View Full Version : they've done it again
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=30390&page=1&pp=20
bubbles and sparkles. plus men flying about wiht berserkers..wich look short
Afro Thunder
08-08-2005, 17:52
Yes, the bubbles look ridiculous. What the hell was in that chili the troops had before the battle?
The sparkles? Those are only meant to make it easier to show when a unit gains an experience point, just like that gigantic banner is only meant to identify the unit. Consider it part of the interface.
As for the berserkers, well, they ain't called berserkers for nothing you know!
Well you can remove those so it's no problem what disturbes me is the sparkles that may not be able to remove. :furious3:
Teleklos Archelaou
08-08-2005, 18:05
I would also like techno-music and someone yelling "FIGHT!" right at the start of the battle. Oh yeah, pirates too. Plz! Thx!
*no comment*, but the floating bodies are done real good.
abortretryfail
08-08-2005, 19:14
Afro Thunder:
You have a Bactria sig from EB. I was looking for the unit preview for them but couldnt find it. I assume it must have come out if you got the sig right?
Steppe Merc
08-08-2005, 19:17
abortretryfail, that is a Bartix. A bit of a difference. ~;)
But yeah, we have released Baktria. Try looking back a bunch of pages...
Copperhaired Berserker!
08-08-2005, 19:28
Oh yeah! Berserkers rule!~D
No, but really, I find that sparkle quite useful. I mean, you're fighting them, no need to look at unit cards, just see that sparkle. As for bubbles and splashs, They've just started doing it! It's a demo, for goodness sake! It will be better in the full version!!
abortretryfail
08-08-2005, 19:40
abortretryfail, that is a Bartix. A bit of a difference. ~;)
But yeah, we have released Baktria. Try looking back a bunch of pages...
Aha, I see. At first I thought it was some archaic spelling I was unfamiliar with. Then I found the "Bartrix" thread. I hurried back here to edit my post but was too late. Thanks for the reply.
well, the anoying part is those details are nice (or not). but it makes it even more frustrating thate they could hav espent more time on, perhaps, research...
The demo was terrible. I'm not purchasing BI until a modification is released.
Mongoose
08-08-2005, 21:02
( :kid: )C'm0n! s0m3 0f th0s3 3ff3cts r th3 b3st tin sinc3 s0nic 4600! One1!!111onr!!11one1111!!1111!!!!!11!
1 CEn N0t w@T3 2 PwN t3H r0m1ns w1t t3h b@rb bairserks!!11!!1111!!!!!111!111!1111OnE!111One!111oNE!11!!1OnE1!!!!11
But 1 d0 n0t lik t3h huns cuz th3y r 2 g@y!!1111!1!!!11!!!1!11!!!OnE!!!!!111ONe!!!!!!111!!!1!11!!!111!!11!1
~:joker:
Gah! Yet another ranting thread about BI. :furious3: Why can`t you just realize that BI isn`t going to be the game you want? Threads such as this won`t help making CA change their mind.
BI seems to be a great improvement over RTW; play it yourself please before you rant, and by that I don`t mean the demo but the full-version of course.
Well you can remove those so it's no problem what disturbes me is the sparkles that may not be able to remove.
The sparkles? Those are only meant to make it easier to show when a unit gains an experience point, just like that gigantic banner is only meant to identify the unit. Consider it part of the interface.
Yeah those sparkles probably dissapear after a few seconds, actually not a bad idea if you ask me.
Conqueror
08-08-2005, 21:50
I don't mind a visual effect for the valor upgrade, but I think there's plenty of ways to do it more elegantly than throwing magic sparkles. Such as making the unit's banner to display some "upgrade!" symbol, or the unit card to flash for a moment. Sparkles are just way silly :stars:
Dux Corvanus
08-08-2005, 23:58
Ok, Sonic-like sparkles, warriors acting like Neo in Matrix... Wait... those are ninjas! Real ultimate power! Berserkers are cool, and when I say cool, I mean totally sweet. Those guys are flipping out and cutting heads all the time, and may suicide randomly... ~;p
Mongoose
08-09-2005, 00:08
Did you know that a berserker once killed an entire town just because a kid opened a window? ~:eek:
here are some facts:
Facts:
1. Berserkers are mammals.
2. Berserkers fight ALL the time.
3. The purpose of the Berserker is to spin around and kill people.
FAQ:
Q: Why is everyone so obsessed about berserkers?
A: berserkers are the ultimate paradox. On the one hand they don't give a crap, but on the other hand, berserkers are very careful and precise.
Q: I heard that berserkers are always cruel or mean. What's their problem?
