995. Firaxis has amply demonstrated that it understands this.

[Wiglaf]

he's right, brock. a game without MP would be fine before 1997 or so. Now it's borderline unforgiveable.

Civ3 needs that mode, given the huge gaps that will be found in the AI at one point or another. Granted, I loved civ2 without MP - but this isn't nearly comparable for three reasons:

1) It's the 21st century, there's no reason for a game to be released incomplete like this. If they ran out of time for MP, did they cut corners elsewhere? And all this rushing for the holidays....not a good sign.

2) the AI here has to be about 100x the AI in civ2. The amount of features the new version has is hard enough for a human, let alone a home computer. Firaxis fell apart on alpha centauri's AI, and that was 1/2 of civ3. Imagine what the future holds.

3) I've come to expect the ability to play my friends, and it will always - no matter how good a job Firaxis does on the AI - take the place of a solo mode.

[isaac brock]

I have not seen any evidence to support your claim that AI will be poor merely because there's no MP. In fact, I think they did the single player first and, when satisfied, got going on MP. 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.

[PGM]

Originally posted by isaac brock
I have not seen any evidence to support your claim that AI will be poor merely because there's no MP. In fact, I think they did the single player first and, when satisfied, got going on MP. 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.

Completely agree. Let Firaxis focus on SP first, as it will provide a good basis for MP, later in time.