View Full Version : Email Campaign to major Gaming Mags.
We need to raise awareness of the lack of support from CA for RTW. Please join me in writing an email expressing your dissappointment and disatisfaction.
This is the only way we are going to be able to make sure our concerns are aired.
Computer Games Magazine:
Editor in Chief
Steve Bauman
sbauman@cgonline.com
Computer Gaming World
cgwletters@ziffdavis.com
Benny Moore
03-31-2005, 18:32
Count me in.
Note, however, that we need some way of grouping our messages. Combining them into one is a bad idea, since that will only require one quick click to remove, but a bunch of scattered e-mails isn't very coherent.
Perhaps we should have a petition, asking the magazines to include an article on the state of things with Creative Assembly and Rome: Total War. The problem with this is that petitions simply don't work, and we could only come up with a few hundred signatures anyway. In fact, I've noticed in such matters that even when there are a few hundred people who complain, only a few dozen actually care enough to even sign something.
Marcus Maxentius
03-31-2005, 20:25
I think that getting an opinion article written in Computer Games Magazine would work. But it shouldn't focus too much on what the problems are with the game, but CA's lack of good customer service. And that should tie in to a larger story about other companies in the gaming industry. It'd be great to link what's going on with RTW to a bigger trend.
Marcus Maxentius
03-31-2005, 20:28
Getting a gamespy opinion article is a good idea too. That would mean something since Fargo, one of thier editors, is a TW nut.
When reviewing of game patching policies becomes a standard in game magazines, it would be the day when developers and publishers would start caring more for bugs.
I mean really, dynamics of gaming industry in last 5-6 years is so great that games have more and more bugs then ever at realse. Now, out-of-box rewiew is not enough to get proper opinion of the game. Long term support plays important role too. Bad long-tem support gives bad game.
It pretty much assumed that games will be buggy at realse, only customers don't know how long will game be supported.
I mean we have games that have up to 2 month patch
support, games with showstoper bugs that not get fixed several months after relase, bugs that break heaviliy advetized features of the game, patches that introduce new bugs which never get fixed, etc...
It's a whole jungle out there.
Kekvit Irae
03-31-2005, 23:26
Oftentimes it is the publisher, not the developer, who decides when to release a patch, or when to release a ship date.
More often than not, the publisher and the developer have completely opposite ideas of when to ship or when to patch. Case in point: Ultima IX was a total bug fest when it first came out, but it was not Origin's fault. They wanted to delay shipping until the kinks were worked out. EA, on the other hand, wanted to ship for the holiday season, and thus the developer could do nothing but watch an unfinished product ship too early.
Please give CA the benefit of the doubt. I support awareness, but you need to also focus on Activision, not just CA, for the problems. Activision, after all, is pulling the strings of the CA puppet.
Well both publishers and developers have share of responsability.
Publishers want to relase game as soon as possible and reduce expenses after post-relase.
Developers want to get their next project going so they could earn more money.
It's all about money.
Oftentimes it is the publisher, not the developer, who decides when to release a patch, or when to release a ship date.
More often than not, the publisher and the developer have completely opposite ideas of when to ship or when to patch. Case in point: Ultima IX was a total bug fest when it first came out, but it was not Origin's fault. They wanted to delay shipping until the kinks were worked out. EA, on the other hand, wanted to ship for the holiday season, and thus the developer could do nothing but watch an unfinished product ship too early.
Please give CA the benefit of the doubt. I support awareness, but you need to also focus on Activision, not just CA, for the problems. Activision, after all, is pulling the strings of the CA puppet.
Kel,
We can agree regardless of whose fault it is, that RTW is not being properly supported and that the user base has been let down. Good to hear from you. I still have your MTW mod on my PC..
tai4ji2x
04-01-2005, 11:09
i'll try and write my letters this weekend.
Shambles
04-01-2005, 11:28
E-Mails sent
tai4ji2x
04-01-2005, 11:40
BTW, i also recommend writing to gamespot and IGN
tai4ji2x
04-05-2005, 00:49
looks like this is one of the last recourses we have
Crazed Rabbit
04-05-2005, 00:57
I recommend going for the letter to the editor types, too (unless you are and I'm confused). These are what will get read by the readers of the magazine, and not just the editors.
Crazed Rabbit
Demon of Light
04-05-2005, 01:08
Try GameInformer. That's the magazine linked to GameStop. My District manager told me that the circulation ranks 25 in the nation. (with all the subscriptions I sell, it had better.)
GAME INFORMER MAGAZINE
PUBLISHER
Cathy Preston
cathy@gameinformer.com
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
Andy McNamara
andy@gameinformer.com
EXECUTIVE EDITOR
Andrew Reiner
reiner@gameinformer.com
SENIOR ASSOCIATE EDITOR
Matt Helgeson
matt@gameinformer.com
ASSOCIATE EDITOR
Matthew Kato
kato@gameinformer.com
ASSOCIATE EDITOR
Lisa Mason
lisa@gameinformer.com
ASSOCIATE EDITOR
Jeremy Voss
jeremy@gameinformer.com
ASSOCIATE EDITOR
Adam Biessener
adam@gameinformer.com
ASSOCIATE EDITOR
Joe Juba
joe@gameinformer.com
GAME INFORMER ONLINE
MANAGING EDITOR
Billy Berghammer
billy@gameinformer.com
ASSOCIATE EDITOR
Chris Cook
chris@gameinformer.com
PRODUCTION
ART DIRECTOR
Thomas Blustin
tom@gameinformer.com
PRODUCTION DIRECTOR
Curtis Fung
curtis@gameinformer.com
PRODUCTION ASSISTANT
Rachel Nimerfroh
rachel@gameinformer.com
ADVERTISING SALES
VICE PRESIDENT ADVERTISING SALES
SAN FRANCISCO
Doug Faust
doug@gameinformer.com
DIRECTOR OF MARKETING AND MIDWEST/
EAST COAST SALES MANAGER
MINNEAPOLIS
Rob Borm
rob@gameinformer.com
SOUTHWEST REGIONAL SALES MANAGER
LOS ANGELES
Marc Minasian
marc@gameinformer.com
ADVERTISING COORDINATOR
MINNEAPOLIS
Amy Arnold
amy@gameinformer.com
CIRCULATION
CIRCULATION MANAGER
Paul Anderson
paul@gameinformer.com
INFORMATION SYSTEMS MANAGER
Paul Hedgpeth
paulhedgpeth@gameinformer.com
I really think forum protest idea should be done first (if both org and twcenter agree).