A: Whoever told you that is a total liar. Just like other mammals, berserkers can be mean OR totally awesome.
Q: What do berserkers do when they're not cutting off heads or spining out?
A: Most of their free time is spent getting drunk, but sometime they eat bear skin. (Ask Mark if you don't believe me.)
Dux Corvanus
08-09-2005, 00:12
LOL... now I know where CA got inspiration... :laugh4:
Mongoose
08-09-2005, 00:22
Yeah, the games going to be totaly sweat. I hope they have flaming wardogs too.
And maybe "spanish bull cavalry"?
Big_John
08-09-2005, 00:27
i don't know why you guys are so hung up on the berserkers. once CA puts the orcs in, the berserkers will be "t3h l0lz".
Samurai Waki
08-09-2005, 00:32
it's just a game anyway *mumbles* stupid CA and their hedgehogs destroying reality.
Mongoose
08-09-2005, 00:39
i don't know why you guys are so hung up on the berserkers. once CA puts the orcs in, the berserkers will be "t3h l0lz".
The real issue is with the orc-berserkers :help:
Afro Thunder
08-09-2005, 00:57
Would you prefer to be forced to have Pre-Marian Roman armies with Hastati, Principes, and Triarii in a ratio of 2:2:1 without a choice, and having nearly no cavalry at all?
KingOfTheIsles
08-09-2005, 01:09
Would you prefer to be forced to have Pre-Marian Roman armies with Hastati, Principes, and Triarii in a ratio of 2:2:1 without a choice, and having nearly no cavalry at all?
Honestly? Yes, I would.
Mongoose
08-09-2005, 01:16
Would you prefer to be forced to have Pre-Marian Roman armies with Hastati, Principes, and Triarii in a ratio of 2:2:1 without a choice, and having nearly no cavalry at all?
actually, yes.
Would you prefer to be forced to have Pre-Marian Roman armies with Hastati, Principes, and Triarii in a ratio of 2:2:1 without a choice, and having nearly no cavalry at all?
Yes.
And we all know orc beserkers can be countered by summoning lava monsters.
Mongoose
08-09-2005, 02:31
Elf night archers pwn lava monsters any day.
Big_John
08-09-2005, 02:44
OMGZERGRUSH! ~:eek:
seriously though, this looks awful. let's all pray that something useful to the mod community will come out of this expansion.
maybe CA will sell TW engine to paradox or something and we can get back to historical war games.
Mongoose
08-09-2005, 02:51
I think they said something about not lifting any of the mod limits.
I kinda stoped playing RTW anyway. Broken AR makes the game a never ending nightmare of slowly hunting down the AI's broken up four unit armies. I am going to wait for EB before giving up on it though.
Afro Thunder
08-09-2005, 03:53
After seeing three people answer "yes" to my previous question in a row, I have concluded that I am in a forum full of conformists...
Mongoose
08-09-2005, 04:24
Hey, i am the evil all powerful dark lord of your nation, show some respect ~D
Don't make me use the FULIX POWEIX OFIX BARTIX! :evil:
After seeing three people answer "yes" to my previous question in a row, I have concluded that I am in a forum full of conformists...
Or just people who enjoy history. But your theory is good too. ~:)
Mongoose
08-09-2005, 05:25
What ever. I like the conspiracy theories with aliens more though.
The truth is out there:alien:
Ferocious_Imbecile
08-09-2005, 06:15
Would you prefer to be forced to have Pre-Marian Roman armies with Hastati, Principes, and Triarii in a ratio of 2:2:1 without a choice, and having nearly no cavalry at all?
Yup
LorDBulA
08-09-2005, 07:00
Originally Posted by Afro Thunder
Would you prefer to be forced to have Pre-Marian Roman armies with Hastati, Principes, and Triarii in a ratio of 2:2:1 without a choice, and having nearly no cavalry at all?
Yes. This is how my Roman armies look anyway (+velites). :duel:
Dux Corvanus
08-09-2005, 07:34
Would you prefer to be forced to have Pre-Marian Roman armies with Hastati, Principes, and Triarii in a ratio of 2:2:1 without a choice, and having nearly no cavalry at all?
Yes. BTW, Romans managed to conquer most of the Mediterranean world with that.
After seeing three people answer "yes" to my previous question in a row, I have concluded that I am in a forum full of conformists...
Then, why not going a step beyond and ask Sherman tanks?
I dont know if you`ve noticed that the berserks are named "hounds of Cullan", i know that there is celtic myth of Cuchulainn but i`ve never heard about any Culann.
Samurai Waki
08-09-2005, 09:42
You know something tells me that the creators of TW are snickering at us everytime they read a realism complaint thread.
