Multiplayer is the future

[Dionysus9]

Also, I will echo your sentiments that RTW is genius. In fact the whole TW line is genius.

But in terms of MP it is a mad genius-- a half-realized genius. A genius without direction. What irks me is that every release of TW has been only half-realized in terms of MP.

SP is great and it is absolute genius, but I don't play SP. So I can applaud your achievements but the undeveloped potential is lying there under the surface and we can all see it, but CA can't. Its just very frustrating for people (i.e. losers like me) whose free time is devoted to TW MP. Outside of work, family, and friends, MP Totalwar is my life. There I said it, I'm a loser.

*cries in the corner with all the other losers*

[Alrowan]

talk about a thread bowing out, as it stands, RTW is a fine game, we arent saying its anything less, all we are asking is that MP takes more consideration than just 2 hours before the game is released (mind the sarcasm)

Even if CA invested 10-20% more of the time they spent on MP, in improving MP, i know that most of the issues would be solved, a tweak to the interface here, changing a value there, and then we would have something that at least many of us would be more than happy with.

PS. logfiles are essentual for tourneys, please include them in the next patch

[FearZeus]

Wish I could bring myself round to play SP, but playing a computers AI does nothing for me, I will take everyones word about SP being great and appologize for not looking at it! But I have never played a game that involves AI.

[d6veteran]

To the CA developers, I can sympathize with the agony (and fortunately not relate) of working so hard on something and then have strangers rant and bitch up a storm and call names. I have a lot of respect for you guys and am a hug fan of TW. I've come to your defense before on this board specifically when the "monkey" reference was thrown out.

I apologize for that kind of treatment. Sincerely it sucks.

The SP game was genius. No argument there!

The MP game that was released was worse than most betas I've played. That isn't an excuse for some of the harsh criticism you've had to weather on the 'fan' boards, but it does at least give an explanation for the tempers and rants.

Pipe dreaming? Come one now! The things that have been asked for and even the idea I proposed isn't even in the same ball park as the ideas that bore fruit in the RTW single player! Am I too believe that the great minds behind the single player would write off pretty straightfoward fixes and ideas for the multiplayer as pipe dreams?

Bah! :D

I talk till the sun goes down and it probably won't change what CA wants or doesn't want to do with the multiplayer. But why can't we at least have a position on it?

Why can't you take a break from lapping up all the kudos for the single player and tell us what the hell happened to the multiplayer on release? I mean jeez, whether it is 1% or 50%, you put multiplayer in the game, added it as a feature on the box and what? What happened to it? Seriously.

Dionysus made a very valid point. I can attest to the number of people who refused to play MTW multiplayer due to all the headaches of logging on through GameSpy. I would say 50% of the people that casually tried out the multiplayer didn't get past the CD key or GameSpy profile issues. And I am certain that estimate is a conservative one. I worked in usability studies at MS and 2 other software companies and the MTW/GameSpy ui was highly confusing and botched.

Multiplayer is the future. Go out and find some gamers and ask them what they really want. Unless I live in some sort of bubble, over half the people you talk to are going to want a robust multiplayer experience.

Calling it pipe dreaming is a cop out. You guys have delivered a pipe dream and I bet you're working on a nother one right now in skunk works.

So tell us, what happened to the multiplayer? If you trully only think 1% cares, then give us the truth. The worst that can happen is a percentage of that 1% stops buying your games. Big deal.

[SouthwaterPanda]

Only a couple of responses, as this discussion is essentially pointless while I'm not in charge of CA...

>>Compared to TW, Stronghold is a pathetic excuse for a tactical game. I'm surprised you could even put it in the same class its so bad. I kid you not, I haven't put it into my computer since I bought it over 3 years ago. Really it was just Lemmings on crack with no tactical elements--just puzzle solving and fast clicking.

But to me, that's all the Warcraft games are. I don't get traditional RTSs at all. The fact that millions of people want to play it online, beautifully polished and easy to play though it may be, is completely baffling to me. But Stronghold? Stronghold has castles. Lots of castles. I love castles. I don't care if it's a pathetic excuse for a tactical game; it's got castles.

>>Because we are the players and we say so. That's about all we have that we can tell you. If you would share some of your figures or even your opinion maybe we would have something to work off--but you are asking us to persuade you without even knowing where you stand.

