patches

[[seminoles]shadow]

when is the new patch supposed to come out? is there even going to be a new patch? what will they change in the new patch?
someone please answer my questions :help: :help:

[Brutus]

I believe there is not going to be a new patch but some bugs should be adressed in the XP.

[Viking]

I read somewhere(over at the com probably), that Activision had no intention to fund an 1.3 patch.

As Brutus said there`s going to be a patch in the expansion, read this thread for more info: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=46366

[Colovion]

Two Patch Policy.

Even though they got lucky with the first one.

this is what I think the board meeting sounded like:

"let's release it, regardless of problems or bugs. We'll need to release one patch straight out of the box, problems we'll have fixed by ship dates, and then take a few months to give basically the only real patch content. Then we'll say that we've already released two patches and are bound by this rule. It's perfect."

lame.

[Brutues]

I hope in the new pach thers going to be something semingly diffrent And by the way Brutus do u know What et tu Brute means in latin it means and you Brutus But thats probably why u picked it

[Old Celt]

This gets asked and answered 10 times a day on the different forums.

There will be NO further patches for RTW!!

There have been NO promises by CA to patch anything in RTW with the expansion!

If CA intends to fix anything (save / load bug anyone?) then let them come here and say so! When you ask if there will be naval battles they can't tell you (top secret you know) but then tell us there will be night battles. Why wasn't that top secret too?

Activision will be continuing with the 2 patch policy on BI. Would you care to wager on how many unresolved bugs those patches will leave us with? Disgraceful!!

[Colovion]

there is no new patch coming out

The only thing that will fix anything wrong at the moment is the expansion pack which, naturally, you have to pay for; Policy is another word for "ways to screw the consumer".

How does that feel?

[Kekvit Irae]

There have been NO promises by CA to patch anything in RTW with the expansion!

Why does this (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=46366) thread exist then?

[tai4ji2x]

that thread makes no promises however.

[pezhetairoi]

Profit motive, people, profit motive. Gone are the days when those who made things wanted them to last, or satisfy the customer. Now it's just profit motive, no warranty, and if it screws up after I sell them to you, too bad, you fix it yourself. While CA has done a good job in creating the game, their post-sale services are seriously lacking.

[Kekvit Irae]

Profit motive, people, profit motive. Gone are the days when those who made things wanted them to last, or satisfy the customer. Now it's just profit motive, no warranty, and if it screws up after I sell them to you, too bad, you fix it yourself. While CA has done a good job in creating the game, their post-sale services are seriously lacking.

Blame Activision for that. Because CA is legally bound by contract with Activision, CA cant even sneeze without approval of A's QA team. So no patches, but thankfully the expansion bypasses the contract obligation of the patching/QA thing by allowing them to fix what errors they have and have full support of Activision.
Thankfully, Spartan: Total Warrior is with Sega, so there will be better support for it (despite the fact it is just a console game)

[pezhetairoi]

oh, Activision. Alright, sorry CA, it's all Activision's fault. :-(

[tai4ji2x]

actually, we don't know who's at fault, or more at fault (if both). for this entire time, we only know that we will get no more patches. we have never, ever, been told precisely WHY

[pezhetairoi]

'Corporate secrecy'. >.< Yuks.

[HarunTaiwan]

Since we all know CA wants to sell only the "best quality" product and is "committed" to service....

Let's see them announce ahead of time how many patches will "support" RTW: BI.

C'mon - honesty is the best policy here.

BTW, I would urge anyone selling new cars near the CA headquarters to request a business card from any prospects. Who knows? Maybe you can get yourself a CA manager to buy one of your cars, and then turn around and remind him of the "two repair" warranty. "But don't worry, sir, you can buy the new model of the car a years or so later and we'll have looked over your list of complaints by then."

[Colovion]

honesty doesn't make money

so our waiting is for naught

[Brutus]

And by the way Brutus do u know What et tu Brute means in latin it means and you Brutus But thats probably why u picked it
I know, alledgedly Caesar said it when he discovered his adopted son Marcus Junius Brutus among the senators who were going to murder him... More loosely, it seems it means: "You too, Brutus?" So yeah, that's why I picked it. But the name's nice anyhow since it simply means something like "idiot" ~D

[Brutues]

Well that shuts me up

[Brutus]

Well that shuts me up
Well, Brutues, you must like the name as well since you picked it for yourself... ~:cheers:

[econ21]

Back on topic, Old Celt and tai4ji2x, there will be a patch with the expansion. Read the last post by Captain Fishpants in this thread:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=46177&page=2

I admit, no promises, but why would he say he can now fix a trait if this was not going to be patched with the XP? Both Mongol Invasion and Viking Invasion had substantial patches and improvements for their vanilla game campaigns. I believe it's a significant part of the marketing appeal of the expansions - that it improves on, not just adds to, the existing game.