"We've got enough money, lets add sparkles and magic, I bet this'll really piss em' off".
I wish I had that kind of power.
Would you prefer to be forced to have Pre-Marian Roman armies with Hastati, Principes, and Triarii in a ratio of 2:2:1 without a choice, and having nearly no cavalry at all?
Why, yes of course...
After seeing three people answer "yes" to my previous question in a row, I have concluded that I am in a forum full of conformists...
Well, considering that the 2:2:1 ratio is NOT what the "system" or "establishment" offers, I'd say we're pretty much inconformists around here...
Cu chulláinn literary means the hound of Chullan. The guy was given the name because when he was a boy he killed the Chullan guy's dog and he had to watch over the house instead...
Why CA chose this name? I guess the same reason why pigs explode.
Greek_fire19
08-09-2005, 10:58
They are usually referred to in game as purple-and-green-killing-machines which avoids confusion with the now obsolete germanic equivalents.
It must be quite a show when one of those guys starts sparkling in the middle of a spin. Ah well, as long as that's how it happened in real life...
Gah! Yet another ranting thread about BI. :furious3: Why can`t you just realize that BI isn`t going to be the game you want? Threads such as this won`t help making CA change their mind.
BI seems to be a great improvement over RTW; play it yourself please before you rant, and by that I don`t mean the demo but the full-version of course.
I agree. Why is everybody so upset about the historical accuracy of BI? You didn't expect CA to make a 180 degree turn after R:TW, did you?
Historical accuracy is not high on CA's priority list, but I don't care as long as the underlying game is in order. We've got EB for historical accuracy. :bow:
I agree. Why is everybody so upset about the historical accuracy of BI? You didn't expect CA to make a 180 degree turn after R:TW, did you?
Historical accuracy is not high on CA's priority list, but I don't care as long as the underlying game is in order. We've got EB for historical accuracy. :bow:
That`s right, we didn`t expect that CA makes a 180 degree turn, but we`ve expected that CA will not make an even worse game than RTW.
You know, seeing these bitching and whinning and flamewars about BI and RTW is now more intresting then the game itself.
Afro Thunder
08-09-2005, 16:01
Yep, gotta love Internet drama... :dizzy2:
Mongoose
08-09-2005, 16:28
Foolisix peasanix! Bowix dowix toix thix darkix lorix ofix Bartix orix yoix musix dieix! :stwmean:
I am not mad about BI. I think it's cool; and by cool, i mean totaly sweat. ~D
You know what, when i first time read the bartix thread i`ve almost fall from chair laughing, but now it`s starting to be boring :shifty:
Since when did guys in full armour float? Or swim for that matter?
Even with just a sword and helmet, imagine all that wool clothing getting wet. You'd be doomed.
Mongoose
08-09-2005, 17:23
You know what, when i first time read the bartix thread i`ve almost fall from chair laughing, but now it`s starting to be boring :shifty:
Which bartix thread? there are two...
the original was magnificent..even I chipped in..god those were teh days:
-wich factions replaces armenia, what units bartix got then?
-sometimes i wish i was dead when i was one and a half
-ranix wnats to shag an object (repeat five times)
-you been drinking to much taquil(mexican booze)
-tank, quite being a smartass
and ofcourse ye 'ol TomteoffDoom Moral patrol
ahh sweet memories
That`s right, we didn`t expect that CA makes a 180 degree turn, but we`ve expected that CA will not make an even worse game than RTW.
And what is worse about battlefield monks when you compare them to, say, screeching women?
CA gives a simplistic, and sometimes incorrect view of history in R:TW. From what I see, BI is not going to be much different in this aspect. So while the general outrage is understandable, is really was to be expected.
Mongoose
08-09-2005, 18:10
I'm not mad. i just think it's funny ~:joker:
Big_John
08-09-2005, 18:27
the original was magnificent..even I chipped in..god those were teh days:
-wich factions replaces armenia, what units bartix got then?
-sometimes i wish i was dead when i was one and a half
-ranix wnats to shag an object (repeat five times)
-you been drinking to much taquil(mexican booze)
-tank, quite being a smartass
and ofcourse ye 'ol TomteoffDoom Moral patrol
ahh sweet memoriesjerby, i feel the need to correct a couple of those....
#1 came in several forms, but the best are "tell what bartix and the faction that replaces armenia got then??" and "so what "bartix" and what faction replaces armenia go then?!!"