That 1% thing is a number. Why would it be industry gospel that's constantly slapped in your faces if companies hadn't tried and died to prove otherwise?

My personal opinion? I get through almost as many opinions as this board does. I can see sense in much that people say. I personally would like to provide a fantastic MP component, but on the other hand it would be very tempting to just ditch it. The figures that come to mind concerning MP are that it gets somewhere between 5% and 10% of the programming effort, 1% of the customers, and 50% of the abuse.

But ultimately, I'm not in charge, so your not knowing what I think doesn't matter.

[LittleGrizzly]

The figures that come to mind concerning MP are that it gets somewhere between 5% and 10% of the programming effort, 1% of the customers, and 50% of the abuse.

ok i understand the abuse isn't nice but put a positive spin on it. We love the game so much that we can get over passionate

anyway as an alternative to the abuse ill give you the positives (plus im much better at flattery than criticism)

many many hours of enjoyable online play that would not have been possible without you
a great community and great friends i would never have made without you
a constantly improving single player game
constantly better and better graphics
more and more variety of units and factions
more unique tactical units
i have heard a few say the basic mp of rome is much better than mtw
an extremely quick patch
posting here and listening to our opinions

although there are things i would like improved thanks for what has been given

[Dionysus9]

great points grizz :)

Gil,

lol, well thanks for your kind response-- I think you could have ripped me in a few places but chose not to. I was a bit harsh on Stronghold--if I hadn't bought STW the same day I probably would have played it quite a bit, and we wouldnt be having this conversation. Heh, at least your abuse ratio would only by 49% ;)

I agree about hte Warcraft series, which is why I am so passionate about TW. Nothing even comes close to the tactical genius that MTW:VI achieved--and it was disappointing for us to take several steps backwards in terms of army control (and thus tactical depth) in R:TW.

As for flawed industry paradigms, a course in business history would disabuse you of the notion that any paradigm is in place because it is correct. history is riddled with blue-chips that fell by the wayside (or had to radically adapt to survive) after a paradigm shifted from under them and left them in the dust. Everyone thinks its the gospel until the next sucessful business model comes along, then they drop it like a hot-potato. The paradigm is in place because it works, even if only marginally, and it is safe. Paradigms can be (and are) ignored by the bold, and as Virgil says--fortune favors the bold.

Actually your opinion is more important to me than most, as you have an ear to both our door and the door of the powers-that-be. but I appreciate and understand your masters will mark your words and pay them back to you threefold if you might say something that displeases them. I do not blame you for speaking within your bounds, and I think you've said enough--though if you are able to say more, please tell us what you, Gil, the person--not the employee--what you the person thinks.

I think we ultimately agree that the MP aspect of TW should either be given the attention it deserves or dropped completely. Personally it appears to me that this "half-way" approach is hurting the series and taking us nowhere.

I apologize for my emotion as this is an important topic to me. Multiplayer is the lifeblood of this game and the community. I've devoted the lions share of my freetime to it for the last 3 years, so it is a hard pill to swallow when someone tells me my $50 is not as important as the next guy's (let alone my opinion).

The only other issue that bothers me as much as this one is the fact that we never hear any "official" words of substance from CA. You'd think the head honcho would like to say a few words to us, once in a while. You throw us a bone now and then on your own time, but really, there should be someone official to say a few words in times of crisis or confusion. But perhaps a prophet such as myself can see that which cannot be seen, and read that which has not been written. . . .

In any case-- I think the solution is to make Total War: Multiplayer a standalone spinoff. You can feed us graphics updates when you release the SP front end expansions, and we'd be happy to finally have the support and attention that a full project gets. Maybe you could pitch that to the powers-that-be. I think we'd all pay another $50 or a highly moddable MP interface that was supported and covered several eras (Shogun, Medieval, Ancient, and throw in Civil War and you are set). Shoot--I think you'd have 3/4 of the wargamers and table-top games around the world returning their figurines and buying computers so they could play it. That would be a paradigm shift for their industry and possibly yours as well.

If you dont, someone will--it is just a matter of time now. You have showed the competition the way, if you don't stay the course and stake your territory--they will take it. I know this as surely as I know my own name-- I can feel it in my bones-- in my clicker-finger. Hundreds of us have been clammoring for it for years, and there are thousands more who do not speak up.