I've posted emails on the following forums:
Strategy Informer
Wargamer
Definately send letters to Computer Gaming World. Of all the PC magazines, they are definately the least biased. They were one of the few people to actually bring up some of R:TW's problems in their review of it, unlike every other review, which hailed it as the best RTS ever.
tai4ji2x
04-06-2005, 02:30
i second the recommendation of CGW. also, gamespot (online) is very closely affiliated with them too.
again, also a reminder about IGN, if only because of its popularity.
Lovasìjász
04-06-2005, 05:23
I have been a suscriber to CGW for over 10 years.
Jeff Green the main editor (now) of CGW used to reply to my e-mails, when i was recommending him what game to review or bring attention to in future articles. Once he was gonna send me deus ex, because i asked him, but i bought it before he sent it. I think i'm gonna write him again, he really listens guys. But i would also recommend to write to other editors in that magazine. CGW is the best PCmag IMO.
tai4ji2x
04-08-2005, 02:51
hopefully this thread can be kept open, as i think it should be less sensitive than the amazon/review concept.
hopefully this thread can be kept open, as i think it should be less sensitive than the amazon/review concept.
There is nothing wrong with having people contact reviewers and complain about the current situation with CA.
Personally, I don't see such 1star reviewes fair.
For example, I see how I could give it 3stars since it has bad AI routine (due to bugs), and thus lowers replayablitiy.
But I would never give it 1star.
I would not spend that much time on game if I had such oppinion.
Also, I don't like reasoning that it's worth a few stars, but still give it just one, to make it easier to lower average score.
HarunTaiwan
04-08-2005, 16:29
On the other hand, I'm sure there are many 5 star reviews by people who had not played enough to run into the list of bugs.
p.s. If didn't use your Bug-Fixer, my generals would all be Scarface! It was driving me CRAZY!
Catiline
04-08-2005, 16:57
Leave the Amazon debate out of this thread please, or it will be closed.
tai4ji2x
04-08-2005, 18:33
Leave the Amazon debate out of this thread please, or it will be closed.
why do mods on so many internet forums in general go about moderating in this way? ~:confused: why not just edit the offending thread and issue a warning to the individual? then if that member persists, ban him/her and then subsequently delete or annotate those posts with your course of action? i find that to be a much better way of maintaining an atmosphere of open discussion rather than outright closing entire threads - which i think just ends up stifling dialogue more than the offending posts ever could in the first place.
just MHO
Catiline has expressed his opinion that the .org should not appear to support a campaign of negative reviews on Amazon or anywhere else. That is his right, and I support it. More than that, I agree with it. There should not be a campaign. If you like the game, review it favorably, if not, unfavorably. Or not. Do whatever you and you alone feel is right. Just be aware that these options exist for you to express your opinions in places other than forums.
Catiline, I hope you will take this in the spirit it was intended: a sincere effort to help stop the debate over reviews. Let's all agree to disagree about them and leave it at that.
Old Celt
04-08-2005, 18:55
I think we should all be respectful of the Mods right to do their work as they see fit. If you have questions, you should write to the mod and ask them, but don't make a public thread the place for this conversation. That kind of action is a provocation for the mod to close the thread.
Catiline has made it clear that this whole subject is thin ice, and off topic content will not be tolerated. So please, if you want the discussion to continue, try to keep it to what will be acceptable so the thread can go on. Even with that, I believe this thread's days are severely numbered.
tai4ji2x
04-08-2005, 19:09
That kind of action is a provocation for the mod to close the thread.
that's the thing... why the impulse, seemingly common within so many of us, to just outright close the thread? why not just delete or heavily edit or at least annotate the offending posts? eh... whatever. i'll shut up (see what i mean about stifling?).
I think you have to keep in mind that game magazines are not impartial. They have a vested interest in giving a game the highest rating that appears credible because they get advertising revenue from the companies that publish the games. That's why Rome v1.0 averaged a 93% rating from the magazines. Even with the remaining gameplay issues, magazine ratings of Rome v1.2 would probably be even higher than 93%.
BlackSquadron
04-08-2005, 20:23
Amazon would need advertising revenue too...
Shigawire
04-08-2005, 20:50
Count me in.
Old Celt
04-08-2005, 20:58
If any of you are registered over at the .COM, you can e-mail Alex, the SEGA rep by following the links from his user name over to the private mail message option. Get to these links by opening the stickied thread on SEGA/CA. I've sent a message detailing the problem and asking for SEGA help.
BeeSting
04-09-2005, 00:08
It's good to see you guys taking action. Count me in!
