EDIT



Quote Originally Posted by Atlantis_Risen View Post

**and ryousei, I didn't demand that they remove MP.

--->



Quote Originally Posted by Atlantis_Risen View Post

This is why I think that MP shouldn't even be in a game like this. All the time and resources put towards not only initially creating MP, but that are now being wasted trying to fix MP, could have been spent making the SP game that much better.



**that's not a demand.



I get that there's a demand for MP. And it's clearly important to you guys. It just isn't to me. It doesn't fit my play style with tbs games: long, slow, and diplomacy based.

Fenrakk101 wrote:
My response to this is to find people in your same set of time management. You're the one who claimed the "vast majority of players play SP" - by your argument, there should be many people in your exact situation, and you could appreciate a game with them.

this doesn't work in practice. I may get a half hour to play, at a specific time. The chance of some other people having the same half hour available is slim to none.

Fenrakk101 wrote:


...and we've debuked all of this before. Developing MP develops SP, because a good game is balanced. A game without balanced becomes boring. And see my previous response to see why MP isn't always fast-paced. I've played SotSE with my friend who always plays slow-paced and we have tons of fun, even though we both despise fast-paced MP games.

The only aspect of the game that MP can help balance is the battle system. In a good SP game, there's some AI races that tend towards science, some industry, some trading, and some war. THAT'S re-playability. In MP all that matters is build fast, crush fast. You lose the best parts of the game.

Fenrakk101 wrote:
There is no MP. Just a desync simulator. You can go enjoy your game, while people who bought the game for MP need to come on the forums and beg for something to be done because we don't have any Endless Space to preoccupy our time.

If anyone truly bought this game for MP, then maybe they chose the wrong genre. MP is never the strongest part of a turn based 4x game.

Tredecim wrote:
Good points in there - I see the "demand" for an MP is justified.. but none of my friends (nor my GF) would play strategic games with me - that's why I'm fine with SP. Thanks for your point of view

Same here, I actually prefer SP so that I can play whenever I like, even if it's just 30 mins here and there - sometimes that's all I get in before my gf starts complaining

Atlantis_Risen wrote:
This is exactly why I favor SP. I need to be able to play at my own pace--take a couple of turns, do the dishes. Take a couple of turns, change a diaper. It's because I have so little time that I value a good SP game.

My response to this is to find people in your same set of time management. You're the one who claimed the "vast majority of players play SP" - by your argument, there should be many people in your exact situation, and you could appreciate a game with them.

Atlantis_Risen wrote:
As for countering my points, I'm just stating my opinion. My opinion is that in a game like this, SP should be the design focus, with MP an afterthought. I don't believe that designing the game around MP adds SP value. The SP game is all about AI personalities. Some races are good, some neutral, some evil. This means that when you start a new random game, you never know who you will start near and contact first. And who your neighbors are changes your game drastically. It is infinitely re-playable. MP is all about quick skirmishes, and who can spam enough ships to kill everyone the fastest. That isn't the game I like to play, it gets boring fast.

...and we've debuked all of this before. Developing MP develops SP, because a good game is balanced. A game without balanced becomes boring. And see my previous response to see why MP isn't always fast-paced. I've played SotSE with my friend who always plays slow-paced and we have tons of fun, even though we both despise fast-paced MP games.

Atlantis_Risen wrote:
This is just what I personally like, it's not a point to be countered. I believe that the people who will still be playing ES years from now, are the people who love and embrace the SP game. As people who love and embrace MOO2 and Galciv2 love it for the SP game and are still playing it after all these years. And do I agree with the original 'demand' of this thread? That they should work on MP first, before improving the SP game? No, I don't agree with that at all.

There is no MP. Just a desync simulator. You can go enjoy your game, while people who bought the game for MP need to come on the forums and beg for something to be done because we don't have any Endless Space to preoccupy our time.

Fenrakk101 wrote:
It lends itself to replayability.

Quite frankly, a few years ago I would have shared Atlantis's point of view. But now that I have a few friends I enjoy playing games with and a woman to spend my time with, game choice becomes even more important - if a game is solely single player, then I'll eventually stop playing it in favor of games that I can enjoy with my friends, because it's more fun. I'd rather play Minecraft with my girlfriend than play Minecraft single player, if that makes any sense. And when choosing games, if Endless Space is single-player only and Sword of the Stars has MP, I'd rather buy SotS because it's a game I can later invite my friends to play with me. It's hard to recommend a game on the premise "this is a fun game you can enjoy when you're not playing Guns of Icarus with me" instead of "This is a game we could play together."

