I have a friend who realli likes the look of FE: LH, but is turend off by the lack of multiplayer. He and me like playing games like Civ 5 togehter so its a huge turn-off not having any multiplayer.
Are there any known plans to add multiplayer in the future? And if not, how likely is it that it will be added at some point?
By pirating a game you are making use of something without paying for it, therefore stealing. And if you aren't prepared to pay for something legally, then you shouldn't be using it at all.
The argument that the pirate/thief wouldn't pay for the game anyway is specious. The pirate/thief's argument that he would buy the game if he liked it is also a lie. There is always an excuse why he won't pay for any particular game.
It's true if there are 10,000 potential pirates for a given game and pirating was somehow completely eliminated, you wouldn't instead have 10,000 additional sales. However, sales would increase. And for those who pirate but wouldn't buy anyway, it is still stealing. "But officer, sure I ran through that stop sign, but I wasn't going to stop anyway."
I am not defending piracy. It's lame. Most games are priced fairly and provide a lot of entertainment bang for your buck. I find the major cost of video games to be the time I waste playing them when I could be doing something productive.
I think it's important to quantify just how many sales 10,000 pirates turns into if piracy vanishes? IMHO, generously, maybe 500. Meanwhile your player-base essentially just got halved. You're going to lose a lot of sales because half of the people who would have been talking about your game instead never played it.
To my mind, piracy is something kids do. It's like sneaking into movie theaters; it's harmless and you grow out of it.
I hate this definition; it seems to suggest that anything that's free is stolen (air, for example. or the genes to Monsanto's corn.). I think a key element of theft is loss. And in the case of piracy it is particularly difficult to show that anything was lost.
Edit: also, thanks to coyote303 for the kind words (and the pun!)
Well, I'll toss another nut into the mix.
I play a pirated version. Kicker is I've also bought the game + expansion + DLC content because I truly do believe in making sure developers get their money for there hard work and effort. Reason: The pirated version allows me to bypass the crap known only as 'steam'.
Does that make me a thief for not playing with the right 'bits' ?
No, it doesn't suggest that at all. You're playing word games to avoid the point. Air isn't produced through the hard work and intellectual rigor of dozens of people. You are stealing their work and the product of their minds. It's theft, plain and simple, regardless of the fact that it is digital and that you don't steal something you can touch.
To me, that's not piracy. At a minimum, it's piracy that does not hurt the developer. I'm sure others would disagree.
To me, if you pay for the game, you have the right to play it however you want, as long as it does not impact others.
god i hate when people on these forums say this.
we dont want to play other MP games. we want to play FE:LH multiplayer. there is no other game like it
As can be said in response to many of your posts: Speak for yourself.
And Borg999 makes a great point (a point I've made myself before). While LH is a unique, wonderful game IMO, there are endless multiplayer options just in the 4x strategy world alone. Stardock has plenty on their plate, and MP doesn't appear to be part of it -- whether that's for the moment, a long while, or indefinitely. Complaining about it isn't doing you any good. Save your time and energy, and get your multiplayer fix elsewhere.
Of course, this isn't everyone. Others have made coherent points and sound arguments for multiplayer which don't revolve around self-entitlement issues.
lol?
Every game is completely dead except Civ V which is absolutely terrible
calling Sins a 4X is a very big leap. Rise of Nations felt a lot closer
I think the first and last multiplayer 4X worth playing was Civ IV. Given the state of the industry, it will probably remain that way for a long while until some RTS developer decides to branch out away from some hyperaggressive esports thing.
in frogboy's elemental july 2013 thread, he stated that tac battles can not be made to multiplayer without major costs in re-writing the entire tac battle system, which implies to me that it was an issue that was created during the creation/development of WOM when there was no one person that had control over the whole project.
harpo
and so ends this thread.
Age of Wonders 3 wiill have multiplayer.
It will be a better game.
One does not automatically equal the other. It depends on the player and what they want out of the game, as I said back in reply 42.
