SP now or MP later?

[Tact]

What's the point of Civ3 with no MP...SP games as a whole are flops...true competition places human mind against human mind. ANY cpu opponent will fall to the brain, it just thinks differently, If they plan on charging me more for an upgrade later, I will not buy it next month. I'll wait for a full true version. If they give me the upgrade for free later (Signed an in writing(never trust a suit, if we could we'd be getting MP next month)), then I will grudgingly buy the SP version and I'll play it once, and it will gather dust while I wait for the MP upgrade

 

[NiceGuy]

I'm waiting until MP comes out to buy the game. I don't want to pay for it twice.

I'm wondering where the info on the Info Page came from that states:

The fate of multiplayer is still unknown, and it is highly possible that multiplayer gaming is added via a free patch or add-on disk in May 2002. <hr></blockquote>

I have seen absolutely NO evidence for this, and ample evidence against it. When they did this with Civ II, the multiplayer came out as an independent product, not an add on or a patch. It might as well have been for the depth of the changes, but the publishers charged full price for it anyway.

If there is some realistic reason to believe that Multiplayer will be available at no charge to those who have bought the SP version, please post a link here.

If it is only wishful thinking, it would be nice if the person in charge of the info page changed it. It would be pretty lame for a bunch of overly optimistic Multiplayer Civvers to go out and get the SP version on release, then find out later that they were going to have to pay another 30-50 dollars for MP, after someone told them it was "highly possible" it would be free.

Frankly, I don't care if they release SP now. I'm planning to wait either way, and if the people who don't care about MP can get it right away, that's fine with me. Either way, I'm going to be waiting until Spring to get the game.

[ September 17, 2001: Message edited by: NiceGuy ]</p>

 

[ratrangerm]

I definitely plan to buy the game when it comes out. I usually don't play MP games anyway. Besides, given that there will be some new concepts involved, Civ III isn't likely going to be a game that players of the previous two can just jump in and coast along with playing. I suspect you'll have to learn some new tactics.

So best to have SP first, then when everyone learns new methods for playing the game, bring on the MP games.

 

[Thunderfall]

I have seen absolutely NO evidence for this, and ample evidence against it. When they did this with Civ II, the multiplayer came out as an independent product, not an add on or a patch. It might as well have been for the depth of the changes, but the publishers charged full price for it anyway.<hr></blockquote>

It was from one of the recent civ3 previews. It doesn't say Civ3 Multiplayer patch is definitely free. Firaxis could release the MP patch free OR they could bundle the MP patch with new stuff such as new civilizations and sell it as an expansion disk for maybe $20.

I really hope they make the MP patch freely available, because $70 for a complete game is awfully expensive. <img src="icon9.gif" border="0">

 

[dreadhead7]

Since I'm a natural loner, I don't play MP, so I'll buy the game when it comes out. I understand where the MPers are coming from, though. I hope that Firaxis will offer a free patch rather than have people pay again for the multiplayer version.

 

[bluffhal]

Single Player Now.<br />But, what if the SP cannot be patched for MP?<br />then Wait for Multi Player

 

[Webba]

Multiplayer. What's that?
Who cares.
Gimme SinglePlayer October 23 (I return from holiday then...) !!
Update that multiplayer-wtf-thing in a patch if it's necessary.

Until you beat the computer player on all levels it will be Spring, and that would be the perfect time to bring multiplayer!

Okay Firaxis - you heard me. Release date october 23 2001 for Switzerlnad. Who cares 'bout America, release date 2002!! hehe

wassssuuup

 

[Scout]

Single player is all I'll ever use anyway.

 

[Conditional Zenith]

SP as soon as possible without too many bugs (ie. I will wait for a bug free version). I probably wont get MP because of the costs of using the internet for the time required, however I may get it.

 

[damunzy]

Bumpity!
This be one of the few times I agree with BlueMonday. SP now but I will wait for MP to buy it.
Though I am torn on buying the Limited edition of the game! Damn you Firaxis!!!! Or maybe it was Infogrames' fault?
Atleast Blizzard is still doing quality games. Oh, damn. Maybe not. They released Diablo 2 with servers crashing left and right because of overload and claimed 'We didn't expect this many users' but we have even more games for sale so you can overload the new servers we are putting up to help with the current problem. Right, the almighty dollar spoke to them also.
I appreciate the situation that game makers are in and will probably support them. Thunderfalll, I believe, said that $70 dollars is too much for a game but I disagree. Civ2 has given me many hours of enjoyment (I guess getting off the computer at 6am to go to work is fun!). Much more so than the ratio of a movie ticket cost to hours of joy given. The fact is I'd be suprised if they offered a free MP patch and after typing all this I realize that I fall into the category of:
Buy SP now and buy MP later, and be happy.

 

[xoque]

SP now, MP later, for sure! But it'd of course be nice if the MP was free later on, however it does appear to me to be a long shot.

Another thing, I disagree with a lot of you who say you wanna hone your strategies in SP before playing MP. The most FUN MP games are when everyone involved has just started and no one has a firm grasp on good strategie, although many each have a few small scale strategies that work with certain areas. Also when no one knows whats going on, there's a lot less ego floating around which is good

Can't wait to play! Bless me, Amazon, with an early delivery.