Official Multiplayer Discussion Thread

I ask that you do not judge me by the color of my skins, the size of my hardware, or my deeply held strategic beliefs. I have a dream, that one day, people of vastly different opinions on mods, tactics, and aesthetic starship design can come metaphorically together in one place, in mutual respect, then try to desperately and utterly destroy one another.

I've read much more "back story" on this forum since I made my first post in this thread, but I hadn't really noticed "Joe Shmuck's" post here until this very MLK day. I suspect my growing interest in the new wave of Metaverse activism is no small part of why I noticed Proloton's wording today.

I guess I might have been less than honest about feeling nasty twoards the MMO crowd (taste is taste, eh?), but I gratefully point to WhoStoleMyNickname's cogent list of MMO "issues." Hot seat and LAN MP options seem more worth supporting to me now than they did a few months ago, but I'm starting to worry about what us MMO-scoffers might "pay" for Stardock's possible exploration of that market.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I was one that also bought the game expecting multiplayer. I even talked several friends into purchasing it very early on, thinking it already had it. We play several games via LAN multiplayer. I usually never post or take part in surveys. But I would like to see multiplayer. I love GC2, and am a huge fan of stategy games in general. (Am still hoping there will eventually be a released updated version of Earth Orbit Station...someday...maybe...lol) I admit I probably do not fit the stategy gamer profile, nor do my friends. We tend to play the MP unless no one is available then fall back on the single player game/mode. Whether or not a multiplayer version/addon is released in the future, I love Stardock games in general. Great job guys. (Unlike...*cough* Atari...*cough*...) You guys always seem to get it done, and do an excellent job. Anyhow...that's my .02. Back to playing games. (Some of us say very little, and play a lot...could call us the non-vocal majority. (But this topic is important.))

Successfully updated karma reason!

MP please.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I am also voicing my support for a multi-player expansion.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Count me in. I'd go as high for $40 for MP. I don't care about cheats or any of that stuff. I just want to play with my brother over TCPIP.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Mp's worth about $5-$10 to me. There's no way it could be put into the game in such a way as to make that rate a sensible return on investment, so I'm content for it to remain absent. If it were implemented, I'd prefer it to be in a separate expansion so that those of us that aren't interested (or at least aren't interested enough) wouldn't end up having ot pay for it. No matter how it was implemented, I wouldn't want to see the SP experience compromised in any way.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I'd most certainly fork out some money for MP support and I think that it is a "sine qua non" feature in strategy games today. You can only fool around with the AI for so long before losing interest in the game.
Seriously, this game need MP badly. Everytime I mention it to anyone, that's the first question that arises: "Sounds cool. When could we try a little MP game ?" Of course, the answer is always pretty disappointing.
If there are thousands of people ready to pay $55 to play a game like Dominions 3 by e-mail, there should be a way to accomodate MP game in a product like GalCiv 2 that sold hundreds of thousands right ?

Successfully updated karma reason!

It is obviously possible, just look at civilization IV, i love multiplayer on that, and to get around the turns taking ages issue for multiplayer games put a time limit on the turns which you can change between fast normal and slow turns so fast being like 1 minute normal beign 3 and slow being 6 or 7. The fact is in todays worlds games cannot survive for long if they don't have a multiplayer, and also its suprising it isn't in Dark Avatar since you can't buy it at the shops and it requires a download, which suggersts that the people buying the game have a decent internet connection. I understand stardock not putting it in due to players moaning about other players cheating etc but a game like GalCiv needs a multiplayer, as said before you can only mess around with AI for so long before losing intrest, it doesn't matter how many expansions are brouhgt out a game can't survive for very long with out multiplayer or a modding community.