#2 is probably the greatest single post the internet has ever witnessed, and should always be represented in it's full glory, which follows:
so times I think i'm a was dead when i was 1 and a half
teletubies-------> ~:grouphug:
terroist----------> :disguise:
U.S Ranger------> :army:
#4 needs the original caps to be fully appreciated, "YOU'VE ALL DRANK TO MUCH TAQUILAL (MEXION BOOZE)"
~:handball:
and for all of the counter-whine whiners, why do you guys care so much whether people who like historical accuracy in a historical game are upset about the travesty of rtw/BI? egregiousness is pretty much a subjective analysis anyway. it's rather silly to say something like "it's not any worse than rtw!!", because for some people spinning sparkling action figures are, indeed, worse than flaming pigs, but for others they are not. who cares which is worse? the problem is that any of it is there, and that CA feels the need to sneak warcraft into the TW series.
BI is ridiculous, possibly more so than rtw. do you really care if i believe that? this isn't some crusade to damage CA or something.. it's just an opinion. if you have a dissenting opinion, why not simply offer it? do you really need to attack those who hold the former opinion?
jerby, i feel the need to correct a couple of those....
#1 came in several forms, but the best are "tell what bartix and the faction that replaces armenia got then??" and "so what "bartix" and what faction replaces armenia go then?!!"
#2 is probably the greatest single post the internet has ever witnessed, and should always be represented in it's full glory, which follows:
#4 needs the original caps to be fully appreciated, "YOU'VE ALL DRANK TO MUCH TAQUILAL (MEXION BOOZE)"
ahh, good times
Mongoose
08-09-2005, 18:43
Thanks Big_John. I was looking for a new signature quote ~D
Big_John
08-09-2005, 18:50
"mexion"! brilliant!
that's what i don't get about the "bartix" speakers around here.. it's not all about -ix suffixes.. it seems like a much more complicated system than that.
I dunno guys, I thought rtw was okay, I'm willing to give CA a little license. But BI has entirely forgotten history. Think about it, Catholic Church and no Illuminati? I mean don't these guys read dan brown? And don't they watch any of the good movies about history? Where are the nights of the round table? And why doesn't attila look like anothony quinn? There are a lot of problems with this game, maybe everyone is right, CA is sinking.
Abokasee
08-09-2005, 19:06
Hey, i am the evil all powerful dark lord of your nation, show some respect ~D
Don't make me use the FULIX POWEIX OFIX BARTIX! :evil:
INSULIX AIX WEAKIX THIX MORDEIX GIXS
:charge: :rifle:
Are the berserkers really named The Hounds of Culann? I find that a little hard to believe.
Abokasee
08-09-2005, 19:15
Aix tix berserkeix realix namix Tix Hounix ix Culaix? I fiix thix a littix haix ix belieix.
Druixs Maix,Druixs thix gaix thix thix silix naix
in english:
Druips Ma:@/Druigs They G@ve tham that silly nameesseeses ~:) ~:confused: :dizzy2: ~D :help: :laugh4:
Mongoose
08-09-2005, 19:36
INSULIX AIX WEAKIX THIX MORDEIX GIXS
:charge: :rifle:
Welix, ofix coursix i aix onlix thix KINIX ofix bartix, yoix arix stilix thix creatoix/goix
Well, of course i am only the KING of bartix, you are still the creator/god :bow:
Greek_fire19
08-09-2005, 19:46
Sometimes I think this community would be much poorer if CA didn't do so many things we could slag them off about.
yeah...thank CA's for being a bunch of F*cks
Please remember, the EB team has never shared these views. CA gave us this wonderful game to mod, and without RTW EB would not exist. We may take issue with how they depict history (and especially how they view those who do not enjoy historical fantasy), but the opinion of EB fans does not hold true for EB members.
Mongoose
08-09-2005, 21:52
Well, i am certainly not mad at CA. Nor am i really very angry about the lack of realism in RTW. I just like to make fun of some of CA's more....color full units. that's all. ~:grouphug:
IMO, direct personal attacks on CA should not be allowed.
saying "CA sucks" and saying "war dogs suck" are two very differnt things....
-Sometimes I think this community would be much poorer if CA didn't do so many things we could slag them off about.
-yeah...thank CA's for being a bunch of F*cks
it was meant as sarcasm...i cant say i hate CA, since i dotn know them.. and again: i dislike their opinion about people liking historical accuracy, and their policy on bug-fixing (the expansion fixes bugs from the original, how crazy is that?)
and, as for all my statements in the forums, i do not pretend to be an EB member. i'm just here a lot...i have nothing to offer EB (knowledge or modding skills)i'm just trying to help people out with their questions. and start a nice discussion..
Are the berserkers really named The Hounds of Culann? I find that a little hard to believe.
That's asinine for many reasons...and here they are because I'm an ass.