Good points in there - I see the "demand" for an MP is justified.. but none of my friends (nor my GF) would play strategic games with me - that's why I'm fine with SP.



Thanks for your point of view

Fenrakk101 wrote:
It lends itself to replayability.

Quite frankly, a few years ago I would have shared Atlantis's point of view. But now that I have a few friends I enjoy playing games with and a woman to spend my time with, game choice becomes even more important

This is exactly why I favor SP. I need to be able to play at my own pace--take a couple of turns, do the dishes. Take a couple of turns, change a diaper. It's because I have so little time that I value a good SP game.



As for countering my points, I'm just stating my opinion. My opinion is that in a game like this, SP should be the design focus, with MP an afterthought. I don't believe that designing the game around MP adds SP value. The SP game is all about AI personalities. Some races are good, some neutral, some evil. This means that when you start a new random game, you never know who you will start near and contact first. And who your neighbors are changes your game drastically. It is infinitely re-playable. MP is all about quick skirmishes, and who can spam enough ships to kill everyone the fastest. That isn't the game I like to play, it gets boring fast.



This is just what I personally like, it's not a point to be countered. I believe that the people who will still be playing ES years from now, are the people who love and embrace the SP game. As people who love and embrace MOO2 and Galciv2 love it for the SP game and are still playing it after all these years. And do I agree with the original 'demand' of this thread? That they should work on MP first, before improving the SP game? No, I don't agree with that at all.



Again, this is just my personal taste. There's plenty of room for everyone's opinions.

Tredecim wrote:
Well I think it's interesting that you buy the game for the MP mode - may I ask why?

It lends itself to replayability.

Quite frankly, a few years ago I would have shared Atlantis's point of view. But now that I have a few friends I enjoy playing games with and a woman to spend my time with, game choice becomes even more important - if a game is solely single player, then I'll eventually stop playing it in favor of games that I can enjoy with my friends, because it's more fun. I'd rather play Minecraft with my girlfriend than play Minecraft single player, if that makes any sense. And when choosing games, if Endless Space is single-player only and Sword of the Stars has MP, I'd rather buy SotS because it's a game I can later invite my friends to play with me. It's hard to recommend a game on the premise "this is a fun game you can enjoy when you're not playing Guns of Icarus with me" instead of "This is a game we could play together."

Well I think it's interesting that you buy the game for the MP mode - may I ask why?



I bought it for single player... (MP is a nice feature but nothing more to me)

Atlantis_Risen wrote:
What specifically is the point you're looking for a response to?

Every single point we've made for the last 8+ posts that you've conveniently ignored while trying to further your own points that we've already countered.

ryousei wrote:
Once again you ignored my point, but I'll reply to yours anyways to be polite.



Yes, while your opinion is good and I welcome the discussion, you saying something like "I think MP shouldn't even be in a game like this." in a post where we are demanding MP fixes is in essence demanding they drop work on MP for SP. So you shouldn't deny this point.

What specifically is the point you're looking for a response to?

Once again you ignored my point, but I'll reply to yours anyways to be polite.



Yes, while your opinion is good and I welcome the discussion, you saying something like "I think MP shouldn't even be in a game like this." in a post where we are demanding MP fixes is in essence demanding they drop work on MP for SP. So you shouldn't deny this point.

n18991c wrote:
Same here, I actually prefer SP so that I can play whenever I like, even if it's just 30 mins here and there - sometimes that's all I get in before my gf starts complaining

Yep, similar to the situation I'm facing



"desync simulator" lol

You need to try to reply and justify other people's points other than just making your own.



We replied to all the points you made, but the main point you seem to revolve around continues to bug me (because I've already addressed it just not structurered for your point), and it is



"Vast majority of players who only play SP" - My answer to this is actually, you know what you're right. 90% of players probably only play single player in 4x games (me too for most 4x games), because the singleplayer aspect is developed so well in most 4x games whereas multiplayer is completely sacrificed. You know the article you made actually helps my point. It it the dev mentions "no shortage of choices on multiplayer, it's nice to have a good old fashioned single player experience", well the days of making galciv2 are awhile back and there are MANY EXCELLENT singleplayer 4x games, but no great 4x multiplayer at all (Civ5 is okay if you can actually get 8 guys to play for 8 hours).



This game has the potential to make the multiplayer 4x experience a good one. Thats the only reason why I bought it. Thats what the devs should focus on because its their competitive advantage... its like when you plan to join the olympics you practice your best sport, not try to be good at everything.



