tenlinkedparts wrote:

People should worry far less about AI and more about playing the game with other people. Civilization VI had this same issue; swathes of people attacking the game almost entirely for its AI, leading to other elements of the game being criticized for no particular reason. This is especially heinous coming after Civilization V, where everyone understands that playing the game with other people is strictly better.

This is an issue with many games and many genres, but it is especially so with 4X games for some reason. An alarming number of people prioritize the AI over all else about a game when it comes to 4X.

If you want to argue that AI should be more than an afterthought, then sure, try that. However, that topic always becomes "there needs to be a proper linear campaign", as it should, because that's the logical conclusion of focusing on AI. The problem is that a proper linear campaign is something that makes your game require at least twice as many resources if you want to do it right, and there is always a very real fear that serious work on a campaign would take away from the rest of the game. This is probably why the Quest system exists as it does.

So, AI is not as important as people swear, focusing on AI is lot more dangerous to a multiplayer game project than people think, and people like to buy games during huge discounts as if to tell the developers they shouldn't put as much effort into a given game... Hmm, nah, worrying less about AI is the smart decision. Those who truly care will make a mod for it, as was done with Endless Legend. That's what mods are for, after all: doing the things that the developers didn't want to or couldn't do.

That's from one perspective. But there are lot more people who DON'T play multiplayer than do. That's an indisputable fact. And whenever I want to have a game I have to arrange to meet up and play with people who I may or may not know and have different schedules and try to finish using arbitrary rules like you can't take more than a certain time for turns or you have to ban this or that mechanic.

Or I may just not like to play multiplayer. And waiting for a mod is not a solution when that mod may or may not emerge years after the game is complete. We got lucky for Endless Legend. LeaderEnemyBoss does not plan to work on Endless Space 2.

So no...play multiplayer is not a solution to a lacking single player AI and never will be.

To want a game that offers both great MP and SP is entirely untenable. The developers are not God. If you want to play a game that offers good SP and MP, wait until you get to heaven.

So which one is Endless Legend and Endless Space. And also which one is Civ 5 and 6. AoW III?

I'm trying to figure out what you're saying.

After seeing the Endless Legend Community Patch I believe an acceptable AI is possible.

Is development of the game really not abandoned or, at least, somewhat deserted?
I've been browsing the ideas section, and the last community implemented ideas are ones from 2+ years ago... kinda discouraging ;(

Slashman wrote:

tenlinkedparts wrote:

People should worry far less about AI and more about playing the game with other people. Civilization VI had this same issue; swathes of people attacking the game almost entirely for its AI, leading to other elements of the game being criticized for no particular reason. This is especially heinous coming after Civilization V, where everyone understands that playing the game with other people is strictly better.

This is an issue with many games and many genres, but it is especially so with 4X games for some reason. An alarming number of people prioritize the AI over all else about a game when it comes to 4X.

If you want to argue that AI should be more than an afterthought, then sure, try that. However, that topic always becomes "there needs to be a proper linear campaign", as it should, because that's the logical conclusion of focusing on AI. The problem is that a proper linear campaign is something that makes your game require at least twice as many resources if you want to do it right, and there is always a very real fear that serious work on a campaign would take away from the rest of the game. This is probably why the Quest system exists as it does.

So, AI is not as important as people swear, focusing on AI is lot more dangerous to a multiplayer game project than people think, and people like to buy games during huge discounts as if to tell the developers they shouldn't put as much effort into a given game... Hmm, nah, worrying less about AI is the smart decision. Those who truly care will make a mod for it, as was done with Endless Legend. That's what mods are for, after all: doing the things that the developers didn't want to or couldn't do.

That's from one perspective. But there are lot more people who DON'T play multiplayer than do. That's an indisputable fact. And whenever I want to have a game I have to arrange to meet up and play with people who I may or may not know and have different schedules and try to finish using arbitrary rules like you can't take more than a certain time for turns or you have to ban this or that mechanic.

Or I may just not like to play multiplayer. And waiting for a mod is not a solution when that mod may or may not emerge years after the game is complete. We got lucky for Endless Legend. LeaderEnemyBoss does not plan to work on Endless Space 2.

So no...play multiplayer is not a solution to a lacking single player AI and never will be.

This. 

I would furthermore that the whole "What's the meta to cheese a way into domination" attitude is very off-putting for newbie Multiplayers. I am not interested in playing multiplayer to find myself schooled because I am not "playing optimally" for my faction.