Successfully updated karma reason!

a was goning to buy galciv 2 when it first came out but every review that i read said "no mp", so i figured i'd till they made their gold edition cause by then they should have made a mp update or something. no i got screwed again by another great game for not having mp (rollcage stage 2) thanks stardock!
you guys could have made mp a 'optional'download with some way for the group of players to join up in a game without the worry of some unwanted player trying to join their private game, especially since most everyone who plays this game would only play it with someone they know (that was my plan).
yea one person starts game and only the people that are playing would have the address/code/room name to join in.
HEY STARDOCK ARE YOU GUYS LISTENING TO THIS!!

Successfully updated karma reason!

How come relatively average 4X games like Sword of Stars, Space Empires V, etc can manage multiplayer and an awesome game like Galactic Civilizations II doesn't? I mean look at all the cool turn based games that have it. Civ IV is a great example and it really payed off. In an age when mulitplayer is becoming an expected feature can GC II really afford to ignore it? The player community wants it, that poll done that showed MP wasn't wanted was flawed. Only players happy with the game and following it would have taken it. Why lose consumers to other 4X games that have a MP feature? When someone picks a box and sees this 4X game has great single player and this 4X game has great single player and multipayer which one is going to get bought? Not to mention all those who are willing to pay $20+ bucks for multiplayer, its a gold mine. Look at all the effort that went into DA. Slap MP into a smal download expansion and charge the same amount. Not a lot of effort compared to DA and the same amount of profit. Give us multiplayer and we give you our money.

Successfully updated karma reason!

kryo

Join Date 05/2003

+458

How come relatively average 4X games like Sword of Stars, Space Empires V, etc can manage multiplayer and an awesome game like Galactic Civilizations II doesn't?

Perhaps the very fact that they spent lots of their budgets on making the games multiplayer (to the detriment of other aspects) is what caused them to be average overall?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Perhaps the very fact that they spent lots of their budgets on making the games multiplayer (to the detriment of other aspects) is what caused them to be average overall?

The funny thing is, they didn't. It was just a part of normal development. MP isn't an extra. Its like saying you car wasn't made with windows because it would detract from the engine budget.

Successfully updated karma reason!

glad theres a thread so dont have start my own. after gettign emailed abtout he expansion I quickly look to see if guys finally have added multiplayer to see NO its still not there. I love multiplayer on turnbase games and would love to have one more modern the moo2 which seems to stuill be the best. Ive not bought gc2 because of this and will not buy it tell it comes with this feature. I dont believe that I am alone and that there are alot of peopel that would like to see that option heck ill pay 20 bucks extra just to have that option!!!

Successfully updated karma reason!

A lot of people do want a MP feature, but sadly a group of diehard antisocials have gotten control. Once upon a time this happened with the Civ games, but, bowing to popular demand Civ introduced MP. In Civ III MP was a little used feature, since consumers who wanted turned based MP went to other titles. However the MP gaming community began to realize that Civ III could gie them their MP fix and a whole new comsumer base became hooked on Civ titles. So popular was this feature Civ IV and its expansion are now looking at MP gamers as an important part of their fan base and factor in that many people will be playing SP as much as MP. This also means that they are making tons of money. They proved that MP does not detract from other aspect of a game. The assumption that the programmers that created GC II are unable to multitask a little does not do them credit. If Civ IV can have good MP and SP so can GC II.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Somebody say something, anything? Come on I'm bored.

Successfully updated karma reason!

From what I can see Gal Civ II looks like a good game. designing of ships and custom civ and all but no MP? One of the best ways in CIV4 to test a mod is mp [hotseat or internet among fellow modders]. the same with mp in neverwinter nights [1&2].
fact: human playing always is more unpredictable than any AI. Some Modules had npcs in nwn, some civ scenarios and mods had AI only civs as well as human or AI civs.
fact: single player only last so long in play. with modding and mp it can go on a lot longer. that's why with play the world civ3 is still going albeit not as strong as civ4 cuz it has mp from the get go. nwn is not suffering due to nwn2 cuz massive mp even persistent world and mp modules. with both modding ability and mp the community can create the campaigns and plenty of them.

a suggestion though: when implementing mp, allow for more custom civs per human player so they can each be the empire of (emailaddress?) or something like that. a paul could be the Pauline empire, as susan could be the susie alliance and vie with other custom empires and perhaps a few AI ones.

what would Stardock want to charge for this mp expansion? perhaps polling on a site like Civ fanatics could get an idea how desirable at various prices mp might be.
just my thoughts. I'll wait and buy the gold edition after mp is available even as a seperate purchase.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Multiplayer all the way please

I'd have no problem paying an expansion price for it either.

