How can you make a game like this without multiplayer?

This has been discussed before. The beta testers at the time voted to make this a great single player (great AI) instead to implement multiplayer.

But don't give up hope.. who know, down the line it might be added in an expension or something.

Not only was there a vote on this, but it has been the game developer's intent that this game not be multiplayer from the start, so he could develop a superior AI.

Certainly those that will not buy a single player game will me missed, but have you considered what you would do when none of your friends are available? Sure, most multiplayer games have single player mode, but how many of them are all that much fun in single player mode? GalCiv just may be the perfect game to fill that gap for you.

Gal Civ is a turn based game. I would't play it multi-player anyway.

How boring isnt it to wait for the other human players in a turn-based game? Id never play multi either.

I used to play bridge with my friends (face-to-face, of course, not thru computers) and that's quite fun, even though sometimes you have to wait for the others. I guess playing MP over LAN must be a similar experience. So I understand where Lovok is coming from.

Small problem is, people who have a bunch of computer-game-loving local friends being able to spare 8-12 hours at a time to play a game seem to be in an utter minority. I am not one of them for sure. And playing a serious strategy game over the internet or God forbid over email is just a disaster.

When I encountered the first interview with Brad about GalCiv, and saw what he thinks about strategy games and multiplayer (basically that these two things don't fit well), I thought to myself: "Damn, this guy knows what he is talking about."

So I for one hope that GalCiv will never have an MP extension.

"When I encountered the first interview with Brad about GalCiv, and saw what he thinks about strategy games and multiplayer ..." Brad has been involved with the development of a number of multiplayer games, so you have to believe he knows what he is talking about.

I'm so thankful MP was not a focus of this game- and it's paid off. Multiplayer strategy games of this complexity are just boring to me.

Besides, there was a vote and an OVERWHELMING majority wanted NO MP at all in favor of decent AI.

Me too. MP does not belong in a game like this. I believe MOO3 failed because they tried to please too many people by implementing MP in it.

The thing to remember is that not everyone wants to log on and play with a bunch of kiddies.

Thankfully, they made the right decision here.

I think the metaverse was a good idea. You can still compete over the internet if you want to, just not directly. So you get the benefits of good AI, while still being able to have a some friendly rivalry. With no disconnects or swearing. Not many games can promise that.

I hope all of you people realize how incredibly ridiculous your comments are. How boring to play "turn based game" solitary in my room. How lame.

Did you even get my point? I want LAN play only!!! I want to be able to connect via LAN and play with 1 or 2 friends versus the comps. I don't play these games single player. They are long, lame, and boring. The only reason I had so much fun playing Birth of the Federation was because of LAN. I NEVER played single player in turn based games. Well, just to let you know, you lost 4 customers because of this. This game would rock over LAN. I guess I'll have to hope Blizzard fixes up WarCraft 3 in the expansion to give me some fun or somebody makes a real sequel to Star Trek Armada (not that piece of junk people call Armada 2).

"I NEVER played single player in turn based games." Then how do you know they arn't fun? If you want to play THIS game with your friends then your would have to expect to play for a few days... this isn't like a WC3 game that takes 3 hours at most. You might be able to speed up the game if you constatly hit the turn button, but what would be the point?

You really don't know what you are missing out on... this game is great!

Well, then, call a friend over and you can both sit down and have a GalCiv party. You play on one computer, he plays on the other. One tries to conquer the galaxy one way, the other person another way. See who does it faster. Or switch off every so often, so you can blame each other for your empire collapsing later.
Or, if you only have one computer, have one person RP as the Head of State, the other as Head of Military. Head of Military makes movement decisions, colonizes, builds starbases, and makes production decisions for Military Projects (not funding and research). Head of State makes all decisions for everything else. Or set it up however you want. Get creative. Single player games can be played by more than one person, and it doesn't have to be boring. So Lovok, if you want the game, you have to adapt to it, not the other way around.. plenty of people will be buying it, and I bet you could have fun with it too.

multi-player is the absolute bane of turn-based strategy games.

I, for one, am glad to see a company take a stand against it. The effort made to implement MP takes away from AI development, which kills SP.

