The war of (single player) vs (Multiplayer game mode)

[Juaner]

The devs on Reddit and the official forums said that the game will not have multiplayer at launch but if a big group of fans in the community want a multiplayer game mode they will add it in the future. So the ones that want it (like me) keep the hope alive. I think there is no problem with a multiplayer game mode if it does not interference with the Single game mode (like SM5 that is horrible).
A good example of a city simulator with the 2 modes working fine is Open TDD, I hope that in the future Cities skylines have a multiplayer game mode similar to Open TDD, or in a same region there is space to build more than one city and you can trade things between cities (similar to SC5) or a CO-OP/ or Competition multiplayer game mode (similar to Open TDD) (where you can in the same region build your enterprise and compete with friends or people in have the best one)

I’m in the side that i will like in the future a Multiplayer game mode… i don’t see the harm of having the 2 games modes in the same game. The solo players can only play the single game mode and the ones that like playing with friends have the multiplayer option. BUT i also think that is better at this moment of the development of the game that they focus on the Single Player mode until it is perfect before they add the multiplayer mode (cause for making so many things at the same time can occur the disaster of SC5)

So let’s wait a little and make force that the devs make a multiplayer game mode in the future :)

And the ones that say that a city simulator does not work with multiplayer game modes (please don’t be a group of haters) one game mode doesn’t have to interference with the other. I invite you guys to play the multiplayer game mode of open TDD (is a free game)

[CursedPanther]

Originally posted by OtterBon:

MP doesnt belong in this genre end of ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ discussion. shut the ♥♥♥♥ up about it

As rude as this statement may sound, I actually have to agree with him.

City builders have a tendency to achieve everything on their own and in their own ways. It gives us the actual sense of accomplishment.

[Juaner]

as i said (dont be a group of haters) one mode dosent fight with the other mode... just read it complete.

[CursedPanther]

Originally posted by Juaner:

as i said (dont be a group of haters) one mode dosent fight with the other mode... just read it complete.

What's the point of having a multiplayer mode if only 1 outta 10 of players is willing to use it(legitimately and not screwing around that is)?

Even if the synchronization in SC2013 did work back then, your city was only one griefer or abandoner away from complete ruin. We already saw that many multiplayer cities being abandoned just a few months after release, primarily due to SC2013 being a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ game in the first place, but also because one of the participants had left for good or intentionally griefing the others. My friend once wanted to switch his sector to crime based for the fun of it. At the end it turned out that criminals had completely overrun the policing facilities on my side and hundreds of them were running rampant in my streets and I was forced to abandon my already well built city. I was only able to hold back later and not beat his ass up for he's a friend in real life.

Lesson learnt? Don't ever ever put a multiplayer mode in a city building game. It'll end up bad one way or another eventually.

[Brent]

I don't see the problem with having multiplayer mode. If you guys don't want to play it, you don't have to. I think it would be fun building a city with a friend. For example, he would have his 25 squares and I would have my 25 squares and we could visit each others cities and check them out.

Are you saying mayors in real life our isolated from their neighboring city and that they shouldn't work together.

It seems like many of you are thinking the only way to implement multiplayer is the way sim city 2013 did it.

There is many ways to implement it and the way I imagine it is NOT a region play like SimCity, but rather a coop sort of mode where we each have our own 25 squares and can benefit from a friendssurplus in workers or industrial products or something a long those lines. But really, I think the thing people want most from multiplayer is just being able to be able to visit their friends city and thats all. Most people probably could care less about sharing resources or anything of that nature.

The multiplayer aspect would be a seperate mode entirely and if you choose not to play it, you wouldn't have too.

[Juaner]

Originally posted by CursedPanther:

Originally posted by Juaner:

as i said (dont be a group of haters) one mode dosent fight with the other mode... just read it complete.

What's the point of having a multiplayer mode if only 1 outta 10 of players is willing to use it(legitimately and not screwing around that is)?

Even if the synchronization in SC2013 did work back then, your city was only one griefer or abandoner away from complete ruin. We already saw that many multiplayer cities being abandoned just a few months after release, primarily due to SC2013 being a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ game in the first place, but also because one of the participants had left for good or intentionally griefing the others. My friend once wanted to switch his sector to crime based for the fun of it. At the end it turned out that criminals had completely overrun the policing facilities on my side and hundreds of them were running rampant in my streets and I was forced to abandon my already well built city. I was only able to hold back later and not beat his ass up for he's a friend in real life.

Lesson learnt? Don't ever ever put a multiplayer mode in a city building game. It'll end up bad one way or another eventually.

well, that is not the leason.. the leason is modify the multiplayer game mode... In TDD you can make that the multiplayer seasion is only played by friends or people in the community with a high trust rank. so wel can apply that ideas and make that only the kind of players you want in ur multiplayer seasions are the one that can play with you, so u know that those kind of porblems will not occur. (the idea is to improve and be creative) make a new way of introducing a multiplayer mode in a city simultor game. there always new ideas that can make it better.

Originally posted by brent:

I don't see the problem with having multiplayer mode. If you guys don't want to play it, you don't have to. I think it would be fun building a city with a friend. For example, he would have his 25 squares and I would have my 25 squares and we could visit each others cities and check them out.