Good thought, Old Celt, and a particularly apt choice of quotes to go along with the protest icon. May I suggest either linking that message to the ludus magna thread or explaining how to do a quick diagnostic campaign so that it's easy for him to see the issue for himself?
slackker
04-09-2005, 03:44
great idea pode. as much as i dislike their support, the potential of the game is crying out to me as its crippled...but exams are around the corner so juz put my name when its needed to get better support ;)
Marcus Maxentius
04-09-2005, 04:47
Might I suggest an actual letter campaign maybe in addition to email. It'd have more impact to make them see something physical to show them this is a serious issue. We have to show them we are real individual paying customers not some cog in their buzz marketing campaign. Think of it. If I were sorting the mail, I'd be crapping my pants to see envelopes with international addresses on them flooding in. Send it to the mags, heck send it to CA and Sega directly. Get THEIR mailing addresses. They can't ignore this at or away from their computers.
Im in.
Ive already sent emails to those two. Why not email a lot more people?
Benny Moore
04-10-2005, 00:57
How about telephone? I think that it might be more effective still. It'd ring off the hook.
why the impulse, seemingly common within so many of us, to just outright close the thread? why not just delete or heavily edit or at least annotate the offending posts?
The reason for a closing a thread is never impulsive. Agonizing would be more like it. But since you ask, this is the most common reason to close threads:
http://img120.exs.cx/img120/5454/beatdeadhorse55vt.gif
We do not have the time to meticulously prune and edit each thread post by post. Just reading them all is work enough. Catiline and I try mightily to be fair and neutral. The same can be said for the other org mods in their respective venues.
Everyone who has expressed grievances about Rome enjoys the fact that the org is not a house organ for Sega or Creative Assembly as indeed it is not. The Colosseum must remain neutral ground as patrons discuss what they like and dislike about Rome in a civil, respectful, even tempered manner.
I would remind everyone that the org is not monolithic. Opinions about Rome run the gamut from great to poor. That is why we must not be perceived to take sides in any attempt to organize a campaign to embarrass or discredit anyone or to encourage low game ratings. Patrons are not empowered to speak for the org in such matters. It is therefore inappropriate for anyone to suggest that the org condones or endorses boycotts, email campaigns, etc.
If patron AnyOldJoe wants to start an email campaign he should refer to it as such and call it Joe’s Email Campaign not the org email campaign. Leave the org out of it. The org is not an instrument for disgruntled patrons any more than it is a tool for CA.
tai4ji2x
04-10-2005, 07:36
in your emails/letters, as an example of the way we are being treated, be sure to quote yet the newest specimen from killemall54:
http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotalwarfrm4.showMessage?topicID=1301.topic
I don't even know if this initiating post is a serious post in the first place. But in the second place if you are leaving your computer game on and open for hours and days you are falling for the kids' superstition that if you step on a crack you will break your mother's back. While the Romans were superstitious and prey for oracles, and people are no different today than then, this is the 21st century, and science exists. And its rigors.
But human beings are prey to mob mentalities and you are being stampeded like cows in a thunderstorm created by imaginary events.
It's fine with me if you want to believe the Testers. But now you are engaging in weird rituals and generally absorbing yourselves in strange behaviors. Why not put a clove of garlic on your computer or say 10 Hail Marys to ward off the siege load bug?
Suppose they are right. The AI was never accused of brilliance on the level of Alexander or Napoleon or Caesar. Let the AI aimlessly lift sieges you wish they would complete.
Me, personally, I would more fear the number of boats they make.
That interrupts trade. Do a jig back-wards and drink more milk to prevent the AI from building fleets.
This is a plea to advise you to think before you react. Are you human beings or almost hairless mammals?
Don’t make this into another .com thread or it will go the way of the last one.
The last one got locked because of the Amazon review talk, not because anything .com related. Or were you referring to something else by "go the way"?
Bh
Voigtkampf
04-10-2005, 19:04
Hi, Bhruic, long time no see. :bow: Guess because there is no TW game to tie us to the same forum, right? I remember we had some pretty interesting debates, you and I. Hope you are doing well. :bow:
To the general: I have the power of second sight. Or was it the third? :dizzy2: Well, my premonitions say to me that if anyone refers in his e-mail(s) to Org as the organizer of this protest campaign, the mighty Org Warlords will put a big, bad mojo on the person(s), and its effects will definitely be quite serious. And for the cause itself; well, it would have run its course, so to speak.
No official stance, only a safe bet, gentlemen. I suggest you do not test it in practice. ~;)
.Spartan
04-11-2005, 12:27
Someone should post a list at the TWC as well.
-Spartan
tai4ji2x
04-11-2005, 12:32
Someone should post a list at the TWC as well.
list of?
Kekvit Irae
04-11-2005, 12:46
I have a few honest questions, and I hope nobody takes it the wrong way, but...
If people do not like the current state of the game, why do they continue playing it? Why not move on to something that they feel is better? Why continue posting in the game-related forums about the problems? Why take the problem to third parties when the developer is fully aware of the community's displeasure?
It seems to me that the majority of people who dislike the game feel the need to flog a dead horse when they could just go out and buy (or download, there are plenty of free games on the net) the next best thing.
This is what has always confused me about complaints about the "lack of support from CA."
:blankg:
I have a few honest questions, and I hope nobody takes it the wrong way, but...
If people do not like the current state of the game, why do they continue playing it? Why not move on to something that they feel is better? Why continue posting in the game-related forums about the problems? Why take the problem to third parties when the developer is fully aware of the community's displeasure?
It seems to me that the majority of people who dislike the game feel the need to flog a dead horse when they could just go out and buy (or download, there are plenty of free games on the net) the next best thing.
This is what has always confused me about complaints about the "lack of support from CA."