Hotseat would satisfy me, as my friends and I are always wishing we could actually play each other rather than compete seperately based on score and date of victory. It would be nice to do LAN/WAN as well... one way that could work to speed things up is to seperate the turns into two stages: First stage is everything but ship movement (this stage would be simultaneous, waiting on everyone to press Next Stage). Second stage is ship movement in turn order. Also ways to speed it up would be turn time limits (as already suggested) and limiting ship designs to either pre-designed ships and quick custom ships (no extras available and no nice placement of each part, just click and it appears on a hardpoint).

I have no interest at all in an e-mail game... that's way too long. I like to finish my games in under a year please

Successfully updated karma reason!

I was wondering if for multiplayer, whether it would be possible to arrange for a second player to play on the same computer. I'm suprised no-one else has thought of this. In my mind it would be relatively simple to allow for a second player to choose their race after the first player, and take their turn immediately after the first player. This would be similar to other turn-based games like Worms, that allow multiplayer. Obviously for some people it would not be as good as full, online multiplayer, but for those whose friends live nearby (and it seems like almost everyone who wants MP would rather play with friends and relatives than other people) it would be very useful. Of course you are going to have some problems with the other players seeing what you are doing, but that would be relatively easy for each individual person to sort out.

As an added bonus (though I have almost no coding experience myself) it would seem that it would be fairly easy to add the code to the game in a patch, just adding something to the start of the opponent choice menu to select human opponents and then let the choose their own race.

Successfully updated karma reason!

kryo

Join Date 05/2003

+458

As an added bonus (though I have almost no coding experience myself) it would seem that it would be fairly easy to add the code to the game in a patch, just adding something to the start of the opponent choice menu to select human opponents and then let the choose their own race.

No, it wouldn't by easy. It's been suggested before, but hotseat would actually require *more* work and changes than standard multiplayer would.

Successfully updated karma reason!

The funny thing is, they didn't. It was just a part of normal development. MP isn't an extra. Its like saying you car wasn't made with windows because it would detract from the engine budget.

That'd only be a valid analogy if 50+% of the driving population didn't use or particularly want windows. MP gamers have had run of the gaming world for some time, partly because the gaming press is full of them (by their very nature gaming press are going to have friends that game and have time to play games with them, so you get a severely disproportionate view). The fact is that even a lot of people that play exclusively multiplayer games (like WoW and Guild Wars) play single player the entire time. MP most decidedly is an extra, and a totally useless one to a lot of folks. We may be used to getting hosed by being charged for incomplete SP experiences, but that doesn't make it right.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I played Moo2 for 10 years.

I got all my firends into it. Now, since Moo2 over the internet with Windows XP is impossible with out an emulating matching service (like Kali - do they still exist?). IPX was the Lan protocol. Never heard of it? Yeah it got replaced by TCP/IP (Ok it still exists in XP, but its a pain in the butt to configure if it even works in XP).

Problems, with Moo2 in terms of gameplay will still exist in Galciv2. Turns taking forever? Yep. One person pointed out why not have everyone play thier turn at the same time? Ok, Moo2 did that. Problem: What if another player is designing a new ship (even upgrading)? You sit in a "Chat room" or even worse stare at an empty screen for 20 minutes waiting for the next turn. Say your playing a player that likes to check all of his/her colonies frequently. Very frequently. Same problem.

