TBS Games and Multiplayer

Since most of the people here are GalCiv players, and GalCiv has no multiplayer, I'd say hardly anyone.


I played Star Trek: Birth of the Federation. That was designed to allow for multiplayer gameplay. To prevent the inevitable boredom of having to wait for all the other players before your turn came round again, decisions were made simultaneously. So if you wanted to attack the enemy fleet, you'd have to guess where it would be next turn, and even if they only had a movement of one, that leaves nine possibilities - pretty frustrating. They were sacrificing the quality of the single-player game in the name of multiplayer options I hadn't planned on using.

One of the things I look for in a game is for me to be using my brain the whole time I'm playing. Anything else - loading screens, cut-scenes, repetitive tasks where I have to press twenty menu buttons to do a single thing - gets annoying. TBS multiplayer games are full of delays, even if they are the simultaneous decision variety.

Also, I hate losing, especially in long epic struggles. I imagine I'd lose quite often if there were that many other players.

I quite like multiplayer RTS, though.

To solve this I would propose that in the game set-up where we choose the races to play in the game we have the option to make the Race Multi.

If one race is Multi then the game must be done online. If not then it stays the way it is.

This way we get the two worlds. The problem is can it be done.

~SDC~

I played multiplayer Civ II for several years, and I have to say that nothing beats the adrenaline rush of having a real person running the other team(s). That said, multiplayer TBS has more drawbacks than advantages to me. The advantage is having an opponent smarter than any AI, and experiencing real depth of strategy. The drawbacks:

1) Scheduling. TBS games take a *long* time to play; you have to find a mutually agreeable time to play, and be able to have all players show up at the scheduled time over a period of months. The game is more interesting as you increase the number of people playing, but the scheduling problems increase exponentially with the number of players. One alternative is PBEM, which relieves the necessity of being online at the same time, but turns months of play into years. Or you settle for "one night stands" where you play the early turns of the game over and over and over. Or, you go with:

2) Altered rules. In Civ II, a lot of people played with double movement and double production to make the game go faster. While this was apparently fun for a large number of people, it was not the same game as the standard single-player game. There was no point in building any improvments in cities; it was mainly a matter of churning out units and rushing your opponent's capital. In Age of Wonders, which is similar in a lot of ways to MoM, most people play with strategic combat in multiplayer, which removes a fun and challenging aspect of the game.

3. Quitters, cheaters, and braggarts. Multiplayer brings out the worst in some people. Claims of cheating will be frequent and often acrimonious. Some players will just disappear when they are behind in a game. But, on the flip side, how much fun is it to invest hours of your time in a lost cause? And while "talking smack" may be a celebrated talent in our society, it doesn't appeal to me.

4. You can't get something for nothing. The programmers have a finite amount of time to spend on the project. Time spent on multiplayer features is time taken away from some other aspect of the game (usually AI: "we don't need a challenging AI because there's muliplayer capability"). And, as Matthew Downie said, sometimes design decisions are made to improve multiplayer at the expense of the single-player game.

I have kids and a job, which leaves a very limited amount of time for game playing. My preference is for a good single-player game, where I can play any time I want, for as long as I want. When a game stops being fun, I quit and start another.

Thanks for the good replies everyone. You all bring up some valid points and I can understand why you prefer a single player environment. I will admit that it can be hard to get games together, and even when you do its sometimes hard to keep them together. I have a close group of friends that I normally play with on our lan. I do however realize that many of you do not have that luxury.

While DaveV is absolutely right that adding multiplayer would require extra work to incorporate into the game, I still wish more developers would do it. And as far as single player design sacraficing for multiplay, that doesn't have to happen. That is up to the designers themselves. Personally I would have been happy with ANY multiplayer functionality for Gal Civ, even if it was a bit clunky.

It reall just comes down to a difference in play styles. While my friends and I would never play a TBS single player, except maybe to learn it, we understand exactly why many of you would never want to play it our way. I just ask that our way be implemented to some extent. Even if it is just an afterthought. I would love to play Gal Civ with my friends, and even more so a possible Master of Magic 2.

