For a game that was built for multiplayer from the ground up they did a stellar job, on the first 70 turns or so.
I was just thinking about this today, wouldnt it be glorious if around the 250th turn it ran as smooth as it does on the first 70ish. (Im using 70 as a rough estimate). And im not talking about the lag of people warring and using up more of the turn timer. Im talking about a 2minute turn timer that takes 5 real minutes to complete. Or just as one example, clicking a citizen in the city screen and it takes 2-5 seconds for the action to process through. You know how when the game lags mid-late game it starts to tick slower and slower until the game becomes agonizing and people start dropping.
They drop because, and this is perfectly understandable, no one wants to wait 5 minutes per turn, it gets very boering espeically at that time of the game when either your at war, or have everything queued up and plan on just clicking the red button for several turns. Well at 5 mins a turn thats 12 turns an hour. Waiting an hour to build an observatory or whatever building is just well... agonizing is the perfect word. The blazing turn timer is great but whats the point if it's lagging up.
With many realtime strategy games and fps games wich are doing alot more calculations, in real-time none the less, are able to run very smooth on even low end systems, its disturbing that a turn-based game like civ plays the way it does mid-late game. Poor, unoptimized coding perhaps? Is it the engine?
Its like the guys at firaxis tested a few turns, decided it was running very good, and went on adding more features. It's like no one actually played a multiplayer game over the internet, on recommended systyem spec pc's. Its like they tested it on the LAN at the office and with ultra high end systems, and only for the 1st 100 turns. Or maybe it just doesent lag on the lan the way it does over the net?
My friends and I always joke about civ being "built for multi from the ground up" It reminds us of how "Play the world" was actually play the AI until they fixed it.
None the less, wouldn't it be glorious if multiplayer civ ran as smooth as it does the 1st several turns in the mid-late game?
I cant wait to read what you all think. Hopefully a few of you hear where I'm coming from. Civ players are alot of times logical type thinkers and it wouldn't suprise me if alot of us have similar views.
I was just thinking about this today, wouldnt it be glorious if around the 250th turn it ran as smooth as it does on the first 70ish. (Im using 70 as a rough estimate). And im not talking about the lag of people warring and using up more of the turn timer. Im talking about a 2minute turn timer that takes 5 real minutes to complete. Or just as one example, clicking a citizen in the city screen and it takes 2-5 seconds for the action to process through. You know how when the game lags mid-late game it starts to tick slower and slower until the game becomes agonizing and people start dropping.
They drop because, and this is perfectly understandable, no one wants to wait 5 minutes per turn, it gets very boering espeically at that time of the game when either your at war, or have everything queued up and plan on just clicking the red button for several turns. Well at 5 mins a turn thats 12 turns an hour. Waiting an hour to build an observatory or whatever building is just well... agonizing is the perfect word. The blazing turn timer is great but whats the point if it's lagging up.
With many realtime strategy games and fps games wich are doing alot more calculations, in real-time none the less, are able to run very smooth on even low end systems, its disturbing that a turn-based game like civ plays the way it does mid-late game. Poor, unoptimized coding perhaps? Is it the engine?
Its like the guys at firaxis tested a few turns, decided it was running very good, and went on adding more features. It's like no one actually played a multiplayer game over the internet, on recommended systyem spec pc's. Its like they tested it on the LAN at the office and with ultra high end systems, and only for the 1st 100 turns. Or maybe it just doesent lag on the lan the way it does over the net?
My friends and I always joke about civ being "built for multi from the ground up" It reminds us of how "Play the world" was actually play the AI until they fixed it.
None the less, wouldn't it be glorious if multiplayer civ ran as smooth as it does the 1st several turns in the mid-late game?
I cant wait to read what you all think. Hopefully a few of you hear where I'm coming from. Civ players are alot of times logical type thinkers and it wouldn't suprise me if alot of us have similar views.
You would be AMAZED at how routine everyone is now!
), but these are problems whether you play SP or MP.