Because face it this game will never match total war, civilization, or Europa universalis 3 in single player depth, no way, ever. No matter how genius these devs are, you just can't match the budget difference. (Maybe the sequel or 2 sequels on can.)

Atlantis_Risen wrote:
For me, a huge part of TBS 4X game is building an empire, and diplomatic relations. I like a long game played at my own pace. I want to meet other races and discover allies and enemies. War is the least important to me. MP is all about who can build the most ships the fastest, and kill everyone else as fast as possible, using whatever exploit is available. This doesn't appeal to me at all. The below link explains pretty well the case against MP (even if the post is 6 years old, it stands true today). I know many people enjoy a MP option in their games, but the vast, vast majority of people that play turn based strategy games, play them alone and want a great SP experience, even at the expense of MP features.



http://forums.galciv2.com/98074

First of all, I don't think you can justly say "the vast, vast majority of people that play turn based strategy games play SP at the expense of MP." You may be right, but you could also be horribly wrong.



To that point, you still failed to acknowledge pretty much every point I've made, including the part where I pointed out how developing the MP experience improves the SP experience even more, both for the consumer and for the dev who has less work because of it.



Every other point you made here has pretty much been covered in the posts since your previous post by me and ryousei.







EDIT

Atlantis_Risen wrote:
**and ryousei, I didn't demand that they remove MP.

--->

Atlantis_Risen wrote:
This is why I think that MP shouldn't even be in a game like this. All the time and resources put towards not only initially creating MP, but that are now being wasted trying to fix MP, could have been spent making the SP game that much better.

For me, a huge part of TBS 4X game is building an empire, and diplomatic relations. I like a long game played at my own pace. I want to meet other races and discover allies and enemies. War is the least important to me. MP is all about who can build the most ships the fastest, and kill everyone else as fast as possible, using whatever exploit is available. This doesn't appeal to me at all. The below link explains pretty well the case against MP (even if the post is 6 years old, it stands true today). I know many people enjoy a MP option in their games, but the vast, vast majority of people that play turn based strategy games, play them alone and want a great SP experience, even at the expense of MP features.



http://forums.galciv2.com/98074



**and ryousei, I didn't demand that they remove MP.

Plus, if the devs try balancing the game around the single player experience, it will be impossible. The AI will never tell you if the Hissho are overpowered, or if the Cravers need a buff. It's mostly the MP players who discover the methods for exploiting the game that need to be evened out, and the flaws in design about which races fare better than others. Would SP players have discovered the uneven map generation issues as quickly as MP players did? Having MP in the game also improves your SP games, because as the devs balance the races around the MP experience, they can balance the AI around the races, instead of having a double-layer of balancing they need to work through.

Fenrakk101 wrote:
And making the game much less successful commercially. I would never have bought the game if it didn't have MP, and I'm pretty sure more than enough people feel the same way to prove my point.



Think of it this way: Everyone who bought the game because it had MP should more than cover the expenses of fixing MP.

Yea i would have never bought the game except for the MP.



Atlantis: As fenrakk put it nicely, you don't have to play, but doesn't mean you should be here demanding its removed.

Besides if you read my post in this topic earlier you'll see why MP for this game is actually its competitive advantage.

For SP endless, if you play 4X games to a large degree, you should quickly find the SP to be a bore because terrible AI + simplistic game makes each game exactly the same as well as too easy.

Atlantis_Risen wrote:
This is why I think that MP shouldn't even be in a game like this. All the time and resources put towards not only initially creating MP, but that are now being wasted trying to fix MP, could have been spent making the SP game that much better.

And making the game much less successful commercially. I would never have bought the game if it didn't have MP, and I'm pretty sure more than enough people feel the same way to prove my point.



Think of it this way: Everyone who bought the game because it had MP should more than cover the expenses of fixing MP.

This is why I think that MP shouldn't even be in a game like this. All the time and resources put towards not only initially creating MP, but that are now being wasted trying to fix MP, could have been spent making the SP game that much better.

Fenrakk101 wrote:
The one flaw I see in the argument of saying they shouldn't focus on MP:

Nobody can even play MP. Nobody plays MP because there's no MP in the game. It's just a desync simulator the technologically inclined. You can sit there and enjoy your SP, but all the people who miss that human connection are now arsed out of thirty bucks.

And saying ES isn't an MP game is like saying mayonnaise doesn't belong on sandwiches. You don't have to have mayonnaise on your sandwich, but if you do then society doesn't stare you down like a crazy bastard.

Wise spoken



Well I'm not into MP that much, but when MP is implemented, it should work too