Since we are on a Socratic theme, let me ask you a few questions that reflect on my regard for single player games:

Would the game of chess still be played today if it was a single player game?

How many 100-year-old (or older) single player games can you name?

Who is your opponent in a single player game? Who is the winner? Who has bragging rights?

What is the maximum number of players in a single player game? multiplayer game?

How good can you get at a single player game? At what point does the challenge disappear? Same questions for multiplayer. . .

In a single player game, can you ever face an opponent who is smarter, more creative, or more ruthless than yourself? If so, wouldn't it be nice to buy him/her a beer after the game?



I wish we could all sit down and run through some tactics on the Total War field over beers. conversations that have taken years would take only hours in person, with the game and units in front of us.

Ahh well, maybe they will make you president someday-- we will go to bat for you, thats for sure. You are the only one at CA who cares a tinkers cuss for us hardcore losers.

[Papewaio]

What is happening in Korea and Taiwan which has a billion dollar online games? They have busted the 1% cap for sure.

Maybe a different version of MP needs to be made... one unit, multiple spawns, powerups, forges you can capture for armour, sword of merlin ... make it an FPS with 60 sprites. Then have the guys running around a tactical map with 20*6 guys if possible.

[d6veteran]

Maybe a different version of MP needs to be made... one unit, multiple spawns, powerups, forges you can capture for armour, sword of merlin ... make it an FPS with 60 sprites. Then have the guys running around a tactical map with 20*6 guys if possible.

LOL! Oh that is funny to imagine.

[Papewaio]

Yes it is... I have never played MP however.

But I would call this version that I suggested TW-lite.

[Oswald]

I second Bachus's post.

TW is the first online game that has me hooked.

30 years ago I began with little soldiers on a map, and spent days doing what MTW/STW does in 40 minutes, and with less arguments.

There are thousands, nay millions of us out there, and yes we want the arcade fun, and yes we want some measure of historical accuracy, and yes we want it to have complexity and character.

Rome is a good game, no question. But giving it a proper MP would make it a classic...

over to you guys at CA...

respectfully
Oswald

[ElmarkOFear]

But to me, that's all the Warcraft games are. I don't get traditional RTSs at all. The fact that millions of people want to play it online, beautifully polished and easy to play though it may be, is completely baffling to me.

It may be that millions of players want to play it BECAUSE it is beautifully polished and easy to play, patched regularly as problems are found and an enjoyable experience all around. It's simple to get online, patching is done automatically when you log onto the server, and games are easy to host. Its the experience, the socialization, that most people enjoy in online games. If RTW had focused on these things then it too could be the next Warcraft.

The only things which have been holding the TW series back from becoming a big online community are the same things which have made it such a great SP experience: TW's sense of historical perspective and its attempt at historical accuracy. This is what the SP players are looking for and how CA marketed the series. To great success. However, this focus is very time-consuming (researching battles, faction units, their strengths, their uses, their looks, etc . . .) and takes away from time spent on other parts of the games (like MP). It is a case of self-fulfilling prophesy: If you say; "The market for MP is so small as to be a waste of resources." then you will devote more time to other things and the MP market WILL continue to be small and never increase to a level of importance where more resources could be allocated to it, which would contribute to a greater return on investment.

I realized, with the release of RTW, (and its sole focus on SP, along with the increasing complexity of the campaign features and the time-consuming jump to a 3-D engine), CA had reached critical mass and could not/would not devote much time to MP. If this is not obvious to everyone, after seeing the state of the MP lobby, the connection problems, and the lack of many much-loved features (which the MP community has relied on for years), then I feel for you. You will continue to be dissappointed if you rely solely on MP as the aspect of the TW series you enjoy. With this realization, and being one of the MP-only crowd I decided to discontinue playing TW MP.

I have moved on to other MP games, which offer things such as: Good connection stability, an MP lobby which has all the features needed to enhance socializing and community building, an easy to use MP interface for hosting, lots of information on game settings, lots of options to play the game the way you like, a good balance of units, and an automatic patching system (Ex: WarHammer 40K, which uses the Gamespy server and shows that most of the problems and lack of features can be attributed to RTW and not Gamespy.)