:blankg:
Kel,
The Total War series has a strong community scene mostly driven by previous games that dies hard. MTW was a quality product and with its excellent modding support, interest was sustained. Shogun was also a classic game. Many had similar expectations for Rome only to experience a game full of broken features, flaws, and inferior AI.
There is a process that people go through to get to a point where they throw up their hands and give up. Some people hope that CA will still "see the light" and patch the game. Others have given up on the RTW patch but hope their efforts will change future patching policy. Most people do not feel that CA understands the problem or for that matter is even listening. Still others want to send a strong signal for CA to "shape up". The reasons are many, and personal to each person.
Realistically, you can not expect people with a strong community sense to easily give up on anything. Creative Assembly has clearly mishandled customer relations and in doing so has galvanized many in the community to do something about. Stonewalling, denial, then strong censorship do nothing but frustrate and anger your customers.
You can argue about whether the methods of action are useless, unfair, and fruitless. The point is, people will only take so much. I think many people, myself included, have had enough.
At the end, people will give up on the game, on CA's products, and move on. If that happens, the damage will be irrepairable. The majority of dissatisfied people were devoted veterans of the series and active in the community. Losing elements of the core customer group is never a good thing for any company.
Lets hope it doesn't come to this and that somehow CA wakes up and starts trying to extend a hand of friendship back to the people that feel alienated and angry.
.Spartan
04-11-2005, 15:44
list of?
Names and email addresses as well as a community letter for lazy people also contact info for non English publications would also be nice.
Anyway, if I get the time in the next week or so (no promises) I'll see if I can get some students at a near by HS or U to do a protest march outside of the biggest software store in the local area. It is great because there are several Us and a couple HSs close by that have student bodies that shop there so it should have a nice impact if I can find the time put it all together. Unlike in the USA, Japanese stores go crazy when such things are even talked about especially those that cater to the young.
-Spartan
At the end, people will give up on the game, on CA's products, and move on. If that happens, the damage will be irrepairable. The majority of dissatisfied people were devoted veterans of the series and active in the community. Losing elements of the core customer group is never a good thing for any company.
Lets hope it doesn't come to this and that somehow CA wakes up and starts trying to extend a hand of friendship back to the people that feel alienated and angry.
Most of the veteran players have already left. The add-on to RTW is going to be more of the same: weak strategic AI, weak tactical AI, poor playbalance, historical inaccuracy and non-realistism. The average gamer doesn't seem to be put off by these design decisions, so I guess they are the right decisions.
a_ver_est
04-11-2005, 16:24
Anyway, if I get the time in the next week or so (no promises) I'll see if I can get some students at a near by HS or U to do a protest march outside of the biggest software store in the local area. I
-Spartan
Sorry chap, but it seems to be an awful idea, the world have a lot of serious problems to do a protest march but a game bug is not one of them.
I am not playing the game because the bug and I won't buy any CA product anymore.
If you want to take some serious action check the game warranty and, if applicable, go to a costumer association and explain the case. They will work out every available legal action and you will recover your money.
tai4ji2x
04-11-2005, 17:29
Sorry chap, but it seems to be an awful idea, the world have a lot of serious problems to do a protest march but a game bug is not one of them.
yes, but i think spartan is thinking of it simply because it's not going to be all that difficult. besides, never underestimate the kookiness of life priorities when it comes to the modern japanese... ~;)
Voigtkampf
04-11-2005, 18:17
Realistically, you can not expect people with a strong community sense to easily give up on anything.
I don’t know really, when I look around Colloseum, I see mostly new faces, there are hardly veterans around here any more. I know I am still around because of that strong community sense, I’d hate to leave all the friends I made here at Org, but I’m certainly not going to strain myself one jota more over the Rome issue.
Even if completely fixed, polished, bug-free (including the save-load infamous bug), Rome would not tie me to a chair, nowhere near as Medieval did.
Puzz3D is right, the vets are gone, the spirit is gone. No patch of XP will bring them back to Rome.
There is hardly a vet anymore... I can count the vets I see every day on a single hand. Prior to RTW there were loads with older accounts than me. Now, a few remains. And I have never really considered myself a vet here.
voice_of_reason1971
04-11-2005, 20:08
Ok sorry for the long post! I’ve been lurking around twc and the org for a long time now but I finally feel myself forced to post because of some of the crazy stuff going on triggered by the savegame issue. I must say, having spent more time here than at the .com because of the much more thoughtful and informed discussions here, I’ve become horribly disillusioned by (imho) extreme and profoundly ill-informed material that is stickied or always bumped to the top.
First of all, let me say that reading all the in-depth test results that were posted up at the .com (all credit to you guys) yes, there definitely is a difference in game behaviour after a game is loaded and the turn ended. I found it quite interesting that CA didn’t actually deny this explicitly but seemed to try to explain it (which to me suggests there’ll definitely be a ‘fix’ in any expansion). I guess I also agree that this could cause major problems for someone who wants to play only one or two turns per session (though wow, that’s some serious micromanagement!)
I’m not sure I agree that it’s a game-breaker. That’s a matter of opinion I guess, but I think we need to keep a sense of perspective. Sure if you only play one or two turns it greatly weakens the AI for the campaign side of the game at least, but it’s not totally broken : the AI does still expand (though much less). Fine, perhaps you think this is game-breaking, but by that level of strictness most games I’ve ever bought have been riddled with game-breaking bugs, even my favourite game ever, Europa Universalis. Even after patching that has AI that makes RTW’s AI look superb, even if saving between every turn (I’m thinking of simple attrition management, not aggressiveness). But I digress. Thing is, games have bugs! Games are the most advanced software products available to normal consumers and are much more complex and technology-pushing than other software, and we should remember that. Especially when they only cost $50… I’ve played Rome for hundreds of hours, so that’s less than 25c per hour compared with a movie ($5 an hour) or any other form of comparable entertainment.
