Search

Forum Home | Login

Poll Results: Would you recommend GalCiv II?

Frogboy

Join Date 03/2001

+2422

CEO - The Chief Executive Officer of Stardock

Click Master - Received 10,000 clicks from shared links to my posts

Popular Poster - Received 5,000 clicks from shared links to a single post

Center of Attention - Received referrals from 1,000 websites, for single post

Precious - Received 1,000 Total Karma

Experienced Poster - Created 500 Posts

Super Active Commenter - Replied over 1,000 times

Mentor - Gave 100 Karma

Poll Results: Would you recommend GalCiv II?

And the next poll

The ultimate verdict on a game is when someone is willing to recommend the game to others. We took a poll to see how many people here would recommend the game to other people. Over 1,500 people responded and over 96% of people said yes. I have to admit, I was surprised (and happy) about the result. Sometimes you read the forums and it sounds like a walking disaster zone in there of people who are mad or wish it was more like some other game or whatever. For those 4% that aren't satisfied, hopefully 1.1 and future updates will win them over.

Our next poll will ask, would you purchase a $20 multiplayer only expansion pack. Since development resources are finite, we have to decide whether it makes sense to put them on a future expansion pack that is mainly about multiplayer or mainly about adding other features and content to the game.

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

Personally I don't care if you were to give it away free. I don't play multiplayer games. I don't really know why, I just don't enjoy them.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Please DON'T include SP content with a multiplayer expansion (unless they suck of course). I don't want to waste my money on MP to get good SP features.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Why not fix the current one first, I still have yet to get through a complete game without a crash. Rebooting my machine takes too long so I end up playing something that works.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I would think a better poll would be: -

If we add Multiplayer to the game and have to spend more time sorting that out than expanding the original idea for the game i.e SINGLE PLAYER how many people are we going to #'%$ off, and how many of those will take their money elsewhere where the developers dont stick it up the rear ends of those who purchased this game because it was a single player and we knew the support for these games is better than an all-consuming multiplayer game.??

Answers on a post card please

BTW am i the ONLY member here to feel a bit annoyed about the entire topic of multiplayer and GCII? I know i may get 'flamed' for saying this but for those of you who are whining about a MP add-on i have a question... Did you buy this Single Player game (knowing it was this before you purchased it) just to sit up and start moaning that it did not have a MP part to it??
It just beggars belief why Brad and the crew are even contemplating a MP add-on in the first place. If people like the SP version they purchased and think it would be good for a MP version too, then add it to the wish list for GCIII surely! Dont jump around stomping your feet for it to be added to GCII

Hear, hear!!!

Successfully updated karma reason!

Sorry about the double post, but I got an application error from the forum server.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Nooooooooooo!!!!

*dives in front of frogboy's keyboard - saving the SP fans from multiplayer GC2 at the cost of a serious poke to the ribs*

Successfully updated karma reason!

Yeah, I'm not suprised by the poll. Don't gauge user satisfaction by the forum. The forum will always be skewed towards the complainers and people who have technical difficulties. A game's forum has little to nothing to do with my decision to purchase a game, because I'm aware of the bias.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I've got to say I'm in two minds over it. It's been at the back of my mind since it first came up pre-beta and I still haven't decided!

I think I might dabble with a PBEM mode but I can't see myself ever sitting down for hours to play a 'real-time' online game and dont think I will get much use out of a hotseat mode either, being able to see the other players moves takes the edge off things. Whatever the plan is it has to allow me to play over time easily and reliably.

Would I shell out for a pure-MP expansion....out of fanboy loyalty I think I would, but as a regular punter no. Voting no, I would buy an expansion that adds at least soething new to the core game as well as multiplayer but not solely for MP.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I voted no. I have no interest whatsoever in playing multiplayer games. Even when multiplayer is built into a game I do not use it.

I enjoy the metaverse though and have even back to GalCiv 1.

Successfully updated karma reason!

For starts I doubt people will fork over $20 just to enable MP in Gal Civ 2. You need to add much more content to expansion pack to make it worth the money.

Successfully updated karma reason!

i have other games for multiplayer

Successfully updated karma reason!

