TW5 SP vs MP

[Yun Dog]

This is based on a precedence set over at Stardock the developers of the Galactic Civs 2 game posted a lengthy argument for why they would never be including an MP component with Galactic Civs 2. The primary reason they gave was that to devote resources and time to MP would diminish the resources available for the SP game and they believed the numbers who would actually play MP didnt warrent any investment in it in its own right, and the community agreed this should not be at the cost of the SP game.

http://forums.galciv2.com/?forumid=162&aid=98074

So as a bit of a hypothical
Given the problems which some people believe the MP game has. I think its reasonable to assume that the piggybacking of MP onto Total war games does have an impact on the SP game and visa vie. Were CA to say for the next title they were considering dropping MP completely to concentrate on improving the SP game, and to enable them to commit more resources to the SPTW game.


How would you feel?

edit - your right thx for that - damn cant seem to change to poll title - ce la vie

[Sheogorath]

1 Shogun
2 Medieval
3 Rome
4 Medieval 2

The next one is Total War FIVE people.

In regards to the actual topic at hand...

I personally never got into multiplayer. People are dicks most of the time and, for me at least, I either end up facing some over-blown idiot who spends all his time working out exploits or some total n00b who I spend most of the game explaining the concept of moving ones units to.
*shrug*
Current TW multiplayer is fine by me. A multiplayer campaign is fine as well, I suppose, even though it'd take forever. If it doesnt take away from the development of the ACTUAL game, its fine with me.

[Shieldmaiden]

I voted b) though I've only tried MP a few times and not even enjoyed it particularly.

I believe CA should include MP - if feasible - the thrill of fighting other live people is the 1 thing you can't program into SP.

[Lorenzo_H]

Both. Single player should have preference though.

[Daaraa]

I voted A.

MP could be fun but as others have said, MP usually leads to extreme gameplay types.

The ones who exploit and go all nutso.

And the ones who don't have half a clue why their Light Cavalry got eaten alive by Armoured Sergeants even though they charged them head on. (I actually had one person accuse me of cheating when this happened. This was one of the last times I tried MP)

[Louis VI the Fat]

I am for improving SP and if that means dropping MP so be it.

99% of my time playing games is SP. For all my favourite games, there is a loud, vocal minority demanding better MP. This minority dominates the devoted fan-sites of most games, which can create the false impression that most fans want better MP first and foremost. But I think that in reality, outside of the hardcore fanbase, most gamers spend the overwhelming amount of their playing time playing SP.

[atheotes]

I am for improving SP and if that means dropping MP so be it.[/I]

MP is good only if you know the people you play with...

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

I am for improving SP and if that means dropping MP so be it.

99% of my time playing games is SP. For all my favourite games, there is a loud, vocal minority demanding better MP. This minority dominates the devoted fan-sites of most games, which can create the false impression that most fans want better MP first and foremost. But I think that in reality, outside of the hardcore fanbase, most gamers spend the overwhelming amount of their playing time playing SP.

But what about games like BF2/2142, where The Most Fun IS on MP. No fun playing AI when you can fight Good Humans.

Same for Total War. Everyone make Excuses like:

No Time (Family,Bad Sickness,etc....)
N00bs,pee pee heads,etc....
only good for people you know....


etc....

but that's untrue.

playing MP is not a everyday job. Just look at some people on this fourm, I only see them playing MP once a week for 2 hours or so.

Number 2, Yes, there are arrogant disrespectfull new players and even arrogant older players, (but if you can't handle them, how can some of you people handle each other in the BackRoom? ) You can just ignore them!


Number3, you DON'T need to have a friend to play a MP game! I play BF2 with No Friends, and it's just as fun. Total War is just as fun with playing with a friend then without it.


That why I hate these type of threads,when 99.9 percent of totalwar .org poplutation is SP orianted, it's hard to get you point across when you a MP player like myself.


IMO, MP is the ONLY Way to show you true skill. Fighting against the AI takes no skill, Fighting against a MP player does.

[Yun Dog]

Some good replys there people

Im hoping to gets some good numbers by posting this in the EH so keep the votes coming

remember theres no such thing as a wrong opinion

[Chaos Cornelius lucius]

I agree with Warman,
I played MTW for about 2 yrs on SP and I considered myself quite a good player on it. I tried MP and discovered how wrong I was . Fight against an AI enough times and you can predict what it will do fairly accurately. Fighting against other people is the main thing that has kept me playing the total war series. I enjoy playing the campaigns a lot, but the battles pale against a good online game.
True you do get disrespectful and arrogant players in the games and lobby, but quite honestly you get them everywhere. The internet just gives them an anonymous soupbox to shout from.

Personally if the next TW game had no MP aspect I would not buy it.

[King Kurt]

The strength of the whole TW series has been the combination of the strategic campaign and tactical battles. The campaign is the province of SP play, but the tactical battles must benefit from input from the MP scene. I don'y play MP - barely have time to do SP - but both parts of the equation is important. I get the feeling that the quality of the campaign game has been second best in the rush for good looking graphics - but that is not down to MP I think. I don't think that excluding MP would necessary address that.

[Martok]

I voted that MP is nice but that the singleplayer game needs improvement. And to be honest, I would've voted for multiplayer to be eliminated entirely, except that I realize that's not really an option. While I myself have little use for it, there's probably still enough players who want MP to warrant keeping it, despite MP'ers being a relatively small fraction of the total fanbase.

I would *love* it if MP were expanded to finally include campaigns, but I know that realistically it's probably never going to happen. Given that, I think CA should do everything they can to improve the singleplayer portion. As King Kurt said, the main strength of the TW series has been the combination of both the strategic campaign and tactical battles. So I'm all for the singleplayer aspects of the game being the best they can possibly be.