I must respectfully disagree with many of you in this post. Have you never tried the game "Moonbase Commander"? It is turn based and great fun in MP. In fact this is the only real place that game is very much fun.

Personally, I am buying GalCiv for at least three reasons.

1. I love to play SP missions in games.
2. I look forward to a game with depth and a great AI.
3. I want to support Developers like Frogboy who communicate with users and commit to maintaining their game. This is rare indeed, and should be loudly applauded!

OK, 4 reasons, the price point is very nice compared to overpriced, buggy game that hit the market to often today (no one game in mind here).

However, I would in no way be opposed to play it MP either.

If GalCiv is around for many a year after release it would be nice to see (now that it has a great AI) MP put into over time.

If that could happen it would be just that much better. And if you do not like Turn Based in MP you just would not have to play it MP, but for others MP might be the only place they would love to play.

Guess to each his own, and everyone remains happy.

For me I will be happy in my SP world and being part of the Metaverse.

Toothy

Brad has talked before about making a multiplayer galciv, though it'd be completely seperate from the SP version. Though im new to online gaming (a console-only gamer until I started working for SD) the idea of empire building with/against some buddies on a lan always sounded cool to me. Again, though, that game is for another time

lol. does he realize this is a turn based game?

BoogieBac
Frogboy will have you on heavy duty hole plugging and cheese patrol for the mp version. (I always knew you were a green bay [ackers fan )

rich

' I NEVER played single player in turn based games'

I'd like to know how you manage to finish TBS games in multiplayer.... Stars! works, but only because you don't have to stay connected to the host.

The fastest one I've seen was Birth of the Federation, and even it was too long to play out (unless you're really unlucky and the galaxy gets invaded by the Borg very early on, but I don't like winning by Deus ex Machina).

Heroes of Might and Magic *fill-in-the-blank* can manage it once in a while, but only very small maps.

Are you guys kidding?Man no multiplayer,no animated battles....
Turn based is the main attraction for these games.I got 2 comps in my house,and me and my friend love playing botf against one another,and thats turn based.Too bad,this game has everything moo3 didnt,and nothing moo3 had(good things).

The problem with some games with multiplayer is that without someone else to play against, it's not worth playing the game. The AI is so incompetent or so omnipotent that it's boring.

GalCiv comes up with an interesting solution. Make competent AI that has a good chance of winning at the same time as you have a good chance of winning.

This creates a game that is entertaining to play in single player mode. When your friend is over, play a fun multi player game, or a game like I described...

I'd rather play board games with friends, and leave the computer games to when I have no-one to hang out with. And now, with Metaverse, when I'm away at college I can still compete with my friends back home, even though I can't get together with them for a session. The friend I would play against would take far too long turns anyway. I'm glad I don't have to wait for him.

EU and EU2 do an interesting job of multiplayer strategy (not just tactical) games. They are not turn based though, and not really about total conquest.

Paul.

About your question why such a game as Galciv can be released without multiplayer is that it would have a weaker AI(which is very bad in these type of games)
It is very hard to make either a good singleplayer and a good multiplayer.
See it as a slider(with resources, money, time, programmers) which can be focussed to balanced,(no outstanding AI, no outstanding multiplayer), AI and features or a 4x type of game that is totally built for multiplay.

Lovok, if you do not wish to play this game single player then it's not a game for you.
However I suggest that you wait a little and play the demo when it gets out.

Seems a bit hars to me to judge the game without even have tried it.

If you really want a turnbased multiplayer game try AoW2, it's turnbased and got multiplayer which is very fun.
The single player campaing is also very good, the bad thing is that it got a few bugs, like playing trough gamespy hardly works. (playing trough ip is the best way)

Have to add that AOW2 is a HOMM style game and not 4x (Players can move at the same time which makes it better in my opinion)

I think the major point is I have never seen a (4x) game developed for MP which also had a very good AI for those who want to play SP. As most of the guys above already stated I am also very happy Galciv is developed to give us a big SP challenge and most important we should be grateful for the decision to skip MP Mode if this meant the AI would be weakened.

the reality is that the majority of gamers are solo players, and we are long overdue for a TBS that hasn't used MP as an excuse for a poor AI