But I hope that it is a great multiplayer game and that those like yourself who are seeking a multiplayer experience enjoy themselves. Those seeking a singleplayer experience will also hopefully enjoy themselves in FE:LH or Age of Wonders 3 or both. Either way, hopefully everybody will have fun, as isn't that what gaming is all about?
Now can we all just agree to disagree and move on please? Thank you.
Let's wait and see how competent the AI will be, shall we?
Boy, are you wrong! LOL everybody is not demanding it. I'm certainly not and a lot of others are not. When GAL CIV II came out and didn't have MP we were elated and still elated it had not. Last I read Stardock sold 100,000 copies of it and without MP. Must be something said for that. No computer games should have MP really they just ruin games they don't add anything to them only a handful of players ever play MP anyways, polls have proven it.
To say Age of Wonders II is one of the best games is such a laugh. It falls into more of the line of the "worst" game of the fantasy series. You may like it because it has MP and coop but the other portion of the game the solo single player content is horrible because of MP. That's why I'm glad there is no MP in this game so far and the longer we go without it the BETTER.
What does that say about GalCiv 3 then?
"Q: Is there multiplayer?A: Yes, there is online and hotseat multiplayer. Stay tuned for details, but we can at least confirm that some form of asynchronous play will be included so you don't have to get your friends to commit to playing for several hours in one sitting to complete a game."
For the record, I don't care about multiplayer either, but Stardock must think it's worth it, or they wouldn't be adding it to GalCiv 3.
Interesting question. I suppose not, outside of technical legal issues I don't care about. It does make you obviously obsessive about Steam, but with a bit more credibility about it than most. I have to admire that, even if I disagree with you. Well done.
I'm concerned that inclusion of multiplayer might make stardock nerf lots of stuff that makes FE:LH fun for me for the sake of BALANCE!
Blizzard did it to world of warcraft... guess what? I don't have a subscription to their game anymore for years now :3. Especially after they removed every single funny thing that made the game fun just to make the pvp balanced and bland and boring.
I friggin miss my seal of command. I miss the days when priest used to be squishy instead of raid tanks they is now. Resilience is garbage.
Things have been said before that didn't happen: remember they said there would be MP included in Elemental too but none has been produced I'm happy to say. )
E:WoM did have MP. It was bad, based on what I've read, but it was there. As for GalCiv 3, Stardock is using Steamworks for the MP part, so it should work better.
However, if you won't believe, that there'll be MP in GalCiv 3, then fine. Just don't act all surprised once the game comes out.
There is NO MP in Elemental now......and that's the facts. If you can't accept that then there's no hope for you. I don't really care as long as there isn't any right now. I win you lose. LOL
I also could care less about Gal Civ III as we all know games only get worse as the series continues, look at Civ V and HOMM IV -VI......POC games. I wouldn't touch Gal Civ III as they'll add stuff to it I don't agree with or want so they lose money from lost sales. If they want to waste their time on MP for it I don't care I won't be buying it anyway so it don't affect me at all.
And? That doesn't change the fact, that E:WoM did have MP, which you denied.
Accept what?
If games in a series only get worse, then how can the fourth part of a series be better than the first part, let alone the third? I mean, you said yourself, that
Also, why are you supporting the making of sequels in the first place? If you really believe, what you stated, then you should be neither buying nor playing any sequels. That also counts for FE, which is a sequel/remake of E:WoM.
Sorry your dumb attempt at trolling me isn't going to work bucko!! LOL
Fact: NO MULTIPLAYER IN ELEMENTAL OR GAL CIV I or II. YaY lol you lose. LOL
So, you can't answer some simple questions, and instead, start to call names. I didn't expect anything less from you, willie. You haven't changed at all.
Lose what? Also, I already said in my first post, that I don't care about MP. I only play single-player. So, why should it matter to me, that those games don't have MP?
What is your problem? He only corrected you in that the original Elemental: War of Magic back in 2010 had a multiplayer mode, even if it was short-lived and did not work very well, and that Stardock is planning on giving GalCiv III a proper multiplayer mode.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
