Gamespot says: "Just about the only disappointing thing about Civilization III is..."

[yin26]

Old-Timer: I share your concerns, obviously. I don't think people will knock Firaxis for failing to make an AI that can't be beaten in short order by the great players out there. At minimum, we should expect the AI to be a step above SMAC. Here's a SMAC example:

Simply place a powerful counter-unit in the right spot and watch wave after wave of expensive AI units just die again and again.

As you noted, the complexity of the game has increased substantially from an AI point of view: How can an AI be expected to handle the resource war and cultur-creep when even 'simple things' like DON'T KEEP RUNNING TO SPOT X and dying weren't handled in SMAC?

Answer: We have to have some really sharp players dig into the game for us. I am NOT buying the game until MP is ready and until I am convinced the AI is top-notch.

Techwins:

This misinterpretation comes from the fact that Yin posted this. As many feel that Yin is 'Lord Pessimist'.

Thank you. I love the categories people use around here without actually reading posts.

Markos:

so, in order to appear as "fair", what's left for the previewer? lack of multiplayer

This implies that the reviewer would NOT mention the issue if other things were also wrong. He highlights being "very" disappointed at the loss of MP, and I don't think he'd have to go that far just to be fair. If he wanted just to be fair, he'd say:

"While not an optimal situation with the lack of MP, Firaxis promises good things. Looking from what they delivered so far, I don't doubt it, though it will certainly cause waves if MP is another pay for the pleasure x-pack."

Face it people: MP is important to heck of a lot of people.

[MarkG]

Originally posted by yin26
This implies that the reviewer would NOT mention the issue if other things were also wrong.

hmmm no, i didnt imply such a thing

my comment was mainly on the use of the word "only"

"While not an optimal situation with the lack of MP, Firaxis promises good things. Looking from what they delivered so far, I don't doubt it, though it will certainly cause waves if MP is another pay for the pleasure x-pack."

if you consider this statement fair, how do you characterize your call to people(and it's tone) to not buy the game if mp is not free?

Face it people: MP is important to heck of a lot of people.

who said the opposite?

[yin26]

so, in order to appear as "fair", what's left for the previewer? lack of multiplayer

Indeed the 'what's left' portion here implies that if there had been something else to be negative about, the MP comment would have been softened. Perhaps that's not what you mean to say, but that's what it says.

if you consider this statement fair, how do you characterize your call to people(and it's tone) to not buy the game if mp is not free?

When I'm the writer for Gamespot saying such things, your comment will have relevance to this thread.

"Face it people: MP is important to heck of a lot of people."

who said the opposite?

Ummm, geee. Here at Poly?

[Faboba]

Originally posted by Anunikoba


Also, a lot of casual strategy gamers are into online play, due mostly to the RTS multiplayer trends these days. So something like "No MP in CivIII" might just turn some prospective CIV noobs away.

I for one would like to see less noobs. So what if some casual gamers don't buy it, fine by me. There's always still pletny enough money to be made out the franchise sit's not like Civ will never do another or it will never be upgraded ( nb. I'm not sure exactly the comparison to other games but I know the preorders so have been "overwhelming" and the demand was "much greater than first anticipated" so.......

[Firaxis is working on MP, right? ]

Actually there probably having a rest now. A little holiday for a job well done. From what I hear they deserve it.

[Jack_www]

Really AI in computer games has many limitations, as many here have already pointed out. The AI in computer games always does stupid things. In Civ 2 there was an option where one could change the civ you are playing and let the comp controol the one you had. I remember doing this, I had lots of bombers abput 30 of them at that time, and what does the AI do with these? It makes them run out of fuel! Too once you have learned how to beat the computer it gets borring really fast. The only way I have seen programmers make the AI harder is have the AI cheat, which I think sucks. The higher the difficluty the more the A.I. cheats.

This is why I want mp in Civ III!
I would like to ask again a question to sp players. Do you ever get tried of playing the computer?
And how would you feel if Civ III had only MP?

[Provost Harrison]

Well the one aspect of the MP that I am most surprised by is the lack of even PBEM?! I am sure this wouldn't require any fancy multiplayer code or anything, it should be implemented. This is why, to me, it is beginning to smell of a quite deliberate witholding of MP, so they can sell an MP version at a later date. I must admit, I find this dubious despite being an optimist about the game in all other respects...

[MarkG]

Originally posted by yin26
Indeed the 'what's left' portion here implies that if there had been something else to be negative about, the MP comment would have been softened.

again, that's what you understand from what i said. not what i said.

When I'm the writer for Gamespot saying such things, your comment will have relevance to this thread.

i fail to see the point. i assume that you characterize your own comments about mp not being given free as fair. you do the same for the proposed "gamespot quote". how come?

Ummm, geee. Here at Poly?

using "people", you addressed everyone, including me. well, at leasti shouldnt be included

[MarkG]

Originally posted by Adm.Naismith
MarkG, I really appreciate your well "balanced" post. It should (but probably without any chance of success) moderate some posters.

I like you stepped in to explain (from some first hand experience) to many of us of things works in preview world.

well, if things go the way they seem to go, we will too end up having an "apolyton preview" and not a review(we should note that gamespot calls it a preview as well, it's not a final judgment) ready by the release date.... with an actual review coming out a couple of weeks after the release.

as a comparison, we had a copy of ctp1 in our hands a whole month before the release....

