Game Reviewing Rant

[istara]

Multiplayer isn’t for everyone. Some of us have no friends

[Kaitlyn]

To use Civ 3 as an example, yes, it was “the game” as released that it was single player. But in that case, the absense of multiplayer capability was a significant drawback to the game; it’s a game that conceptually lends itself to MP play, AND virtually all similar games have multiplayer. The game was a much weaker product without MP than it should have been with it.

This seems a strange claim to me. Which similar games are you referring to? I’ve never seen a turn-based strategy game that would lend itself well to multiplayer–they seem, like adventure games, to be almost exclusively solo oriented.

At the endgame of Civ3, a single turn sometimes takes as long as 5 minutes. If you have three players, thats 15 minutes per turn; a hundred turns would take days of actual play time. Unless you alter the gameplay into something other than turn-based, which makes it into a fundamentally different game, I don’t see any way to make it work.