It is good to see CA participating in this discussion, though too late for me. I know where Panda got the "develop a thicker skin" statement, and I stand by it. I had to develop a very thick skin indeed at the .com since the moderators and administrators there are blamed for all the problems associated with TW games, as if we are actually employees of CA and not volunteers. In truth, we are as in the dark as anyone on what CA is up to. No information on MP or anything in the game was ever offered to us. We knew/know as much as the regular patrons and nothing more.

I admin'd at the .com, in the hope I could help the MP community grow, by gathering a list of MP issues and showing CA in a timely fashion, what the game needs to grow a large MP community. RTW showed me that my time was wasted, and I resigned from the .com.

I took this (and still do take it), as a "slap in the face" since I was asked to start up the MP sections at the .com, because CA was interested in gathering ideas and improving the MP side of the game. Now I feel responsible for misleading others into believing this was true. I apoligize for this.

[WarPriest]

God Bless you Elmarko old friend.
As Far as my -2 Centsare concerned Same Old Sh!t different Title. I'll buy it just so we can drop togeather, like old times.

[ElmarkOFear]

Hi WarPriest! Long time old friend. Stop by the ugli.org site and say hello to the gang. :) We all are playing WarHammer 40K now. Obake has made an MP campaign, and we are all roleplaying. I, of course, am the orcs! :)

[andrewt]

Speaking about Blizzard, I heard from a post by one of their employees on the official boards that only 5-10% (I forgot which) bought Diablo2 for battle.net. You can play it on a LAN but I doubt that the total multiplayer component is much larger than the 5-10% of battle.net. Note that this is already Diablo2, easily in the top 10, maybe even top 5, most successful multiplayer games in PC history. Other Blizzard games have around the same online penetration.

Besides, succesful multiplayer games are mostly of the same genre, clickfest. Warcraft3 is mostly an exercise in clicking speed. There's actually a program out there that measures clicks/time and the faster clicker wins a huge majority of the games. I already feel that RTW, in the tactical battles, is somewhat dumbed down compared to MTW. To be successful in MP, it has to dumbed down further, something which I don't like.

[FearZeus]

funny aint it, If RTW came along before MTW we would all be amazed by the control system. I mean MTW controll system definitly makes RTW look the older game, yet the graphics tells the real story...

[LittleGrizzly]

ok my memory may be failing but STW and MI also had the same control system ?

[GilJaysmith]

It is good to see CA participating in this discussion, though too late for me. I know where Panda got the "develop a thicker skin" statement, and I stand by it. I had to develop a very thick skin indeed at the .com since the moderators and administrators there are blamed for all the problems associated with TW games, as if we are actually employees of CA and not volunteers. In truth, we are as in the dark as anyone on what CA is up to. No information on MP or anything in the game was ever offered to us. We knew/know as much as the regular patrons and nothing more.

Just to say that I didn't know that, and wasn't consciously quoting you... I've heard it said now and then when people argue that developers should be able to take criticism.

I'm personally sorry to read your experiences, though.

[Swoosh So]

I think one of the reasons most of the multiplayer community are upset is that shogun was actually a better mp experience than any of the CA games that followed it (and im just talking about the general foyer and other options even before you get into battle, layout etc). The minimum the community expected was to maintain that level quality in the mp experience, but to have features taken away seems baffling. My god even if you stuck in the old shogun or mtw foyer format back in it would be an IMPROVEMENT.

First time i logged into rome i was almost sick, fast moving video in the back ground where your trying to read text, half of what you type showing, no private message window, small text area, set denarii levels the list goes on and on. These features were in mtw and it was just surprising they werent in rome (the gem we all waited for). I personally have returned my copy of rometotalwar... a sad sad day, 4 years ive spent playing CA games online but they just get worse and worse with every release. No ones disputing its a good SP game (it is!) but to have a HOBBY of CA's totalwar games MP and to see them diminishing over time is a sad sad thing for us. How many players have left although loving the series due to these things hundreds? Jeez whole of rage clan left 10 players? 90% of fear clan 20 players? thats just two clans not to mention all the lone players who would have just left due to frustration.

I can understand its disheartening to read negative things in the forums about your game, but take a second and look at whos saying these things, most of us have over 1000 posts to our name in this forum alone! We all loved the series and had countless hours days months years playing your games online, but the fact remains that they have got worse over time, and i think that rome is the catalyst, its just a shadow of what it could have been with a LITTLE effort and i do mean a little, ie to leave the features already in, and add couple of nice features to the foyer sytem that was in place, just a few small things, dident need a whole makeover......