Well, I've been on record on this subject before, but I'm extremely happy to hear the topic coming up again - and so soon! I would gladly pay $20 for an MP expansion, and I've got another two or three friends (minimum) that would buy it in a heartbeat as well.

I avoided GC1 because of the lack of MP. I very nearly avoided GC2 for the same reason. My friends and I are supremely disappointed that we cannot match wits against each other, in a game that appears to be begging for that sort of capability. To all of the people that are referring to the 'vocal minority' of people that want MP... yes, we are a vocal minority, but I think that the reason that MP fans aren't more vocal in forums is because they're too busy playing games with their friends to bother posting. (Cursed work - I could be gaming right now.)

I'm sure the poll that comes out will impact the devs decision (and will tell the tale of what the majority of the fans think), and I understand the arguments of the fans of the SP experience. But in my opinion, nothing beats actual social interaction and human opposition. Who needs "AI", as in "artificial intelligence", when you can have "AI" - as in "Actual Intelligence"?

I'll be casting my vote in favor of an MP expansion - and the sooner the better! Now, to convince my friends to get off their butts and vote as well...

Successfully updated karma reason!

Leave the MP for GCIII so those of us who only want a single player game dont have to buy it. Dont penalise those of us who purchased this SINGLE PLAYER game in good faith!

This is madness. Since when does a multiplayer expansion prevent someone from playing single player? This is stupid beyond measure. Come on, how many new "features" for single player are really going to be THAT interesting?

In the end, you're playing against a machine that doesn't care if it wins or loses.

Single player is nice, but why be so militant against multiplayer?

Would I but a multiplayer expansion? Yes. Another singel player expansion? No. Why would I? I already have the single player game.

Successfully updated karma reason!

You expected a poll about a game to be objective based on responses from a forum about that game?!?!?
I mean seriously how can you not see the problem with that??

Successfully updated karma reason!

his is madness. Since when does a multiplayer expansion prevent someone from playing single player?

Prevent? No. Fundamentally alter? Absolutely. A game designed for multiplayer must be balanced for multiplayer, features that will disbalance the multiplayer experience must be removed. Resources that could be put towards AI or other single player features must be diverted to tackle the multitude of new issues that multiplayer brings to the table. In short, multiplayer exists at the expense of the single player experience, always. A game with both can be fine, sure, but as an SP only gamer I'm always paying for half a game I'm not using. I'm always looking at a game that could be a better SP experience if the MP game I'm not using wasn't part of the decision making process for changes to the game, and wasn't using up programming time and the like.

You people have your games. Hell, you've got basically every strategy game of the last ten years. Stop trying to fuck with the one truly great SP strategy title to come along in ages.

Successfully updated karma reason!

You expected a poll about a game to be objective based on responses from a forum about that game?!?!?
I mean seriously how can you not see the problem with that??

They are asking their customers who have bought the game if they will buy a multi-player expansion to supplement their purchase. GC2 owners are the only demographic that matters as we are the only ones who will buy the expansion pack. If there is no interest from current game owners then any MP expansion will almost certainly lose money.

You could also consider, if the poll had indicated a higher number of dissatisfied customers then it would suggest that the single player game needs more drastic attention before considering multiplayer. There is no such thing a truly objective poll anyway, sooner or later you have to allow for some bias in the results. This poll suggests that the games core audience are happy, probably not as happy as the raw numbers suggest but still quite happy.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I would also agree that adding multiplayer as well as other features for $20 would be good, but $20 solely for multiplayer doesn't seem as attractive.

Successfully updated karma reason!

If the devs really take our opinions into consideration.. I voted No for multiplayer. The game is still evolving with the current patch updates... multiplayer on a turn base level will create a whole NEW set of bugs that we don't need... I'd rather you guys put a whole lot more new content such as more Minor Races popping up and actually expanding their empire and causing havoc instead of just sitting pretty on their homeworlds until they get pounced on. 2nd, revamp the combat system (ground and space). If you still want to keep the "click one button" battle scene and hope the odds are in your favor, at least redo the animation with a couple of different win/lose scenarios were it actually shows somekind of animated movie. Example, if the odds are totally against you when invading a planet, show an animated ground combat movie scene like in Starcraft where a marine is blasting zergs for his life but gets killed. As for space combat, you are half way there with the animated scene, just spice it up a little more. Or even similar to the animated movies such as building your first medium hull ship, landing on your first planet, etc etc. That's about it

Successfully updated karma reason!