Hot seat is fun, played that. But then, everyone can see everything your doing. Espionage has no point.

Lan? ok, but you gotta hual your rig somewhere. Don't drop it!

Internet? That could work. Now who is gonna have a server dedicated exclusively for the matching service? I don't know my firends IP addresses, and maybe I don't have firends that are into Galciv2. What happens when Stardock finally shelves Galciv2 when they make Galciv3, etc. Who will run it then? Security? Version support? Moderators/ rule enforcement? Those aren't one time development costs. Those are continual costs that exist for the life of the game.

I think multiplayer would be more a novelty item. People might try it, then shelve it. I'd rather get more updates/expansions with content. I prefer to play Galciv when I'm by my self; With firends I'm going out and getting sun, not staring at a computer screen

Successfully updated karma reason!

With this particular game I would only enjoy multi-player if it could be implemented without sacrificing anything else from the game. I think it would be a lot of fun to be playing with a couple of your best friends and then all of a sudden be at war with one of them because of an assassination or an insulted mistress. It would be interesting to see whose ships and/or tactics were superior. We had a blast in Civ3 and Civ4 but we always said we wished we could have designed our own unit's like you can in GalCiv2.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Problems, with Moo2 in terms of gameplay will still exist in Galciv2. Turns taking forever? Yep. One person pointed out why not have everyone play thier turn at the same time? Ok, Moo2 did that. Problem: What if another player is designing a new ship (even upgrading)? You sit in a "Chat room" or even worse stare at an empty screen for 20 minutes waiting for the next turn. Say your playing a player that likes to check all of his/her colonies frequently. Very frequently. Same problem.

Hot seat is fun, played that. But then, everyone can see everything your doing. Espionage has no point.

I totally agree with this multiplayer would have no point at all... The game would last for hours on end and half the time you would be sitting there waiting for someone to finish their turn or vice versa. It would really be pointless.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Perhaps the very fact that they spent lots of their budgets on making the games multiplayer (to the detriment of other aspects) is what caused them to be average overall?

Ofcourse you have to divide the budget between different parts of the game but you seem to think that multiplayer is a component that would spell doom for all other components because it can be very expensive but that could be true for any component of a game.

Gfx for example is a part of the game that could basically have infinite budget and still not be perfect. It is the responsibility of the developers to find a balance with what is good but still not too expensive to develop and that is true for any component, not just multiplayer.

PS. Civ 4 is in no way an average game. It's an excellent game and it has multiplayer. And there are alot of games that are excellent and have multiplayer so in no way would a multiplayer component automatically make the game average since it would eat up the entire budget.

Successfully updated karma reason!

That'd only be a valid analogy if 50+% of the driving population didn't use or particularly want windows. MP gamers have had run of the gaming world for some time, partly because the gaming press is full of them (by their very nature gaming press are going to have friends that game and have time to play games with them, so you get a severely disproportionate view). The fact is that even a lot of people that play exclusively multiplayer games (like WoW and Guild Wars) play single player the entire time. MP most decidedly is an extra, and a totally useless one to a lot of folks. We may be used to getting hosed by being charged for incomplete SP experiences, but that doesn't make it right.

You are living in the past.... multiplayer is not the result of some evil scheme. Multiplayer is wanted by people because it is infinetely more fun to play against humans than it is against a machine and is made possible by the internet. Eight million people playing an exclusive MP game (WoW) would maybe give you a hint of that.

For anything from tennis to chess people in general enjoy playing against real human beings rather than an AI. And you know what, they arent mutually exclusive. Most games have both an SP component AND an MP component so you can do both, depending on your mood.

And that I Im sure is what the majority of gamers want. The ability to play SP and MP. And as I said in a post above. The idea that an MP component would ruin the SP experience can be said for any component. Too much effort put in the GFX component could make the sound component crappy, too much in the AI component... and so on.

Successfully updated karma reason!