Thanks again everyone for the polite and informative comments. Take care.

John

i used to luv PBEM. why don't games have it anymore?

Some games have Pbem. For instance I'd love to pbem in Dominions II, as many people do, but I just don't have the time to play and the ability to connect myself to the game except on week-ends.
Multiplayer requires lots of coding, requires that the human player be not treated differently from other players in the code, and generally requires lots of programming/debugging. See for instance civIII which was announced as a single and multiplayer game. It was out as a SP game because they hadn't had the time to code it. Consider also Call To Power II where hotseat and pbem were coded, but buggy so they were disabled and you had to add menus by hand in the txt files in order to enable the multiplayer menus, and avoid clicking some buttons in order to avoid bugs...

If I could get Alpha Centuri to run on this computer I would play their PBEMs also.

~SDC~

I bought Sid Meier's Conqueror's Collection and have Alpha Centauri running happily under XP if it's any help.

Alpha Centauri was one of the best games ever. Now that's a game I'd love to see a sequel to.

Dont know what I did different but it is working now so off to look for updates and patches.

Then comes the fun of relearning it and hunting PBEM people again.

Now I have 2 games worth playing.

~SDC~

Update

Ran with V1 but when updated to V4 it conflicted with the CPU so crashed so DL a XP Patch for SMAC on 2000/xp.

~SDC~

When I tried to install the XP patch for SMAC, it forced my computer to shutdown....

~SDC~

I love Multiplayer... I am sad that that GlaCIv missed this feature. Still I think I will buy GalCiv2 but still I hope there for a well done Multiplayer. Nothing like the crap of Civ3.

Add this line to Alpha Centauri.ini file: ForceOldVoxelAlgorithm=1

And there are also no CD files out there.

On GC I hope multi or pbem is in GC2 but with their talk about how smart the new AIs are I have my doubts.

~SDC~

Glad to see at least some of you like multiplayer here. Again I respect those of you that don't. But as someone who hates single player I am dying for a new TBS to play.

lol, you know you could order your fleet to patrol the area and intercept fleets so wherever the enemy fleets move your fleet will go there too if the enemies destination is in range.

Multiplayer is very important for me in any game and I was pretty disapointed that GC1 had none at all. I bought it nevertheless cause MoO3 sucked so much and didnt regret that decision.

however for GC2 they better add real Multiplayer. we are in the year 2004 soon 2005. Multiplayer is just as much a standard as 3D Graphics or the mouse-cursor is.

Guess I'm different than alot of people. Along with TBS my favorite genre is RPG. Try and find a decent RPG that isn't online (Everquest, Final Fantasy,...) I refuse to buy a game then pay for the privelge to play it. And then to try and find a group, the time, etc. I also like to explore everything, not try and finish the game the fastest way possible. I just prefer single player even with games that have both. Oh well, just my 2 cents worth of whining about RPG's and multi-player.
[Message Edited]

I agree with everyone on Alpha Centuari - Alien Crossfire being the best TBS game ever!

It should run on your PC with XP now they made a patch not long ago. I had SMAC/SMACX installed before I formatted working on a Mod I wanted to create. I only play SMACX I feel it has more entertainment.

Tbs is one of my favorite Genres to play and my website has these type of games featured for this reason. http://www.neotechgaming.com - NeoTech Gaming Network I wish more people still played SMAC series. I would be supporting it at my site.

I know. I have been taking a break from GC and doing the ACDG and ACpbem along with an regular game in SMAC and SMAX.

The opportunities to make you think stratagy are great.

If they are able to add Multi and PBEM without destroying the game GC would definatly add more people who want it.



~SDC~

ForesterGC dang it now I am considering installing it again. I do not have the time with my website. LOL

We all should make a point to post this suggestion in the GC2 thread and at the new GC2 website. Playing online is not essential for GC2 (be cool though) however adding PBEM and HOTSEAT is a must it would bring in more players.