As for the notion that CA is making loads of money from RTW, all I can say is I doubt it! In the UK at least, developers are dropping like flies. Argonaut, the biggest one in the UK just went bankrupt. Any glance at an industry website will show you that game developers pay really low salaries compared with other business jobs like IT. I worked at a big IT company once and we paid our grads fresh out of college more than many senior positions in developers. It would be pretty stupid to get involved with games if you’re in it for the money! Only EA and Activision make any money in this industry as far as I can see. Even Eidos (Tomb Raider/ Hitman/ Deus Ex) is almost bankrupt.
I’m sure many will say it’s not so much that Rome has bugs, but what they take issue with is CA’s ‘attitude’ or refusal to patch. But this is what is getting me really REALLY MAD!
You need to BLAME ACTIVISION NOT CA!!!! Do you guys involved in this insane Amazon campaign not know anything about the games industry ?! CA will have signed a contract with Activision for RTW, so Sega has nothing to do with it. Activision has always had a 2-patch policy (poor, yes, but we always knew it)… and I reckon there’s no way Activision would let CA release an unofficial patch for a game that Activision would consider to be their game – Activision has to run customer support and do lots of QA testing, and the publisher always has to approve patches to ‘their’ products, so I think CA’s hands are tied, explaining the evasive nature of their responses.
It really upsets me that you guys seem to be trying to destroy CA and the TW series under the pretext of trying to force CA to release another patch. Maybe you want to stop it being popular so that you can consider yourself more ‘hardcore’ rather than a fan of a more mainstream game. But the bigger the series, the better for all of us! Games cost millions of dollars to make, and this is only going to get bigger with time. There are so many crappy games out there (especially with film licenses attached) that have such huge budgets – all you’re doing with your campaign (if it’s successful) is to reduce the sales of TW games, and hence reduce the profile and market attractiveness of these kinds of strategy games in general (not just TW games), meaning that they’re left as a low-budget low-profile niche, while all the dev money goes to superficial rubbish. A successful TW series means more millions being spent on huge beautiful wargames and strategy games in the future. Eg: whatever you think of the Imperial Glory demo, there’s NO WAY this game would have ever been developed if RTW hadn’t been so commercially successful. So please PLEASE stop destroying what I love! More to the point, stop destroying what (I think) you love!
You may say your goal is simply to force a fix for the game you would love, but firstly, you should be campaigning to change ACTIVISION’s policy, and secondly, I think the main effect of your campaign (if successful) will be to hurt wargaming and strategy games as a whole. I’m talking about your email and letter writing campaign as well as the (much much MUCH worse) Amazon campaign.
So, I am begging you please please STOP THE MADNESS before this community self-destructs!!!
Old Celt
04-11-2005, 20:39
voiceofreason:
If you've been lurking here for long, you know people bent over backwards to try to avoid the writing of letters over the save/reload issue. Members of this community even went so far as to offer to fix it through modding for free if the source code could be made available. You know what sort of response there was from CA.
A strategy game which has a weak AI to begin with, as RTW does, becomes infinitely worse when you consider the Save/reload bug renders it into a quivering mass of jelly which waits like a bookend for you to finally come and put it out of its misery. How would you like/rate a chess program which couldn't reliably save all the game data so you were playing the same game you saved when you reloaded it? Regardless of your opinion, some people find that unacceptable, and seek a fair remedy from the maker for that.
No one AFAIK, is out to destroy CA. It is fair that people who are dissatisfied and have been ignored by CA can write to other venues and say they are dissatisfied. Other customers might decide differently based on that information, but that is just as fair as giving a movie a review and letting that review enter into a potential movie goers decision about whether to see it. I firmly believe that where there's a will, there's a way. CA/SEGA need to find that will, if they want to keep my business.
PS: Please don't write your posts as one long, unbroken paragraph.
First,
PC GAMER:
Letters@pcgamer.com
PC Gamer Letters
Future Network USA
150 North Hill Drive, Suite 40
Brisbane, CA 94005
Second, here is a sample letter for the lazy to use based upon the one I sent...
Dear Editors,
As an avid reader of your magazine, I feel the need to bring to your attention an issue with Rome: Total War. This issue concerns not only the quality and playability of this game but also the concern of the community regarding the quality of product being churned out by game developers, and their duties to correct severe flaws which arise in their product.
There is a bug which has been discovered wherein the AI will abandon any sieges versus the player or another AI city on the turn after the game is loaded. This bug also has other less dire consequences, such as the AI accepting any offer to become a protectorate on the turn after a load. One Rome player demonstrated on the official message boards that he won the game without a single fight due to this bug.
The fatal flaw in this bug, is that if a player can only play 1-2 turns at a time, AI expansion is virtually non-existent and the computer will rarely pose a real threat to any of your cities. Anyone can watch this bug in action by disabling the fog of war, quicksaving, quickloading, and hitting the end turn button. There is a minor exception to this bug where the AI's "intent" is to starve out the city, otherwise, no cities with walls will change hands, and all sieges will be lifted.
I assume as game reviewers, you would play the game for long stretches of time with minimal loading thus your review would not have been affected by this. However, when one can only play 1-2 turns a night then this issue makes playing the game virtually pointless. The Creative Assembly has denied the existence of the bug besides overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and instead posted an official statement calling this a "feature" in which the AI reassessed its position on the map. The fact that this feature causes the AI to always break a siege was denied by the developers. Many customers, me included, feel quite insulted by the developer response considering we have paid our hard earned money for their product, and their refusal to fix the issue.
