Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by Efexeye, Dec 22, 2005.
See thread title. How come no one plays multiplayer?
...I'll play it with friends, but not a bunch of random people who would leave the game on a whim.
Because multiplayer just isn't my thing. I prefer playing against the AI. They are there whenever I want, for how ever long I want. And besides, I am no good at multiplayer games
not a bad question..i was a mp maniac on civ3 , ladder player non ladder games , future ect. On Civ4 i prefer sp. Guess i tired of poor connections cheating ,quitters and keeping stats (required if u play in a league kinda scenario) I'd say i am aging and am to lazy to jump over all the mp hurdles.
When i tire of sp i will undoubtably play more mp games- but i am also waiting on that pit boss thing that will be like a powerful godlike entity that will resolve all mp issues and be nice too. Unless i meet a gal in which case i will bury my cd and make fun of guys that play video games and talk real serious.
On the subject of multiplayer...civ is much better as a single-player game. We have other game types, FPS, RTS, MMORPG, etc. that are suited for multi. To design the game from the ground up with multiplayer in mind only takes away from time that could have been used to balance and design singleplayer.
my 2 cents.
I guess I should have included an "I hate Gamespy (I DO hate Gamespy)/people that drop" option. I guess if that's how you feel, you can vote for #2.
I totally disagree- cIV is pretty much a big board game. Playing against an AI is eventually gonna get boring, but different humans will always offer different, interesting strategies.
... because i can't get it to work.
What does that mean, exactly? What modes don't work? What have you tried?
Being an oldish fart (37), I rarely ever play multiplayer games at all. I'll have a slight interest in MP when I get a new game, but the oh so inevitable accusations of cheating and hacking steer me back to my single player games.
yes, i agree with Efexeye's post. It happened on Civ3. Expand attack, lure trade. Redundent after awhile. I gravitated to Mp and it kept the game alive for a couple years.
However, there are Sword weakness issues i have read about in MP.
I played a couple games and in the last just destroyed johnny expando in short order but lost to johnny- i -have -catapults -and horse -and -axe giant stack. (and me with no catapults)
(They should program the AI to accuse u of cheating and quit once in a while to give that mp feel to sp) The biggest drawback to mp for me is getting shot to a city for the next build order when i needed to attack with a unit- when the other guy gets the drop on ya, it bites- on occurance that does not happen with sp.
Seems like some of you have a very clouded view of what actually takes place in the Civ Multiplayer realm. Thats a pity.
More interestingly, someone said that civ shouldn't be played Multiplayer. Wow. Thats crazy! I love playing with other people, thats how I get my diplomacy fix.
the only mode i am interested in is internet; i have not tried any other modes. the game freezes every time i attempt to log into the gamespy lobby. believe me, i have tried to remedy the situation by doing everything i could think of.
MP is fun almost to the point that SP is boring.
mp all depends on the players in the game. good crowd- good game.
League strength is common players- League weakness is - same players.
I suggest joining the "Confederation of Horror" a non league group that do not even know each other. But again i agree with another poster - MP made SP obsolete in Civ3 for me. I assume the same will happen with 4.
Signed...I couldn't agree more. It's the difference between playing poker against people, and playing poker on a little handheld toy.
@niffweed- maybe someone here can help? Do you have a firewall program running that won't let cIV access the proper ports, or something?
i turned all firewalls off in testing. no effect.
There are better games for multiplayer.
Turned-based strategy games are just not well suited for multiplayer, regardless of how much you design your interface to resemble a RTS game. I like the new interface, but if I want some multiplayer action, I'll play a different genre.
Well, do you want it to work, or not? Can you provide some more specifics?
So, by your definition, Risk would be better played against a computer? Chess, the same thing?
To me, cIV is essentially a multiplayer game with a singleplayer training mode.
Separate names with a comma.