[Old Celt]

"Blame Activision for that. Because CA is legally bound by contract with Activision, CA cant even sneeze without approval of A's QA team. So no patches, but thankfully the expansion bypasses the contract obligation of the patching/QA thing by allowing them to fix what errors they have and have full support of Activision.
Thankfully, Spartan: Total Warrior is with Sega, so there will be better support for it (despite the fact it is just a console game" - Kekvitirae

No, that is incorrect, and I'm surprised to see that kind of view taken by an educated mod on this site. CA stated that they are not legally prohibited from doing another patch. It would have to be a developer's patch, and as such, would not be paid for or supported after the fact by Activision. CA owns the code and can patch it to their heart's content. To answer your question directly, Kekvitirae, the reason the thread you referenced exists is as a sort of pacifier for people with complaints. The strategy is to quell hostilities in the hope of reaching the expansion launch date with a minimum of potentially sales sapping complaints clinging to them. There is no substantive change in CA's policy or position since the whole controversy about patches began, and in my view, there never will be. When people give away their power as consumers by blatantly declaring they will buy the expansion without knowing anything about its content, they send CA the clear message that quality doesn't matter.

@Simon Appleton:
I have read the thread you mentioned. If you read closely, you will notice that as always, there are no promises to fix anything, and no statements as to when or where anything they do fix will actually be delivered. The statements are VAGUE, and when follow up questions are asked to get details, those questions are answered by silence. I cannot get a straight answer to the simple question: Will CA fix the save / load bug in a patch or in the expansion? When you get no answer, you are forced to assume the negative response, because silence is evasion.

[Puzz3D]

CA has always done only one patch. This is nothing new. They do patch the original game with the add-on, and with the patch to the add-on. So, the original game can get up to 3 patches. There were minor patches to STW and RTW shortly after release to correct MP logon problems, but I don't count them as full blown patches.

[Little Legioner]

If the guilty Activision, CA should break their contact if they dont want to their prestige and fans, customers. Two patch limitation is totally nonsense! How could you limit your support? Unbelieveble and unacceptable!

This is not a ordinary1.3 requesting. Coz i'm not talking about a new patch. If we need a patch. It should be. If it's not necessary. There is no problem but when you put a limit... :duel:

Just look at the other games. An example is not necessary. One two three maybe four but no limit.

Please CA, kick the Activision's :furious3:

Find a new hero who deserves you :charge:

[SpencerH]

Bah Humbug!

[tai4ji2x]

simon appleton:

basically, what old celt said. also, i should have been more specific: i should've said "no more patches until the expansion". "expansion" being a euphemism for a spruced-up patch that you have to pay for...

[sik1977]

Blame Activision for that. Because CA is legally bound by contract with Activision, CA cant even sneeze without approval of A's QA team. So no patches, but thankfully the expansion bypasses the contract obligation of the patching/QA thing by allowing them to fix what errors they have and have full support of Activision.
Thankfully, Spartan: Total Warrior is with Sega, so there will be better support for it (despite the fact it is just a console game)


Kek

Please note that there is no such 'contract' which prohibits CA from developing or releasing patches. Shogun has specifically stated that there is no more 'money' from Activision for the patch and that is the reason for there being no more patches and not a clause in a contract prohibiting CA from developing and releasing patches.

I can understand the love people have for CA and their products, and I am one of them, but going so far as to mis-state the facts as if the contract between CA and Activision was public knowledge is misleading to say the least. Kek you are a vet from MTW days and should know better then to say that 'CA cant even sneeze without approval of A's QA team', unless you read just that in that 'phantom contract' which seems to have been read by everyone defending CA blindly and painting Activision as the evil dude.

I understand both Activision and CA's point of view in this and as its nothing bit a commercial venture for the two companies. I may not like it, but that's another matter.

BTW, to Old Celt and everyone, I heard that in the new PC Zone Mag preview it has been stated that the BI expansion is now with Sega and not Activision. Lets see if thats true. We shall know in a few days at E3.

Best regards to all and no offence to Kek.

[player1]

And why people always assume, that CA is capable relasing and developing patch on its own funding.

It's not a big company such as Blizzard or Bioware.



EDIT:
Ok, there is a MTW: VI patch, which was not funded by publisher. Raises the question, what is now different compared to then...


Wild speculation:
Maybe they know that MTW: VI situation will repreat itself (with RTW: BI), and that they just don't have resrouces to make developer patch twice (for both orginal and expansion).

[tai4ji2x]

EDIT:
Ok, there is a MTW: VI patch, which was not funded by developer.
Raises the question, what is now different compared to then...

you mean "funded by publisher", right?

[player1]

my error

[HarunTaiwan]

It's interesting to see other people came to the same conclusion about the bug thread that I did.

Though it is better than nothing and might even be useful in the end.

I suspect we will not see any increase in Battle AI or Strategic AI. Just more units, factions, and a new time period.

Oh well.

[Old Celt]

It would only take a few words from an official CA rep to clear these issues up. It seems to me that Jerome stepped in a pasture patty a couple of weeks ago by saying words to the effect that "most of the work has already been done" regarding major issues members have been asking for a patch to fix. After that, the question of why no dev patch can be released to improve play between now and the time the consumer financed patch (expansion) comes out has been asked a lot. AFAIK, there have been no CA postings from anyone other than The Shogun since then.

It is interesting, and not a little sad, how many otherwise intelligent people can be so easily distracted from the central point of a debate. The need for a patch is clear cut and the existence of very detrimental bugs has been proven, yet many people are easily led down the garden path and change the debate from the rightful discussion of CA's responsibility to customers, to a debate of speculation over why they completely shirk that responsibility. No one should care what CA's excuses are in the customer community: that's not OUR problem. Just as I would with any other product, if it is defective enough to inconvenience me, I expect the manufacturer to put it right, not give me a song and dance about why they can't / won't. In this case, it is clearly the latter.