I believe it is a game developers duty to put out a working and playable product. No one expects perfection, but when a bug which is considered game breaking by many of its players is pointed out, the company should have a duty to fix that product. Rome received excellent reviews due to it's exceptional game play, however, as a single player game, unless one is facing an enemy capable of holding their own, the game itself becomes pointless. I alone cannot fight a major battle with The Creative Assembly and Activision personally, therefore, the public's support is needed. Having just announced an expansion pack, while refusing to patch a debilitating bug sends a mixed message at best. Do you not believe it is a game developer and publishers duty to fix an issue of this magnitude, especially in light of the kind of sales and reviews Rome: Total War has received?
But the bigger the series, the better for all of us!
Couldn't disagree more. People need to get rid of this fallacious "bigger is better" notion. One can get better. One can get bigger. One can do both. But getting better doesn't automatically make one bigger, nor does getting bigger automatically make one better.
RTW got "bigger" than STW and MTW. But there is a large pool of players that would argue that it certainly isn't "better" (and yes, there is an equally large pool that would argue it is).
Games cost millions of dollars to make, and this is only going to get bigger with time.
No, games don't cost millions of dollars to make. SOME games cost millions of dollars to make. Many do not. There are many exceptional games that are made with much smaller budgets than other games that end up being relative flops.
There are so many crappy games out there (especially with film licenses attached) that have such huge budgets
Ok, glad you see this, but as it invalidates your earlier point, I'm not sure why it appeared here.
all you’re doing with your campaign (if it’s successful) is to reduce the sales of TW games
And why is that such a bad thing? In any other consumer market, if a company has a reputation for not fixing their merchandise, that company is going to end up selling less than companies that do fix their merchandise. That's the way capitalism works. If CA decided they wanted to increase the sale of their TW games, it's an easy fix - support your product.
low-profile niche
Again, you say that like it's a bad thing. STW was a low-profile niche game. As was MTW, although the profile had been raised by that point. They were both excellent games with followings to this date. Perhaps you should attempt to remove the "money = good" mindset you seem to be locked into.
Eg: whatever you think of the Imperial Glory demo, there’s NO WAY this game would have ever been developed if RTW hadn’t been so commercially successful.
I see, so you are suggesting that a game that has been in development for over a year wouldn't have been in development if a game that came out less than 6 months ago wasn't successful? You might want to have another look at your logic on that one.
Imperial Glory was likely made because MTW was successful. And deservedly so.
So please PLEASE stop destroying what I love! More to the point, stop destroying what (I think) you love!
RTW isn't what I love. I love a company that supports their product. I love a company like Blizzard, that just recently put out a new patch for Starcraft. Starcraft! Let alone the support they've put in for their newer titles.
If CA were willing to commit to that level of support for their TW titles, I'd be happy. I still might not like some of the design changes they made in RTW, but it's something I could live with.
Bh
Kekvit Irae
04-11-2005, 21:27
*snip*
That's what I tried to say on page one. Equal blame falls on Activision, and it is confirmed by The Shogun on the Com boards that CA needs Quality Assurance funding from Activision (which will be a cold day in hell) before they can release a patch.
Unfortunately, my words fell on deaf ears (which is ironic, since my spouse is deaf)
I am of the opinion that the letter-writing campaign can only do more harm than good. Especially since the only entity that can do anything about it is Activision, yet you're not writing to Activision, you're writing to everyone else which is completely pointless and of no value.
The gaming mags already know that publishers suck. Writing to tell them in explicit detail about why the gaming public is being screwed over by game publishers is like preaching to the choir. There's nothing they can do about it, and since all their advertising revenue comes from these game publishers, even if there was something they could do they won't.
The fact is CA bit off more than it could chew with RTW. They tried to do too much in one game with the allotment of money they got from Activision. They HAD to cut corners, and when you have to cut corners in a game, AI is the first to suffer.
At this point the best thing we can do is to write letters to CA asking them to concentrate on AI for the next expansion. The expansion is in development now, so this is the time that fan pressure can have an effect on that game. Fan pressure for RTW now is pointless. RTW is over. Finis. It's not going to be patched, so you're wasting your time.
Write about the expansion. Write to the developers who are right now working on the next game. Tell them to put a LOT more effort on AI and to start now. Quit writing to tell people RTW sucks. It doesn't suck. It doesn't live up to its potential but that doesn't make it a bad value. It's still a good game that needs more sales, not less.
tai4ji2x
04-11-2005, 21:33
That's what I tried to say on page one. Equal blame falls on Activision, and it is confirmed by The Shogun on the Com boards that CA needs Quality Assurance funding from Activision (which will be a cold day in hell) before they can release a patch.
Unfortunately, my words fell on deaf ears (which is ironic, since my spouse is deaf)
i find this a bit ironic, since obviously their QA is at worst a sick joke, and at best only able to check for stabilty/CTD issues, not gameplay issues.
Kekvit Irae
04-11-2005, 21:40
RTW isn't what I love. I love a company that supports their product. I love a company like Blizzard, that just recently put out a new patch for Starcraft. Starcraft! Let alone the support they've put in for their newer titles.
Starcraft continues to be supported because Blizzard (AKA: God to many gamers) refuses to be pressured by deadlines, and refuses to give up on a game that has such a cult following.
