Multiplayer won't be included with Civ3 release!!!! Fight Back!!

[OzzyKP]

It seems to be true. The October release of Civ3 WON'T feature Multiplayer capabilities. From what I've heard they will release MP in the Spring, and of course charge you again for it.

Problems with this:
1. Incredible delay in multiplayer.
2. Clear demonstration on how low MP is on Firaxis' list of priorities.
3. The fact they will charge us twice for what should be included in the game.
4. Compatability problems. Add-ons never truly are built into a game fully. It creates many problems (like in Civ2) and looses quality.
5. Did i mention they'd be charging us twice!?!

Don't stand for this! Fight back! I found a few ways to ease everyone in contacting Firaxis and giving them a piece of your mind. Send lots of e-mails, and persuade all your friends who feel the same about Multiplayer to write lots of e-mails.

Tell Firaxis that we are pissed, tell them we won't buy two half-games. Tell them we want MP integrated into the game and sold upfront with the rest of it. Tell them that if they fail to include MP we'll refuse to buy the game, and just download a copy online.

Moderator Action: Please read my post below. Inciting people to spam Firaxis is not a good idea.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889


------------------
Ozzy - King of Metal
Ozzy - Proud Sayen Member
Ozzy - Hungarians in Eurodip I
Ozzy - Prez of NYRA, http://nyra.ecg.net

[This message has been edited by Thunderfall (edited September 09, 2001).]

 

[lkendter]

Sorry,

I am part of the crowd who does NOT care about MP.

I will be pissed off if they delay the game for a feature I could not care about

 

[gjts00]

Although I don't play MP, I think that it should be included & thus offer my full support.

------------------
Listen, strange women lying in ponds, distributing swords is no basis for a system government.

 

[gerkenbr]

I've just emailed a protest note to everyone. Although not a fanatic multiplayer user, I don't think CIV III without it would be a complete game.

 

[Thunderfall]

Folks, spamming Firaxis's mailbox won't make them release multiplayer the same time as single player in October. All we can do is ask Firaxis to DELAY the release date of the game to Spring 2002 and release the game when BOTH single player and multiplayer are ready. It's extremely unlikely they can finish multiplayer by Mid October.

Both me and DanQ have contacted Firaxis about the issue and we should hear from Firaxis by Monday latest. Let's give Firaxis a break and stop spamming their mailbox. <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/jesus.gif" border=0>

If you want to protest, please just post the message in the forum. Firaxis will see them. Thanks.

[This message has been edited by Thunderfall (edited September 09, 2001).]

 

[Algernon Pondlife]

stop whining.

Multi-player is a minority interest. Your argument about add-ons is invalid since they have always planned to have a multi-player facility. If it costs more then you should pay more. I don't want to pay for something I won't use. I'm sure they won't charge full whack if you already have the game (if they did you could complain, but right now you have no evidence and the precedents are favourable).

Phased release is a perfectly reasonable strategy for large projects. So it is not a delay atall.

If for some crazy reason they took this campaign seriously they would probably rush things out poorly validated and then no doubt you would complain at that.

Stop whining and get ready to play your new game.

If you cause spammy grief for Firaxis I'll ask for you to be banned here. such pathetic behaviour is beyond the pale.

 

[Morten Blaabjerg]

I just realized how great an influence this civ community exercises here. How difficult it must be for a game company to ignore what is going on here! Negative influence as well as positive....

We don't want a hurried effort, do we? I think we all want this game to be a blast, whenever it hits the streets. I'm a bit surprised they didn't contemplate multiplayer along with planning this project a long time ago. But after all, these folks know what they're doing. I hope they take all the time they need to do this thing, with all it takes. Better for playtesting, better for implementing all things neat and tidy, for compatibility issues, better for everything. A delay is a good thing, if they haven't got it ready yet.

On the other hand, an early release would spawn a tremendous feedback and co-development on part of players and modpack makers, so that the multiplayer version could be even better, when it comes.

 

[Cyrus]

Add me and my friend to the protest. Without multiplayer we will not purchase civ iii. Only if the game is done right may Firaxis consider us loyal customers to there company. Without it we will be bitter indeed!! May those who fail to finish wonders of the world such as civ iii perish upon chariot spikes. Would the Egyptians have stopped when they reached the capstone of a pyramid... i'm tired of unkept promises and half finished products.

 

[iso-R]

WHAT!? Why the whole game should be delayed to spring!? Single player is ready and I want it as fast as possible! No more waiting! Those who needs that multiplayer feature they can wait. Most people never plays multiplayer.
That what I don't like eíther is that if they
take extra money from multiplayer feature.
Maybe they release just a patch? Or maybe
multiplayer feature is then included on same
box? So price would be normal for those who
have waited.

 

[Ubik01]

Actually I have never, ever used multiplayer with Civ 2 (only game ever on multiplayer for me was HOMM3 - and that for a short time) and I doubt I'll use that feature in the future.

