View Full Version : Multiplayer - family members
wildespele
22-11-2006, 14:04
Hi all... rushed to the shop to get the game, it's great indeed. :hello:
I often play multiplayer games on local LAN with my partner/kids.
Therefor, I regret that we cannot do that with this game, it appears that the DVD has to stay inserted, and you have to play with different serials...
With Age of Empires e.g., this is no problem.
Is the only "legal" solution for this prob that I have to buy the game for each family member??? :sad:
grtz to ya all Annoholics
Sorry wildespele, but for playing in multiplayer mode one DVD is needed in each participating PC.
Broodrooster
22-11-2006, 20:12
According to all reports I've seen here, that is the case. It's not only the "legal" solution but probably the only functional solution also.
BTW, please note that "cracks" of various sorts are not allowed to be discussed here.
:huh:
indeed "NO CD CRACKS" are NOT, i repeat NOT the solution :rofl: :rofl: :wink:
z13l5ch31b3
24-11-2006, 19:32
Dissapointing is the fact that 1701A.D. should be a family game,... itīs not unusual this times that thereīs a network in the house :bday:
Pretty hard 4 families 2 buy two or 3 copies of the game 2 play 2gether
notice, maybe this post is a little bit ironic
Disappointing is the fact that 1701 A.D. should be a family game ; itīs not unusual these times that thereīs a network in the house.
Pretty hard 4 families 2 buy two or 3 copies of the game 2 play 2gether
notice, maybe this post is a little bit ironic
The ownership of even a single PC is not a universal characteristic of households.
It is hard to feel sorry for a family/household which can afford PCs for several members so as to form an "in-house" network when they claim hardship when required to purchase several copies of a game to play on a network. How does one or two extra copies of the game compare with the cost of all the hardware & software already sunk into the home network?
It is like a complaint that a family has to buy several spoons to share a pot of soup. They have the pot of soup and several bowls, but they have only one spoon. They curse the spoon maker for his added expense.
:hello:
____________________________
I see that this aspect is being flogged to death.
There are also the cases when gaming friends gather together in one room with cables rather than sitting at home using some sort of third-party system of connection.
How on earth is the publisher of the game supposed to be able to recognize and subsidise a "family" for home play as different from all the other possible same'o same'o but non-family situations?
We all love families. We don't love all the liars and cheats on the internet who can pretend to be families.
:nono:
wildespele
27-11-2006, 09:54
Dear all
first off all, I buy all may games and software legally.
Perhaps I used the word "legal" in a wrong way in this thread.
Just wanted to ask a question. The answer to my question was "yes, you have to buy a second dvd". Ok, so be it, no prob.
Case closed....
Toccatta
27-11-2006, 16:10
The ownership of even a single PC is not a universal characteristic of households.
It is like a complaint that a family has to buy several spoons to share a pot of soup. They have the pot of soup and several bowls, but they have only one spoon. They curse the spoon maker for his added expense.
Likewise, the ownership of a DVD player is not a universal characteristic of household entertainment systems.
An argument (a REASONABLE one even) could be made that this complaint is more like a person saying that just because there are three people in the family, it isn't reasonable to require them to buy three copies of The Matrix on DVD just so they can all sit together as a family and watch it.
Logically, if your friend down the street wants to watch it, and you want to watch it at the same time, then obviously there would need to be two copies, but by the same argument as above, if he wanted to come over to your house so you can both watch The Matrix, then there doesn't really need to be two copies of the DVD.
The idea that the server of a multiplayer game requires a disk but the clients don't is hardly a new or outlandish one. I've had several computer games that worked that way. While I also don't see why there's such a hardship to buy a second copy (I did!), I also don't see a need to ridicule someone because they would rather not.
As to how to manage it so that everybody on the internet doesn't play MP 1701 while Sunflowers only sells one copy to a poor fool that hosts everyone else's games... Make it so that only a game's host machine needs a DVD if it's in local area network mode and CD-key checking is disabled. If it's in internet mode (and the game DOES already make this distinction) then all machines need a DVD and a unique CD-key. Of course, that doesn't prevent four people from taking their machines to one person's house to play multiplayer... but then again, the difficulty and annoyance of doing so coupled with the inability to play solo at their own houses would be sufficient to ensure that each one had their own copy, so in effect, it would only be of benefit to a single family (which is all these people have really been asking for anyway).
... The idea that the server of a multiplayer game requires a disk but the clients don't is hardly a new or outlandish one. I've had several computer games that worked that way. While I also don't see why there's such a hardship to buy a second copy (I did!), I also don't see a need to ridicule someone because they would rather not.) ...
The thread was started by an individual who who wanted an answer - yes or no - to a technical question. That answer was given. On some boards, the thread would have been then locked in anticipation of useless arguments, but it was not. A couple of other posters found this thread to be a place to vent their displeasure over this requirement and used the fabulous "family" excuse. There are also other threads wherein the moderators have warned about the board's prohibition on discussion of "cracks" - which include the elimination of the requirement for disks to be mounted during play.
When these additional posters chose to comment, they did not just state that they chose not to buy additional copies of the game to meet the requirements of the manufacturer. They instead disparaged the idea that such a requirement should exist, and they used demeaning arguments.
It is perhaps only in your eyes that my reply with a simple illustration is "ridicule." If they could not understand the initial answer as clearly given, it would seem that they might need to have further explanation.
It also seems that you wish to seek out my posts to submit personal attacks. I don't know what your problem with me is. I do not follow you around on this or any other board to disparage your posts. If your goal is to drive me away from this board and this game - you are close to success.
"As you like it"
So I will close this thread ... now! :angel:
vBulletin v3.5.4, Copyright ©2000-2007, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.