[Fredric Drum]

Originally posted by d_dudy
i don't think mp is that important.

i think civ was always meant as a solitary game

Uhum... but MP is a lot more fun if you're able to set up a decent game. A more human AI in civ III could make the (temporary?) loss of MP less important... I'm confident Firaxis wil pull this off, but if the AI turns out like ctp.... no, I don't even wanna think the thought.


Fred

[yin26]

again, that's what you understand from what i said. not what i said.

Just going off common uses of the language. My apologies.

i fail to see the point. i assume that you characterize your own comments about mp not being given free as fair. you do the same for the proposed "gamespot quote". how come?

I guess I fail to see your point.

using "people", you addressed everyone, including me. well, at leasti shouldnt be included

You seem to be part of the 'Vocal Minority' then. Welcome.

[Father Beast]

This is actually a bad sign for upcoming reviews, since in my experience, Previews tend to just heap praise and build hype. they save their honesty and hard hitting for the actual review, which they only get to do one of.

For example, I read a preview of Braveheart in PCGamer which did almost nothing but drool. 3 months later came the review, which labeled it as a big piece of craaaaaaap.
Game magazine editors also seem to jump on the bandwagon clamoring for multiplayer. A number of games (such as Oni came out without the multiplayer functions that were hoped for and got slammed in the reviews, and in the editorials. "is this a trend, leaving off the formerly promised multiplayer?"

The reviews will suffer. Count on it. the days have passed when a strategy game can be published without multiplayer and people not miss it.

[campmajor!]

Originally posted by MarkG
if i was undecided on whether to buy civ3, i would rather wait for the comments from players on the first month(and not just the first two weeks) and then decide

That is my opinion as well! The previews and the reviews of ctp2 were all overall positive, but the game was no good at all!

So, as you said, the actual reviews of hardcore civvers are the only indicators whether civ3 is good or not.

[Grumbold]

Every game that is expected to sell well gets upbeat previews. Even glaring faults get dismissed as unimportant or "bound to be fixed by release". Only when the game has been played for some time does the true review emerge. Look at CtP2, or more recently Black and White. Most reviewers still think B&W is excellent but do actually admit that the 1 player game is not the essence of perfection they originally claimed it to be.

I can live with the temporary absence of MP provided the AI is at least competent (not just given outrageous advantages). Fortunately for Firaxis (or quite deliberately) the AI has a chance of being more solid because in many ways it has less to do.

- Where you build units is no longer so important because support is now national.
- Combat stats are now simpler with hitpoints and firepower standardised.
- Blitzkrieg invasions are now impossible so defences do not have to be perfect in advance.
- For the same reason, and for ensuring trade routes cannot be cut, building road/rail on every square instead of having defensible choke points is now a better strategy.
- Planes don't have to refuel since they stay at their bases.
- Spies and diplomats don't have to move round the board
- Giant stacks won't die from a single combat loss
- It no longer has to worry about players hoarding caravans for rush-buy strategies, allowing its gold production advantage to really count at higher difficulty levels.
- The simplified growth model means the player cannot use ICS against it.

Offset against that we have better diplomacy and culture. The complexities of the first one it can dodge by just saying no to any complicated deal. The second in its basic form is just a matter of building certain buildings to resist cultural domination. I know I'm oversimplifying but it still looks like an easier job to appear competent in Civ III than Civ II.

The absence of MP does give the reviewers a way of downtoning a review if they want to justify a lower score. Where an early review goes, others often tread. Since its a lot easier to say "no MP and we're not sure if the AI lives up to the boasts" than "I've played the game for 100 hours and the following tactics fool the AI every time" I'll be expecting to see more of these. Then I'll wait for the reviews I really want: Apolytoners one or more weeks after purchase

[Father Beast]

Originally posted by Jack_www
I would like to ask all the sp players out there a question. Do you guys ever get tried of playing the computer? I know I do. Once I figure out how to beat the AI I move on to mp. Something that really gets me mad is how it seems that all you sp only players are hostile to mp players. You think when we complain about no mp in Civ III that we have really nothing to complain about. How would you feel if there was no sp and only mp? Really the only complaint I have with Civ III is the lack of mp, everything else I am happy with. I also think that there is more than half of all who play Civ play mp sometime.

OK, I figured somebody had to answer that before this becomes a "mp players only" thread.

Actually, no, I don't get tired of playing the computer. I get a little weary of the ridiculous tactics and absurdities they pull, but mostly I'm enjoying building my little world. Truly, I don't play to win, but to have fun. That's why I play an expansionist on deity +2 every once in a while. to enjoy getting myself pasted to the wall.

Categorizing "all of us sp only players" is unfair. I am an sp only player and I have never suggested you mpers have nothing to complain about. danged few have, except maybe orange. but I know you have something to complain about. However, I won't let your difficulties keep me from buying and enjoying the game
If I wanted to, I could take umbrage at the first part of your post basically saying that I'm a MORON for playing any sp after my first win, but I'll bypass that. That would probably be being too sensitive .

How would I feel if there was only mp and no sp? beeen there, done that. Diablo II. I complained (to deaf ears) and never bought the game. never will unless they fix that abominable save system.

So I agree that there is something to complain about. even though I don't play mp, I am appallled they would do this to you. this is a worse debacle than the no demo debacle (and please don't start in that I have nothing to complain about with there being no demo). I just won't lend any monetary support since I AM buying the game.

[Buck Birdseed]

Originally posted by tniem
I have read that Pizza Tycoon will be a great game in one preview.

Oi! Pizza Tycoon is an absolutely brilliant game, almost as addictive as Civ.