As I said above, CA does not benefit from lack of deadlines. Their strings are being pulled by Activision. When The Boss says you need to release something right now, you release it right now. If The Boss says you cant put a patch out because there isnt any funding for QA testing, you cant put it out. A sad fact of game making is that feces roll downhill, and developers are often at the bottom of the hill.
Kekvit Irae
04-11-2005, 21:42
*snip*
I agree totally.
I am of the opinion that the letter-writing campaign can only do more harm than good. Especially since the only entity that can do anything about it is Activision, yet you're not writing to Activision, you're writing to everyone else which is completely pointless and of no value.
The gaming mags already know that publishers suck. Writing to tell them in explicit detail about why the gaming public is being screwed over by game publishers is like preaching to the choir. There's nothing they can do about it, and since all their advertising revenue comes from these game publishers, even if there was something they could do they won't.
The fact is CA bit off more than it could chew with RTW. They tried to do too much in one game with the allotment of money they got from Activision. They HAD to cut corners, and when you have to cut corners in a game, AI is the first to suffer.
At this point the best thing we can do is to write letters to CA asking them to concentrate on AI for the next expansion. The expansion is in development now, so this is the time that fan pressure can have an effect on that game. Fan pressure for RTW now is pointless. RTW is over. Finis. It's not going to be patched, so you're wasting your time.
Write about the expansion. Write to the developers who are right now working on the next game. Tell them to put a LOT more effort on AI and to start now. Quit writing to tell people RTW sucks. It doesn't suck. It doesn't live up to its potential but that doesn't make it a bad value. It's still a good game that needs more sales, not less.
It is a big misconception that Creative Assembly is somehow limited by Activision's 2 patch policy. Creative Assembly can issue a developers patch at their own cost and fix the game.
I don't fault Activision at all in this.
Most of the veteran players have already left. The add-on to RTW is going to be more of the same: weak strategic AI, weak tactical AI, poor playbalance, historical inaccuracy and non-realistism. The average gamer doesn't seem to be put off by these design decisions, so I guess they are the right decisions.
Yes, I am afraid you are right. A lot of damage has already been done.
sunsmountain
04-11-2005, 22:34
I think the load savegame AI re-assessment is one of the best things that could have happened to a certain part of the TW crowd. Those who reload every little battle, casualty and little negative trait to get a better result will now scratch behind their head a few more times if they know they're crippling the AI that way, forcing it to re-assess every re-load.
Those will be defined as re-loading powergamers.
For example Turbo. But i used to be one of them, too. The 'bug' is changing me ~:eek:
Perhaps they need a comprehensive strategy guides to prevent those negative traits as much as possible. I'm afraid they'll have to live with the odd unit getting slaughtered, though...
~:)
ps.: To CA members reading this, a well known fact about powergamers is that they are rather vocal (to compensate a sense of feeling powerless in this world, which can hardly be blamed), which would perhaps explain these 'email campaigns' and such. Meanwhile a lot of newbies and other new players enjoy Rome - they just don't post here. Cheers.
That's what I tried to say on page one. Equal blame falls on Activision, and it is confirmed by The Shogun on the Com boards that CA needs Quality Assurance funding from Activision (which will be a cold day in hell) before they can release a patch.
Unfortunately, my words fell on deaf ears (which is ironic, since my spouse is deaf)
The same "The Shogun" that has been telling us that the AI "reassessment" on game load is a "feature"? Somehow I don't find his word to be terribly convincing.
Nor is your assertion that it is Activision's fault terribly convincing either. I mean, we already have a historical precedent in the MTW:VI patch. To suggest that it can't be done is obviously false. The will to do it simply isn't there. And that's my point about Blizzard (or Stardock, or any other company that actually supports their products). They ensure that they can support them.
Activision does not own TW. CA owns TW. Therefore, one cannot blame Activision if there is a problem with a TW product. It's just that simple.
(Note, this exact same argument was used with Master of Orion 3 and determining if it was QSI's fault, or Atari's fault. The difference there is that Atari owned the MoO rights, not QSI. QSI was merely contracted to make a game for them)
Bh
I think the load savegame AI re-assessment is one of the best things that could have happened to a certain part of the TW crowd. Those who reload every little battle, casualty and little negative trait to get a better result will now scratch behind their head a few more times if they know they're crippling the AI that way, forcing it to re-assess every re-load.
Oh, I see, now the reassessment is supposed to teach us a lesson and tell us how we are supposed to play the game. Maybe CA should just hire some people to go around to houses and smack people on the head if they aren't playing the "proper" way. :rolleyes:
Bh
Benny Moore
04-11-2005, 23:13
Yes, and I suppose you also hope it teaches a lesson to those people who do not have time for more than a few turns at a time? That will teach them to let other things interfere with their gaming! Now they'll have to learn to prioritize games higher than things like jobs and family. Good call!
...Not.
Kekvit Irae
04-11-2005, 23:14
(Note, this exact same argument was used with Master of Orion 3 and determining if it was QSI's fault, or Atari's fault. The difference there is that Atari owned the MoO rights, not QSI. QSI was merely contracted to make a game for them)
The problem with MOO3 was that it was simply just a bad game. Personally, in my own opinion, the total automation feature killed it.
The problem with MOO3 was that it was simply just a bad game. Personally, in my own opinion, the total automation feature killed it.
And yet if you were to visit the MoO3 forums, you'd still find people that enjoy the game and play it on a regular basis.
Bh
The problem with MOO3 was that it was simply just a bad game. Personally, in my own opinion, the total automation feature killed it.
