I would pay a $10 for a DLC that had flying units. I would not pay $1 for mulltiplayer.

Honestly I bought Elemental because I liked what I saw from the gameplay and it was supposed to have multiplayer.  I love coop games with friends.  I play Civ5 all the time with friends but I only play it when I have someone to play with.  The same was true about Elemental.  I quickly get bored playing alone but can sit all day playing a coop game.  My friends and I honestly don't plan to really bother with this game after our experience with the first iteration until we see a polished game.  The addition of a full multiplayer instead of the chopped down version from the previous game will play a big part in our purchase.  Honestly I understood multiplayer was going to be part of the release when it was first announced.  The only reason I keep checking back here was to see the game progress and I had my fingers crossed for a good game to play with my friends.  Multiplayer not being added at all is news to me and incredibly disappointing. 

Hell yes that would be worth it, once FE finally gets playable without latter game crashing.

I play Civilization V exclusively using the Giant Multiplayer Robot these days, and it works brilliant.

So, I voted yes, but I really hope the game will have asynchronous turns, with some sort of notification system.

(Either that, or you could ask Giant Multiplayer Robot to support Elemental in addition to Civilization V perhaps?)

I would hope that if Elemental games come to Steam in some form, they don't also become Steam required, even if they do have multiplayer.  However Brad, what was that about the notify and play infrastructure that was already put in place for Elemental multiplayer?  Couldn't that be used instead of Steam for the approximately 25% of players who don't want to use Steam?

As long as 'notify and play' means entering your cd code and BRIEFLY connecting to a server to validate before NEVER having to connect to them again...EVEN if you reinstall the game at a later date.

If it includes installing Steam, I'm not interested.

By notify and play I mean you have your turn, then it notifies the next human player to have their turn, so you don't all have to be on at the same time.  I was not referring to DRM.

I disagree, mostly because my back makes me only really able to enjoy turn based games.
I do think TBS games are better suited for casual multiplayerneering, where the players involved sit in the same room, though, but can help me relax.

I am happy they made this poll, and atleast researched the subject, all I can ask for

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

Not only children
Cripples too!

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

Multiplayer means coop too?
Thats what id use it for anyways.

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

I speak for myself for the 'no' I voted on, but I imagine a great many others share this viewpoint:

It's not the multiplayer specifically; it's the fact that Stardock would have to devote X time to the design of multiplayer, whereas I'd rather they spend that X time into making FE the best single player 5x game to ever hit the market.

For me, that 'no' vote is an easy one, because I have almost never played multiplayer in a 4x game. The few times I've tried it, it was a really boring experiance...always waiting for your opponents to make there moves.

So, to conclude, a function that I never use OR even more depth to and already great game....I choose the later. 

"You seem to confuse "have no friends" with "know better then to play online with strangers and have no friends that play Elemental Fallen Enchantress who would like to play it in multiplayer while having compatible schedules".

No, you seem to confuse "Would you pay $1 to have multiplayer", which every person on earth who play MP would of course say a resounding "Yes",  to "I'm voting no to keep MP out because I have no friends to play with and am affraid to play with strangers".

 

I wonder how useful it is to ask people who play a single player game if they would want to pay for multiplayer game functionality.  It is akin to asking English speakers if they would pay extra to have the game in Russian.  The current game isn't in Russian, so, if you are playing it now, you are happy with (or adapted to) the game as it is.  Of course, if you don't speak English, then you won't buy the game.  Same goes for me in multiplayer.  If it's not multiplayer CoOp supported, then I don't buy it.

And yes, I get it, that person who is translating it into Russian could be the world's best English game designer, but I doubt it.  If they added a multiplayer coop to the game, it wouldn't be catastrophically hard, it is a turn based game, after all.  With that addition, they would broaden the user base.  The content in the game that is already created could be shared with both.  Two games / user bases for the the price of 1.2.  Much like translating World of Warcraft into Spanish added many players to the game.  Would English players pay a dollar extra for Spanish support?  Nope.  But Spanish players would pay $15/month for the feature.

Sadly, I was tricked with Elemental that they would provide multiplayer.  They sort-of provided that, much later, with crippled functionality.  Not sure still why they chose not to have tactical battles in MP --  That is why I came back to the forums to see if the current (or next) game was going to have multiplayer coop support.  Guess it isn't.  At least they aren't claiming they will.  So, +1 for honesty.  -1 from the player base.  Well, minus me and my friends that play multiplayer coop.