Multiplayer is the future

**baz** · 11-01-2004, 19:56

1.1 was only rushed because they had no choice, before its release only 30 people could get in the lobby at a time.

Sadly the statement "multiplayer is the future" was not made by CA, I say this because the gameplay of the 3d battles (MP) has not improved and the campaign has been improved 1000% (SP)

This is clearly a reflection on CA's marketing strategy. Perhaps we think that "multiplayer is the future" but CA has certainly got a lot out of SP in the mean time!

**Bhruic** · 11-06-2004, 08:55

You know, there's a lot of talk about various MP games out there... The various *craft games, FPSs, etc. But can anyone point to a single TBS game that has a large, vibrant MP community?

I enjoy playing games with other people. But, in general, I can't stand playing games over the internet. It just isn't worth the effort. You get everything from teamstacking in FPS, to droppers in RTS, to cheaters in general... I mean, can you imagine? Putting in 2 hours to play a MP campaign of RTW only to have the other person say "I had a crappy start, I'm out", and leave? And why wouldn't they? How many people would sit around and continue to play with 1 city left and no money?

The fact is, campaign mode is not a good MP system for anyone other than friends. I'd be happy to play a LAN game with some buddies, who I could rely on to play fairly and well. But random people on the internet? That can work for FPS, because there are lots of people playing. That can work for RTS, because you don't spend that long on a single map. That can even work in RPGs, because you can have a "join at any time" system. But it wouldn't work for TBS.

I do think that CA could have focused a little more effort on the MP within RTW, as it is nothing but glorified RTS. But I would have been just as happy (well, happier, really) had they scrapped the MP components and focused that 10-20% programmer effort into fixing the SP component of the game.

Bh

**AMP** · 11-06-2004, 19:00

But can anyone point to a single TBS game that has a large, vibrant MP community?

nope, we can't cause no one has really focused on one as you can tell. when we ask for a mp campaign we don't mean taking out the option of just being able to play battles, we would like both. we would also like support for it as well and not put out half arsed. Sure you may come across those people that drop, quit, or cheat, i have many times, but eventually i found a group of people that i got a long with. it has happened with my 3 favorite RTS games over the 7yrs i've played online and i always found people that i got along with in each game i've played for yrs.

The fact is, campaign mode is not a good MP system for anyone other than friends.

for the most part you're right, but when you play online long enough sometimes it may take awhile or it could be the 1st day you log on that you make friends online. you do have clans that would love to have one as well. nothing would be more interesting than to have 3 or 4 of the top clans playing against each other in an online campaign. also in order to play against people that you don't know online in an mp campaign you need a good system that prevents people from cheating or those that like to drop out. you need to limit like 2 online nicks per person/cd key say 1 nick for clan/friendly battles and another nick for competitive battles. also you want to have it where they can't keep changing there nick anytime they please, there should be like a 2 week or 1 month waiting period before they can change there name again. those that are caught cheating or suspected of cheating you should be able to send a saved mp campaign or replay to the devs where they could check and ban there cdkey for like 2 months if they are cheating. as for those that don't want to stay around with like 1 city left in a game i can understand that, i wouldn't expect anyone to stay if they didn't want to, if they were for sure to lose. you also want people to be able to play in more than 1 campaign online at a time at once and be able to save campaigns to start them up again another day. you also want to allow players to play thier turns at the sametime and the battles when armies meet, but you are still keeping it turn based.

i wanted to play an online campaign ever since i started playing online games. lot's of people out there want one, you just need the support for it and for it to be done right.

**andrewt** · 11-06-2004, 20:40

Originally Posted by Bhruic

You know, there's a lot of talk about various MP games out there... The various *craft games, FPSs, etc. But can anyone point to a single TBS game that has a large, vibrant MP community?

I enjoy playing games with other people. But, in general, I can't stand playing games over the internet. It just isn't worth the effort. You get everything from teamstacking in FPS, to droppers in RTS, to cheaters in general... I mean, can you imagine? Putting in 2 hours to play a MP campaign of RTW only to have the other person say "I had a crappy start, I'm out", and leave? And why wouldn't they? How many people would sit around and continue to play with 1 city left and no money?

The fact is, campaign mode is not a good MP system for anyone other than friends. I'd be happy to play a LAN game with some buddies, who I could rely on to play fairly and well. But random people on the internet? That can work for FPS, because there are lots of people playing. That can work for RTS, because you don't spend that long on a single map. That can even work in RPGs, because you can have a "join at any time" system. But it wouldn't work for TBS.

I do think that CA could have focused a little more effort on the MP within RTW, as it is nothing but glorified RTS. But I would have been just as happy (well, happier, really) had they scrapped the MP components and focused that 10-20% programmer effort into fixing the SP component of the game.

Bh

Same. I don't like Internet MP. I play every now and then but it isn't a pleasant experience most of the time. People in general are just as stupid as the AI, cheat more than the AI and do it with tons of foul language and an annoying attitude.

There's a reason Diablo2's Internet mp, according to a Blizzard employee, is only around 10% of its customers. Most people would rather play sp and LAN mp.

**Dionysus9** · 11-07-2004, 05:20

I've been playing for over three years with the same people. I anticipate playing another 3 more. Is that long enough to complete a campaign?

*scratches head*

I guess I havent played campaign mode since Shogun, so I wouldnt know.

**Sp00n** · 11-07-2004, 09:58

Personally I just think its very sad that after all the years most of us have played Total War online, we are spending more time here talking about the state of the game due to its awful curent state.

CA appear not to care, they have only interests in thier profits, im all for sending the petition to every game mag possible in every country possible.

Am I moaning or is it just S**t Rome?

MizuSp00n

**baz** · 11-07-2004, 11:23

i think your right sp00n, while every review is saying this game is the dogs B****** CA have no need to change anything.

**Bhruic** · 11-07-2004, 11:45

I haven't read many of the reviews, how many of them focus on MP? How many even mention it? I've read maybe 4-5 reviews, I can't recall any of them saying anything more detailed than "MP exists". The main part of the review always seemed to deal with the SP portion of the game.

While I have my issues with the AI (and battle AI specifically), I can't deny that the SP of the game is quite good. It certainly needs some patching, but I've reluctantly come to accept that most games do.

What it comes down to, I guess, is that RTW is a very good game, but it doesn't seem to be the one you were looking for. That's unfortunate, but, in the grand scheme of things, it is not CA's responsibility to make the game you want. They've chosen to make MP a minor priority at best. You can disagree with that choice, but it's still their choice to make.

Bh