How can a player spend 2 years playing a game in that foyer? it would drive me nuts, its like having a great job in a flea infested office GAH!

Most of the people who have posted in ths topic have been here since the beginning and we have tried to keep the mp community going with our hands tied behind our backs, it gets harder and harder all the time with no support and eventually people just give up.

Ps: Im not having a stab at you giljay the number of posts beside your name shows the care and involvement you have in the community (the mod side if i am correct).

[Sp00n]

Nice post Elmo for what its worth I never blamed ya for anything m8 you had the same view as me on the game.

Its a shame they have made the game more like a standard RTS.

Swoosh is right they never managed to emulate Shogun online with the last 2 releases MTW was still good though and they didnt change the control system like they have now.Swoosh you forgot to mention the Euro clan members and the old Chain clan members who left also.

Im afraid to say Ive returned my copy of Rome to my local swap game shop yesterday and resigned up for Eve online a game that listens to its players.

I may return to Rome if they sort out the problems and thus ill pop in these forums and ill continue to play MTW every now and then, but after playing 60 or so games of Rome online I cant cope with that forum or the bugs and controls any more im bored.

Id like to thank all the poeple who know and put up with my occasional rants over the years must be nearly 5 by now for the many great times online.

MizuSp00n

[FearZeus]

Can't blame you for leaving m8! I'm sure a lot of us will miss you m8 ;) Swoosh is spot on! they have gone backwards in terms of control system and chat lobby, way too many bugs, but as gil pointed out in earlier threads, we are approx 1% of the total buyers of RTW so they will not suffer even if all of us took the game back. I will put my game aside and wait to see what they fix/change... If it's not enuff then I too will also wave goodbye, but in the mean time I will NOT be playing RTW SP or MP. COD, Warcraft 3, Dawn of war will be the challengers with dawn of war way ahead :)

Actually missing RTW is not all that bad with dawn of war around, highly recommended, I hope to see some of you guys there. Same name for me ;)

[SpencerH]

I'm glad I ran across this thread. Since becoming bored with CIV3, I've been convinced that purely MP games (without SP AI limitations) are the future of gaming. No AI can compete with the deviousness, inventiveness, and fun of playing against a human. I have no doubt that developing such games will be a risk, but a team that can design and code a game as complex as RTW could build an awesome game without AI.

[d6veteran]

No AI can compete with the deviousness, inventiveness, and fun of playing against a human. I have no doubt that developing such games will be a risk, but a team that can design and code a game as complex as RTW could build an awesome game without AI.

I think that is the best summary of what we are all trying say!

[soso]

Warning: this post is made by a consumer and is purely a personal comment. The Author assumes no affiliation with any organization, clan, business or other entity, save for being a part of the general Multi-Player community at large. Comments may offend some CA representatives or their wannabees. Read on at your own risk.

I have been a customer from the first release of the series and I too was looking for a similar experience that the two prior versions had offered (Shogun and Medieval). Unfortunately, this did not happen with Rome much to my chagrin, in fact, for me, this was totally unexpected. I usually like to nurture the hope that there is something better to be sought or learned from a bad experience. I had heard various new elements that were to be included in MP, new campaigns and other things that gave me butterflies in my stomach in anticipation.

Rome had been touted as the next great game in the Total War series. Well maybe I misunderstood what that meant so I looked up the word series to be certain and sure enough, it was as I thought: (from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary) Series, noun: a succession of volumes or issues published with related subjects or authors, similar format and price.

Rome is not in the same format, but it is the same PRICE! So okay there are many issues that need to be resolved, we have presented them and are continuing to do so, in fact I think the petition is up to around 400 names now over at the NET. However…

To add insult to injury, it is apparent CA will do nothing to alter the present state of affairs. What’s more, it is overwhelmingly apparent that the CA employees posting here have no authority to do anything about this situation, by their own admission. So why waste time and effort talking to the wall. CA and their staff would do well to at least be honest with their customers. Yet they have proven they use tactics and methods meant to deceive and mislead customers and what borders on false advertising in order to get sales. Good show chaps.