If I'm not mistaken, MoO3 had to go through a rewrite. I read an interview of the developer team about mid-way through the original. They wanted the game to be very involved, heavy on the micro-management. I think one of them said something along the lines of "We want you to lose you friends, your job, your significant other, everything. That is our goal." Don't know who forced the rewrite, but it delayed them for a while and killed the game. Playing the released version, there is a lot of complexity buried in the planet management, but not nearly as much control over it. Definite lobotomy. Which was a shame, since I wasted countless hours playing MoO2.
Without sidetracking too much, the major problem with MoO3's development was that they went through 3 different publishers. That meant there was no consistent direction, and a great deal of confusion. The end product was cut back drastically from the original vision (as you suggested).
However, that's not really the focus I was aiming at - I was simply presenting the major difference, as I see it, between the situations. That is, the ownership of the license itself.
Bh
Voigtkampf
04-12-2005, 13:37
The problem with MOO3 was that it was simply just a bad game. Personally, in my own opinion, the total automation feature killed it.
Compared with MoOII, which I played extensively, the third sequel was horrible. I once tested a claim that you cannot lose the game, and I began a campaign and simply pressed TURN, without actually doing anything. I came as far as 250 turns or something, I simply had no more patience and gave up. My empire was flourishing, the automated AI kicks in without you wanting it, building what it wants. I didn’t manage to lose.
I was utterly disappointed by the successor of MoO2. History repeats itself, I guess.
And yet if you were to visit the MoO3 forums, you'd still find people that enjoy the game and play it on a regular basis.
There are also people “still” collecting stamp marks; I find both equally unappealing. To each his own, I guess.
There are also people “still” collecting stamp marks; I find both equally unappealing. To each his own, I guess.
Sure. I wasn't trying to convince anyone to play it. Any more than I'm trying to convince people to play RTW. My point was simply that the fact that some people like RTW doesn't automatically make it a good game in general.
Although, really, who can say exactly what makes a good game?
Bh
the third sequel was horrible
Shouldnt that be the second sequal as the third sequal would be MoO4 surely? ~;)
~D
Voigtkampf
04-13-2005, 06:59
Sure. I wasn't trying to convince anyone to play it. Any more than I'm trying to convince people to play RTW. My point was simply that the fact that some people like RTW doesn't automatically make it a good game in general.
Sure, I understood it that way as well. I agree with you.
Although, really, who can say exactly what makes a good game?
Bh
I can tell you; it is a game that you play for hours and hours, though you have other things to do and must be at work or school early in the morning. As you notice time passing faster and faster, you keep saying things like “ok, only ten more minutes and I’m off to bed” or “only this one turn and I’m turning the PC off”. And afterwards - I recall an M:TW thread one that subject, where so many of the people had exactly the same impressions - you find yourself sitting in a business meeting, listening to your partners and imagining how your Templars would charge down that hill you can see right out of the window.
Shouldnt that be the second sequal as the third sequal would be MoO4 surely?
Huh?
Moooo3 is the third sequel, hence the number three (3) in the title. ~:confused:
SpencerH
04-13-2005, 11:37
MOO3 is the second sequel. Think about it for a second ~;)
Voigtkampf
04-13-2005, 15:50
Ah, it seems the finer nuances of the English (which is not my mother language, BTW ~;) ) got the better of me; I should have said third installment. :dizzy2:
I always say, splitting hairs is better than splitting atoms! ~D~D~D
I can tell you; it is a game that you play for hours and hours, though you have other things to do and must be at work or school early in the morning. As you notice time passing faster and faster, you keep saying things like “ok, only ten more minutes and I’m off to bed” or “only this one turn and I’m turning the PC off”. And afterwards - I recall an M:TW thread one that subject, where so many of the people had exactly the same impressions - you find yourself sitting in a business meeting, listening to your partners and imagining how your Templars would charge down that hill you can see right out of the window.
I understand what makes a good game personally. I guess I was just alluding to the completely subjective nature of "good" when it comes to games. Some people think RTW is really good and enjoy playing it as is. Some people think MoO3 is really good and enjoy playing it as is (well, as is now ;)). For almost every game in existence, someone thinks it's good.
Really, I'm less interested in the "goodness" of a game than I am in the support a game receives after it's been released. That's why I consider the concept of an email campaign to be relatively ineffectual, because they aren't commenting on the proper issue, imo.
But to each his own.
Bh
Ah, it seems the finer nuances of the English (which is not my mother language, BTW ~;) ) got the better of me; I should have said third installment. :dizzy2:
I always say, splitting hairs is better than splitting atoms! ~D~D~D
no probs- was just being pedandantic for the hell of it!! ~:)
Most people accuse me of not having English as my first language either. I guess thats whit you get fur comin fae glesgae, no whit a' mean big man? Brand new by the way! ~;)
Arrowhead
04-13-2005, 17:20
Is everyone turning into cows? moo moo MoO MOO moooo moo moo. MOO moo.
.Spartan
04-15-2005, 14:54
I have sent a couple emails to online game review sites. I suggest for others to do the same as the impact is often immediate.
-Spartan
Yes, and I suppose you also hope it teaches a lesson to those people who do not have time for more than a few turns at a time? That will teach them to let other things interfere with their gaming! Now they'll have to learn to prioritize games higher than things like jobs and family. Good call!
...Not.
Hi Benny,
I assume that you are the same Benny from the .COM? If you are, I have enjoyed reading your posts. Welcome to the ORG.
.Spartan
04-15-2005, 22:28
Dont forget to post comments at Cnet Reviews (http://reviews.cnet.com/Rome_Total_War_PC/4852-9696_7-31151743.html?tag=uoreturn)
Its not a gaming mag but they have some major reach with the tech types most of which are big game fans.
-Spartan
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.