What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!

HJ · #1 October 16th, 2003, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by st.patrik:

I understand that what you want is SP diplo. What I was saying is that SP diplo doesn't come close to MP diplo with actual people . If you want diplo, why not just play MP?

Strange question. I mean, why does anybody play SP in the first place? Personal preference, to put it broadly, and differential appeal and aVersion between the two modes of play, along with dozens of other (individual) reasons. Why would that be a thing to wonder about?

MStavros · #2 October 16th, 2003, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by st.patrik:

I understand that what you want is SP diplo. What I was saying is that SP diplo doesn't come close to MP diplo with actual people . If you want diplo, why not just play MP? I refer you (once again) to my earlier post:

You have no valid points. The majority here won't play MP. IW should give the majority the joy of SP diplomacy.
Yes I am sure that it will be hellish hard to script, but why not? Saying that play MP if you want diplomacy is foolish.
IMHO, a diplo system for SP would raise the overall quality of the game...greatly.
I am sure that lot of players will agree about this.

[ October 16, 2003, 18:28: Message edited by: MStavros ]

Particle · #3 October 16th, 2003, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MStavros:
a diplo system for SP would raise the overall quality of the game...greatly.
I am sure that lot of players will agree about this.

I agree.

apoger · #4 October 16th, 2003, 07:52 PM

Please stop this silly bickering about SP and MP dippy. You are acting like IW has announced they are making dippy in the first place, plus that they can only go one way.

I'd like to see some basic dippy/interaction options added to both MP and SP. A simple system should be a breeze considering the complexity of what they have already created. What we need to do is convince IW that the players really do want such functionality.

Endoperez · #5 October 16th, 2003, 08:05 PM

I think we cannot say what IW should do, at best we can tell what would sell their product most. I don't think they are very interested in getting money from DomII. Of course they would like to get some, but it is more important for them to have a game they enjoy playing. If others enjoy it it's just a plus.

Because of this, we have to let them think themselves what is good for the game. We can offer them ideas, yes, but they have to fit them to the Ascension Wars. Of course, some things simply make the game a lot better, like the command scripts, and are added like they are.
But we can only ask and hope that they do as we want, not say they should do that, or that their game would be better if they did this. How many games publishers ordered do you know that have been good?

Mortifer · #6 October 16th, 2003, 08:06 PM

Yeah, if IW will decide to add a system we can argue than.
This is totally pointless now.

Anyways, a good SP diplo sys. will surely enchant the game, it will be a big ++ and not a --.
Simple.

[ October 16, 2003, 19:07: Message edited by: Mortifer ]

st.patrik · #7 October 16th, 2003, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by HJ:

quote:
Originally posted by st.patrik:

I understand that what you want is SP diplo. What I was saying is that SP diplo doesn't come close to MP diplo with actual people . If you want diplo, why not just play MP?

Strange question. I mean, why does anybody play SP in the first place? Personal preference, to put it broadly, and differential appeal and aVersion between the two modes of play, along with dozens of other (individual) reasons. Why would that be a thing to wonder about?

Well honestly (although I suspect that some people here are not particularly interested in honest dialogue) I think that people are drawn to SP for certain reasons, and to MP for certain reasons. I just happen to think that one of the main reasons people are drawn to MP is the desire to have diplomacy - by which I mean strategic relations between nations involving sharing of information, reading of intentions, negotiating alliances, laying down disinformation, judging if/when to break faith and attack, etc. Therefore it seems strange to me that people who seem to have this desire would want to play SP, especially since SP AI cannot replicate these things. I don't question people desiring to play SP at all . I myself more often than not play SP - I am not a die-hard MP fan. There are times when it's more fun to just sit down and play against a few computer opponents.

However, what is lacking in this experience is real diplomacy. And I think the logical action to take in response to this lack (insofar as it is felt) is to play with other people, who you will be able to dialogue with. I think an action that makes less sense is to campaign for an AI diplomacy element, which cannot even approach what real diplomacy is like.

If it were possible, it would be great because you could game at your convenience, without the hassle of waiting for other players. etc. However, AI technology just isn't there yet. - It cannot take the place of human opponents when it comes to diplomacy.

Anyone is free to disagree with this, though I would ask that you at least keep your disagreement civil. However, I do think if you actually read what I said that it makes some sense. And just to re-iterate: I am not against SP [in fact I even argued FOR limited AI diplomacy earlier in this thread] - it is what I play most of the time; my only point is that if you want diplomacy the natural place to find it is MP.

[ October 16, 2003, 19:11: Message edited by: st.patrik ]