Are you saying mayors in real life our isolated from their neighboring city and that they shouldn't work together.

It seems like many of you are thinking the only way to implement multiplayer is the way sim city 2013 did it.

There is many ways to implement it and the way I imagine it is NOT a region play like SimCity, but rather a coop sort of mode where we each have our own 25 squares and can benefit from a friendssurplus in workers or industrial products or something a long those lines. But really, I think the thing people want most from multiplayer is just being able to be able to visit their friends city and thats all. Most people probably could care less about sharing resources or anything of that nature.

The multiplayer aspect would be a seperate mode entirely and if you choose not to play it, you wouldn't have too.

yeah someone that get it!

multiplayer mode does not have to be like SM5 we can be creative and think a new way of doing it. meaby only conectiong citis trade via internet and no more. or a co-op experience or the openTDD kind of way. just imagien new ways of a multiplayer game mode.

[RandomDude]

Honestly i think Multipayer concept in Simcity13 is surprisingly good. But huge amount of servers problem and always-online DRM ruined that game. If Cities:skylines doesn't have any server issue, its will interesting to try.

[CursedPanther]

Originally posted by brent:

It seems like many of you are thinking the only way to implement multiplayer is the way sim city 2013 did it.

There is many ways to implement it and the way I imagine it is NOT a region play like SimCity, but rather a coop sort of mode where we each have our own 25 squares and can benefit from a friendssurplus in workers or industrial products or something a long those lines.

What you've said is exactly what Maxis has envisioned and attempted to do in SC2013, except they never could get rid of the synchronization issue at the end.

Players take up different building areas within a region. Public services and resources are meant to be able to be shared and workers can commute between cities too. Just that none of those actually work. Seriously have you played SC2013 before at all?

Originally posted by brent:

But really, I think the thing people want most from multiplayer is just being able to be able to visit their friends city and thats all. Most people probably could care less about sharing resources or anything of that nature.

This is what I've been saying all along. City builders don't want no backseat mayors second guessing their designs most of the time. When someone wants help with something he/she will naturally go to the forum and start a discussion. No multiplayer needed ever.

Originally posted by brent:

The multiplayer aspect would be a seperate mode entirely and if you choose not to play it, you wouldn't have too.

Nothing more than a matter of development cost really. It's simple. No one with the right mind will spend money to develop parts of a game that the target audiences are known to have minimal interests in. If you believe otherwise, be vocal about the missing features you think are necessary and hope that the developers will pick it up one day.

[Borscht!]

There is no such war.
Multiplayer has already lost, e.g. Simcity 2013.

[Bob]

I fail to see what MP would add to the game. Being interrupted by a jabbering sociopath while concentrating on important city planning sounds incredible annoying.

[JOHNNY]

what can multiplayer benifit be?

[OWL]

Originally posted by CursedPanther:

Originally posted by OtterBon:

MP doesnt belong in this genre end of ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ discussion. shut the ♥♥♥♥ up about it

As rude as this statement may sound, I actually have to agree with him.

City builders have a tendency to achieve everything on their own and in their own ways. It gives us the actual sense of accomplishment.

This (the nice version)

[matthew]

but also, wouldn't the size of the cities have to be reduced back to 2x2km? I expect the reason for the small land size in SC 2013 is because of having to handle so many cities at once, then the only way to achieve that is to make land size small. the same will happen here. small land size. then people will complain, I also don't think MP will work, as the game will make the exact same mistakes as SC 2013.

[Knub]

Anybody who says multiplayer doesn't benefit these type of games never played on a Open Transport Tycoon Deluxe (OTTD) goal server. You had a normal map and had to claim a city. Then the city would demand different goods (depending on size) and you would have to grow it. 3 hours game time, player with the largest city wins. It was really fun because it was so different to the single player experience.

C:SL could have something similar. Or just copy what SC2013 did (it was a great idea on paper just poorly executed). Or just copy what Cities in Motion 2 did.

One last thing: If you don't want multiplayer, don't play it. It is that simple.

[KenseiOmega]

I can't remember a city building game where multiplayer has worked out. I'm not outright against it but it's not something I want attention or resources devoted to until the game is released and well out the gate. I want the Skylines team to have a job for the forseeable future. But I'd prefer that work going into things like a day/night cycle, transportation options, etc. Again, not against muliplayer completely but I don't need to see it for a good long while.

[Borscht!]

Originally posted by Knub23:

Anybody who says multiplayer doesn't benefit these type of games never played on a Open Transport Tycoon Deluxe (OTTD) goal server. You had a normal map and had to claim a city. Then the city would demand different goods (depending on size) and you would have to grow it. 3 hours game time, player with the largest city wins. It was really fun because it was so different to the single player experience.

C:SL could have something similar. Or just copy what SC2013 did (it was a great idea on paper just poorly executed). Or just copy what Cities in Motion 2 did.

One last thing: If you don't want multiplayer, don't play it. It is that simple.

We want developers to spend more time on more important and fun features.
"Build your city faster than friend" mode is just not worth the time and dev-resources at the moment.