I’ll waste no more time on CA or their employees until such time as they change their policy and views. Similar to what Bachus said earlier, I have spent approximately $850 in total on the Total War series, buying for myself, family and friends so we can all play together and enjoy the online experience. If they want my business and that of my family and friends, they will have to earn it. CA has seen the last cent from me and those I brought into the series. Although Rome will not be traded in or thrown away (I am a collector of games), I will unload it from my computers, pack it away and set in on the shelf with all the other games I do not play anymore.

Instead, I will continue to play other true MP games and enjoy a pleasant online experience with friends and family, no frustrations or anxiety, and be saddened by the ultimate demise and death or the Total War MP aspect of the game. SP is okay the first couple of times, afterwards it is repetitive and boring, no matter how good it looks.

I join the thousands now playing Warhammer 40k: Dawn of War and soon Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle Earth and World of Warcraft. These companies, Relic, Blizzard, THQ and EA are focused solely on the MP community, where I am and want to be.

Like a friend of mine likes to say all the time:

Enough words lost.

Cheers CA and good luck with all your SP endeavors.

SoSo

[FearZeus]

Very well said indeed SoSo ;) i'll drink to that m8

[Angel of Deception]

Wow! One of my old accounts is still here! Neat-o!

Thanks Zeus. BTW are you buying?

[d6veteran]

SP is okay the first couple of times, afterwards it is repetitive and boring, no matter how good it looks.

I join the thousands now playing Warhammer 40k: Dawn of War and soon Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle Earth and World of Warcraft. These companies, Relic, Blizzard, THQ and EA are focused solely on the MP community, where I am and want to be.

I agree! As good as the sp game is ... after a couple campaigns it does start getting repetitive and boring, and that is when I start playing the online portion exclusively.

As for going to DoW or BfME ... the problem for me is that those games involve resource collection and building units real time. They aren't the tactical battle simulators I am looking to play. So besides the TW series, what other games provide a tactical simulator style of play online?

[ElmarkOFear]

The only game that even comes close to the TW series in tactical battles is the old out-dated Sid Meier's Gettysburg. It also had its limitations however. First: you could not purchase your armies, but only play historic or random battles online. Secondly: It was not a close combat type of game, since it was mostly cannons, guns and cavalry/with guns. Thirdly: The most you could play was a 2v2 without major lag.

The above game is what first attracted me to STW MP. It allowed you to purchase your army, it had close up combat, and you could play 4v4's without game-killing lag (Well for me as host that is).

There really are not any recent games similar to TW when it comes to realtime battles, which gave them a nice niche. However, with RTW they are closely approaching the mainstream and losing their uniqueness. It is the way of the business world in general and not of just CA/Activision.

GILJAY: Thank you for the comments. I do not have any bad feelings towards you guys. I think it is very nice for you to participate in these discussions and respect you very much for this. I am more angry at the major decision-makers who hide behind the actual hard-working CA employees (such as yourself, Ritchie and the programmers). They make business decisions without actually knowing and/or experiencing what made the initial games in the TW series so great. They are trained to measure progress, spending, and personnel issues, but have no real education in the customer relations side of the business. I know, since I have gathered quite a few degrees in my 42 years, and spent half my career as a mid-level manager and the other half as a skilled-trades person (Of which, I make considerably more money in the trades). I also know that you and the gang, would have wanted to make the game great for both the SP and the MP community, but had to give consideration to time, expense, and other matters, which these "business types" decided were to take priority.

It is a shame I live so far away from CA's offices, or I would drive by and take you guys out for a drink or two (on me.) You have given me 4 years of great entertainment and I have made many friends from playing your great games. If any of you ever decide to visit Kentucky for the Kentucky Derby, let me know, and I will put you up for the week. Might even fire up the still and show you what real Moonshine is like. :) My motto is: "If it has a label on it, it "ain't" worth drink'n!"

[Sp00n]

Ground Control 2 has no resource gathering and neither does Panzers, Panzers I particulary like, but only bother if you love WW" and Tanks.

Sp00n

Niether are like the Total War series but both are better than Rome online.

[Felix Iuvenis Invictus]

I think I've said this before regarding SP vs MP.

Some like play with themselves, and read magazines about it.

But others do the real thing. And once you have tasted it, you never want to go back.