As some people know, the initial release for Fallen Enchantress will not have multiplayer enabled. It was decided early on that 100% of the design and development focus for Fallen Enchantress would be on delivering a world class single player experience.
But after release, lots of things become possible. Advocates of multiplayer tend to be vocal. To gauge genuine interest, how many Fallen Enchantress players would be willing to pay a dollar to support the development time for a multiplayer mode (Internet cooperative / competitive).
To vote, go to:
https://www.elementalgame.com/journals
Please only vote if you are actually in the beta (the admin poll will display what % of users are actually registered users).
Result: 60% would not pay $1 for MP DLC. 40% would.
I would gladly pay a dollar on Tuesday for FE multiplayer today
Not in the beta so, no vote.
Multiplayer may shift more units. But if multiplayer is buggy from the start, then better expect those sales to dry up as word gets around. Also, there's more to adding multiplayer than just setting up a lobby and game list - you've got to expect some disruptive players and give players the means to eject them from the game.
I would buy FE multiplayer for the chance to hang out with some of the forumites instead of jumping between forum and game, because when I play GalCIv 2, it feels pretty lonely.
Honestly, to be a good multi player game it needs a LOT of balancing, and time spent in that would be huge, unless you plan to play in team with a friend against the computer.
https://www.stardock.com/media/stardockcustomerreport-2008.pdf (page 13) The fantasy strategy game Stardock has also been developing a new fantasy strategy game franchise. It has been described on the Internet as “Not-MOM” (as in, Not Master of Magic). It’s a turn-based strategy game that supports random map generation, integrated modding, city building, unit design, tactical combat, multiplayer, incredibly powerful magical spells, and much more. It is scheduled to go into beta prior to June 2009.
---
In my opinion game required to be redesigned for multiplayer support. Currently it is too slow.
In many strategy games balance tends to shift anyway as you acquire resources, add and upgrade buildings, and research technologies. Of course the Romans in Civ 4 are going to have an advantage right after researching Iron Working. But you can prepare for such things.
Even in Minecraft, once you've got a stockpile of iron the odds turn sharply against the monsters. Unless your teammates are so stupid that they detonate creepers right next to your base.
No sir!
I barely have time to play anymore - spending time on multiplayer waiting for people and people getting mad at me when I leave with rescheduling basically impossible due to my schedule? No, thanks!
It's probably more a question of how many people are still around who are interested in it. WoM was originally going to be a MP game, but the MP was delayed well after launch, and then it was really weak once it did appear. At this point few people who wanted it are still around (like me, who has barely been paying attention and hasn't posted in months until I saw this topic).
If the MP audience is gone and not coming back, there's not much sense in building it, right?
War of Magic had multiplayer. The problem is that it wasn't really the same game. Much of what was in WoM was stripped out, and MP was a very basic, limited affair. Wasn't really worth playing (even compared to WoM SP).
So that's the question here. Are we talking WoM style stripped down basic multiplayer, or Civ IV/AI War style "it's SP only with a friend you can play coop with"? Because one of those is easily worth $1 (or $5, or $10), and the other one is worth $0.
But people actually do play these games in MP. In fact, that's the only reason my best friend and I bought Shogun 2.
I voted no. Sorry I have no interest in multi-player online games.
Most certainly. I would pay more if other options like Hotseat or Lan-Support whould be put on the plater (like 5$). Strong favor of coop / non-competitive or balancing heavy / feature-equal to SP but fine with all reasonably done MP for 1$ (probably 1 € here given how a digital distributor might price it) just for supporting the option (also think DLC is a good way to introduce it in the scheme of things)Edit: Also I hope the DLC if it happens is released well after main release (while still announcing there will be such a DLC sometime along the road). To not possibly tarnish the first impression of the game if something turns sour with the MP DLC and to give time to actually do it right (and also shed some of the worst whiners and bashers which are bound to appear even with the best games around...). Some month at least. So please take your time if you do it... Successful FE with a good player base will after all also mean a bigger multiplayer base down the road... no matter how small the demographic of MPs is compared to the overall players...
Voted no. I find TBS multiplayer about as fun as watching reruns of paint drying. The pricing was appealing but I just hate the idea of it sneaking its way into what is otherwise going to be a great single player experience.
No.
(I'm not in the Beta, not because I can't but because it froze my computer when I tried to download it a few months ago...)
I'm now playing Dom3 MP but a game like FE which should be complex and intricate and all about feeling (stories, quests, music and sounds, tactical battles) I wouldn't.
I would! Not only do I like the game, but I could play with my kids. I would pay an extra 10$ if you would add a Kali character like in MOM who could raise dead units.
I vote yes, and like many of the others, I feel it'd be worth a lot more than a single dollar. I'm not too huge on playing random online matches, since I know I'd just get crushed by the optimized strategies the majority would utilize. But I do greatly enjoy playing CIV with my brother and a few friends. I contend that adding MP would greatly increase longevity and community interest. I also concur with those who point out that MP should include a full set of features. If I can't bring in my custom faction, custom leader, and custom set of heroes into a game with my brother, I'd be highly disappointed. Being able to play with "my kingdom" is half the fun of Elemental.
No multiplayer! I'm not in the beta, so I didn't vote, but no... just no.
Multiplayer is not for 4X games. Shooters and fast action-packed strategy games (like Company of Heroes) make a great multiplayer experience. But a 4X game takes days, even weeks to finish and sync-ing with your friends for a such a period of time is hard. Now I'm sure it can be done in such a way that it would be enjoyable, and many people would benefit from it, but for me personally, multiplayer in a 4X games a useless feature that would steal focus away from a better singleplayer experience.
What Stardock does best si a great singleplayer experience (GalCiv II). Even WoM, with all its flaws and bugs was a great fun to play. I still play GalCiv II and I don't know anyone else who plays it. Even the people I forced GalCiv II on, didn't like, didn't understand it, and gave up on it. Please don't steal focus from a great singleplayer experience! I would gladly pay an extra dollar for a singleplayer feature.
I would most likely not use it unless there is a PBEM. Still for $1? That's a no brainer for a yes.
I voted no. More content is better for me.
For only one dollar? Sure! But it has to be PBEM or Pitboss since that's the only way I would play multiplayer.
If not multiplayer then coop against the ai please! DO A POLL!
Funny the polls have gone up but its still around 43% for multi to 57% against.
I'll buy anything with the elemental logo on it ('one of' my first games I bought was ROTK for nintendo= $80 from Toys-R-Us, had to save for some time). I too believe multi-player with the huge modding capabilities the game'll offer will extent its play life. I normally prefer hot-seat with the occasional 4-5 player online game but with my love of really epically huge maps then a nice PBEM style does sound appealing. Wouldn't mind this being put on tha burner for a while till the main game is tightened-up but I would like to have multiplayer at some point.
No, I don't know any computer gamers locally. This game is so intricate that you would have to have a reliable computer partner for a long game.
I would pay 5 $ for Multiplayer and 5 $ for a german version.
yes for a dollar of course. even if i didn't like multiplayer i would pay a dollar for it simply because that's really cheap for a feature that may draw in more people and potential modding community. a 1 dollar investment would have a fast return in the community. you have to look at the big picture here.
If it's PBEM, then hell yeah.
It might be a system where you each take turns in logging in and taking your turn, based on past explanations of Elemental MP infrastructure. That could be quite an interesting way to play too!
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
