MP before SP

[MariOne]

Already said above, I'll reword it my way.

Some AI, on some board game, *can* beat humans.
Deep Blue (or whatwasitsname) did beat Garry Kasparov (although I heard he took his revenge recently).

A good AI would provide me a good "challenge".
And I can enjoy some solo play even if I know that I would beat the AI anyway.

But even leaving alone the sociable aspects of human interaction, challenge is not the only part of it, there is also "comparison".
I can't be satisfied by comparing myself with a computer.
I need to compare myself wtih some being equal to me, that is, a human (last time I checked).
I only got online @home in mid '98, after having bought SMAC.
In my long Civ/CivII playing years, I had only a bare idea of what Internet was, leave alone a gaming online community.
Well, even if I kept spending *hours* everyday playing solo game upon solo game never stopping to thouroughly enjoying it, I always wondered how it could have been to compare myself with a human opponent, and not only by comparing the scores, but seeing how he would play, and above all, *confronting* with him, "on the field". Of course some might pose less of a challenge than the AI itself, then you would seek a stronger one, one of your category or slightly above it, like with chess.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by HugoHillbilly
My problem with MP in empire-building games is that since the idea is to 'win' you don't really take the role as a leader with the interests of your people in mind, therefore trading and empire-building takes a backseat to warring. It kinda sucks playing against humans knowing its not a matter of if but when they're gonna start pouring troops over your border. I mean two Civs spending the last 2 thousands years in a close trading/tech sharing partnership shouldn't be able to attack their neighbours at the drop of a pin. Guess the
'entertainment' slider should really say 'gov. propaganda'

I guess thats why I like roleplaying games more than boardgames, gaming is more fun when you're not in it to win but to play the game.

You just need to find people who are into roleplaying. I've played some immensly fun roleplaying games in Space Empires IV.


I'll deffinately start with single player, but if there is PBEM, I will get into multiplayer games soon after.

[Harry Seldon]

PBEM is out.

[General Ludd]

Ah, bugger that than.

In that case I probably won't get involved in MP unless there's a game of it starting on these forums that catches my eye.

[Sarxis]

Originally posted by Osweld
Ah, bugger that than.

In that case I probably won't get involved in MP unless there's a game of it starting on these forums that catches my eye.

Yeah, PBEM being out sucks. Role-playing and actually trying to make sensible diplomatic and military decisions based on the well-being of the 'citizens' of your empire is great fun. But its true that most of these TBS empire games are hell bent on throwing you into a war to win. Whereas in reality, major wars are far from beneficial in the long run, especially in regards to diplomacy.


But Osweld, I know there's going to be a few hard core MP guys willing to do short stints and such for MoO3 online. I know I'll be one of them, and I already have a couple of other buds ready to play here, there, and everywhere else during the day.

[darcy]

heh, if you call roleplaying a strategy game "hardcore", I'm compelled to link to this article. It's a great site for everyone interested in game design, actually.