You people have your games. Hell, you've got basically every strategy game of the last ten years. Stop trying to *%&$ with the one truly great SP strategy title to come along in ages.

Agreed. I'm a SP gamer through and through, I have no need for MP, and if I had any, I'd already play different games than GalCiv2 in the first place. Even if you're this rare breed of TBS player that likes MP, you have Civ 4, which is a great MP experience for you guys.

Sure, in a perfect world both sides sides would have what they want, but MP would really come at the expense of SP, especially at this stage. It would really tax Stardock, and it will only cause even more of an uproar, since people will find different things to complain about. It will frustrate Brad and all the guys even more than the situation now.

Unlike Nike commercials, I say: just DON'T do it.

Successfully updated karma reason!

This possably has been said before.

I would not hesitate in recomending GC2 to my friends (I already have) because it is a great game.

As for paying for a MP addon as a Yes/No vote I would have to say No. It is not because I doubt the quality of the addon, but GC I can play at my pace. My pace is not necessarilly the same as someone elses so for the MP to stay GC2 in it's style it could be tricky.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I'd love a MP variant. I have quite few friends that play turn based hot-seat games and would love to see that in a MP expansion. Also since Egosoft has become one with the darkside of the Starforce I am in the new market for an Elite style (X XBTF X2 X3) space sim. If you guys port your existing world to that venue I'd be there in a heartbeat as well.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Now there's a thought! GC universe + Elite-style adventure!

You're right JokitoRoyo, there hasn't been a good Elite style game for ages.

Possible niche in the market there Stardock? *nudge nudge* *wink wink*

Successfully updated karma reason!

You people have your games. Hell, you've got basically every strategy game of the last ten years. Stop trying to $%#& with the one truly great SP strategy title to come along in ages.

First of all, be civil.

Secondly, what's with this "you people have your games?" One way or the other, we're all gamers here. You say that MP fans have basically every strategy game of the last ten years. But myself and the other multiplayer fans say that there hasn't been a game that has come along in that time that has been as good as this one - and if we can get it in MP, then we absolutely would support that!

We're not trying to... ahem... 'mess' with GC2. But myself, my friends, and all the other MP fans out there are certainly hoping to be able to enjoy it with each other. There's no reason that it can't be a great SP *and* MP title.

And geez... at some point, people need to realize that the point of a forum is to express one's opinion. There's no right or wrong - just opinion 1 and opinion 2. There's no need to get vulgar and inflammatory about it.

Successfully updated karma reason!

There's no reason that it can't be a great SP *and* MP title.

If it's a great MP title, it won't be as great of an SP title as it could be. I just explained this. hell Brad explained it in several journal entries. This is easy: a finite number of resources can be divided between SP and MP. More MP focus means less SP focus. MP means rebalancing the game, MP means that new features have to be perfectly balanced to ensure no unfair advantages in an MP setting. Everything gets filtered through the MP lens, if MP is added, and that affects design in very significant ways. The vocal MP minority has succeeded to a stunning degree in imposing MP based design decisions on nearly every strategy title on the market,. You can afford leave this one alone.

Successfully updated karma reason!

If the patch finally fixes the race bonuses, I'd probably move out of that 4%.

In the meantime, I wouldn't download a multiplayer patch, much less pay for one. Yeah, I'm not a majority there, but I've never been into it.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.

There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting and posting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!

Sign in or Create Account

View all recent posts

Mark all posts as read Delete cookies created by the forum Return to Top

Stardock Forums v Server Load Time: Page Render Time:

About us | Contacts | Privacy Statement | Register

©1995-2026 Stardock Entertainment. Galactic Civilizations is a registered trademark of Stardock Entertainment. Steam and the Steam logo are trademarks and/or registered trademarks of Valve Corporation in the U.S. and/or other countries. Bank Gothic is a trademark of MyFonts and may be registered in certain jurisdictions. All rights reserved.