But, it is definitely quite a dissapointment to hear that they are not integrating MP in the game - I mean, for some people this is an essential part of the game! Not for me, but for many others.

so,

Firaxis for this one (but I really love you for the anticipation of a marvelous game

)

 

[HIEROPHANT]

Not having multiplayer in the 1st civ3 does not matter to me since i wait until a game goes down to 5 to 20 dollars before buying it.

 

[lkendter]

Well this is the ultimate proof of you can't please all the people all of the time.

Many such as my self will be very pissed with Firaxis if I now have to wait another 6 months for the game.

Then the other group will be pissed without MP.

Sometimes you just can't win.

 

[Juize]

Blaah, Its not nice of course, but at least we will have an un-bugged MP (i hope)
And well have time to practise it as SP.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://www.virtuallandmedia.com/flags4/europe/FIN.GIF" border=0> &lt;-- [ICQ: 130479710]<IMG SRC="http://www.virtuallandmedia.com/flags4/europe/SWE.GIF" border=0>

 

[Cunobelin Of Hippo]

Originally posted by OzzyKP:

Don't stand for this! Fight back!

[/B]

No.

I am a polite, spineless, SP player.

 

[Squirrel]

Remember, Civ 3 is a mass release and is likely to become the best selling game ever. Both men and women between 10 and 55 years will buy the game and that's quite unique. The writers in this forum hardly represent the "average civ-player."

Only a very small share of those who buy the game will ever use MP. Face it, MP is a niche feature and those who want it, should pay for it and will probably be willing to do so.

If they delay the release for half a year only because of the MP I will be seriously pissed off.

EDIT: Grammars

[This message has been edited by Squirrel (edited September 09, 2001).]

 

[NiceGuy]

I think it is interesting that people are making statements about the prevelence of multiplayer gaming in Civilization. How do you people know who plays multiplayer and who doesn't?

For those who play, you know that it is a much more challenging game, and if I were to be as uptight about it as, say, Algernon, I could accuse the exclusively single player gamers of being a bunch of wimps who never face a real challenge. (I would never say something like that though, cause I'm too darn nice.)

I mentioned in another thread that I've got three copies of Civ II, original, Gold (MP) and ToT. Someone said that they wouldn't sell a multiplayer addition for full price. They did with Civ II Gold.

Someone else seemed to imply that having multiplayer made it a whole different game. Civ II Gold is exactly the same game, other than the fact that you can deal with other people. It that game the chat function and the diplomacy functions are the only ingame differences, and with the Civ III diplomacy set-up, they shouldn't have to do much at all to port it to a multiplayer environment.

Lastly, someone said there was no way to please everyone. I disagree. If Firaxis committed to provide a multiplayer version to anyone who bought the original and wanted the multiplayer version, at no extra cost, (via download or something else) I think they could statisfy most of those who are upset. (probably not everyone, though)

Personally, I'm in it for the real competition, and I will wait until they either design a computer AI that can compete on a human level without cheating, or until multiplayer comes out. I don't think that the few people who care are going to change Firaxis' policies, but hopefully someone over there cares enough about what we think to make note for future games.

On a side note, if they are waiting until Spring 2002 to release multiplayer, that MIGHT give them time to do a limited beta for the hard core amongst us who plan to play. How about that idea? <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

 

[WUM]

Please,<br />DO NOT WAIT for MP.<br />It´s better to play civ3 without MP than to play not at all.<br />And once MP will come available later, everyone will be familiar with all the new concepts.

I really hope civ3 will be released ASAP. I really want MP, but it should NOT be a reason for delay!

 

[GuilouneBB]

I'm a french guy and i don't know enought english word to blame Firaxis. Please help me.

MP is an essential part of CIV. It's very fun to discover game whith other human players.

In 6 month some hard player will be to advance in the game so we can't play fun with them.

Please Firaxis why such a bad new, i check all civ fan site daily for a lot of month.

If you say that earlier i don't spend enough time and so many hope.

I wait the complete version before buy a game

 

[CornMaster]

Originally posted by GuilouneBB:<br /><strong>MP is an essential part of CIV. It's very fun to discover game whith other human players.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Not really....Civ 1 won all of it's awards WITHOUT multiplayer. I never even played CivNET!!! Even Civ 2 didn't have MP till '98 after it won it's awards!! So MP is a VERY small part of the Civ series.

I wish they would release it all together...and I'm upset than they aren't, but this is the way Civ has always been....why would they change a winning tactic??

[ September 10, 2001: Message edited by: CornMaster ]</p>

 

[drake]

Multiplaying civ is the only thing worthwhile. Single player civ is *yawn* extremely stale and boring. I don't know how people who are online and have the ability to play multiplayer don't. Is it because they don't like to be challenged or what? I don't get it.

If Firaxis doesnt release civ 3 with an mp capability, they can honestly, whole heartedly blow me. Sid will lose customers, starting with me. I'm fully content to play civ 2 multiplayer bugs and all. And I won't bother complaining to them, for if this is true, they don't really care about the civ community, they just care about their bottom line.