Cú Chulainn was a mythical hero, and principle character of the Ulster cycle. He was named Sétanta, and killed Cullan's dog, and in penance took up the occupation of Cullan's bodyguard in place of the dog. As such, he was called the 'Hound of Cullan'. Cú Chulainn was not a berserker, he was a trained martial artist, who trained under the master of combat Fergus (also the captain of the Craebh Ruadh, the elite band of warriors who organized the defenses of Ulster until the treachery of Conchobar), and then under the female combatant Scathach at Skye, where he learned the 'Salmon's Leap', and recieved his gae bolge (stomach-dart); he was capable with all weapons, but particularly a spear or javelin, and in most versions of the legend, a sword or axe. He was in no way a berserker; he was a trained, very skilled warrior.
So, to recap. They've based a 'berserker' on a clearly non-berserker-type of warrior; particularly, a warrior who was a myth and probably only has thin grounding in reality. Now, basing a unit off of Cú Chulainn wouldn't bother me quite as much, if they:
A. Actually looked Irish
B. Weren't a berserker, because it pisses on what Cú Chulainn was supposed to be; an educated, very intelligent warrior, not some mindless neanderthal thug
They look purple, and they're dressed, badly, like early Britons. They don't look remotely Gaelic. So, they have purple, asinine thugs, representing the great hero of Ulster (and then champion of Ireland), a martial artist who was supposed to be 'most beautiful of the men of Ulster'. Nice. Would they represent some lame unit based off Musashi as a half-brain dead thug in a Japanese themed strategy game (I'm aware Musashi was a real man, but Cú Chulainn was likely based off an actual champion, and was representative of actual Irish masters of combat)? It's actually somewhat insulting.
Dux Corvanus
08-10-2005, 08:43
I feel your pain. Now you know what I thought when I played RTW, saw the "Spanish" (!) faction, and found its best unit was a horde of toreros. ~:eek:
Abokasee
08-10-2005, 09:35
Welix, ofix coursix i aix onlix thix KINIX ofix bartix, yoix arix stilix thix creatoix/goix
Well, of course i am only the KING of bartix, you are still the creator/god :bow:
wix couix easyix paix yix ix ix wanixs ix
who could easyly pawn you if he wants to
shoot the slavers!!
:cry: :whip: :rifle:
Afro Thunder
08-10-2005, 20:36
Okay... So we change the name of the unit from "Hounds of Culann" to something else, like "Berserkers". Sounds simple enough to me!
Ranika, keeping in mind most of what I know about Cúchulainn is from The Tain and I haven't read it in a while, didn't Cúchulainn go into a kind of warrior frenzy or beserker like state on occasion? Perhaps this is what CA based the unit off of. True, that doesn't excuse them for handling the unit so horribly, but it's just a thought.
~:) CA was probably like:' argh Damn EB..you know what, we'll make a very cool kickass unit. and give it an Ancient name! EB happy, fans happy...
and then,,they picked the wrong name!?!
Ranika, keeping in mind most of what I know about Cúchulainn is from The Tain and I haven't read it in a while, didn't Cúchulainn go into a kind of warrior frenzy or beserker like state on occasion? Perhaps this is what CA based the unit off of. True, that doesn't excuse them for handling the unit so horribly, but it's just a thought.
Cú Chulainn did enter a state of madness, but only after he was driven mad by spirits sent by witches. Originally, he could enter a 'frenzy' but it was described as an absolute sense of calm, yet filled with intense rage. He could still act logically and fight in a normal sense, he was just remarkably focused and his rage kept him fighting beyond his limits.
And even if the name was changed to 'berserkers', they don't look Gaelic. At all. These are supposed to be some type of Gaelic berserker (in which case they should be called Rastriagh), but I've explained before what Gaels dressed like; they didn't look like ancient Gauls or Britons, damn it. Why is that so hard for CA to grasp?
My beef isn't exactly with CA or their unrealistic units. I perfectly understand their dumbing down of the game to reach their market base, the purpose isn't to please any one group, but reach as wide a market as possible.
My real problem with CA is that they're being perfect assholes about letting people mod their game. They're being quite adamant about sitting on their asses and watching the mod community scurry around the hardcoded engine trying to accomplish goals that may never be reached. All the while never releasing so much as a bad SDK, let alone a good one.
Ignoramus
08-11-2005, 10:10
CA should read history books, not fansaty books.
Edit: Also, the sparkles are crazy! I expected a strategy game, not a fantasy one.
While I'm upset with CA's fantasy approach, I'm far more furious with their blatant disregard for the gaming community. Their lack (and often late) patches topped off with the inability to mod features or putting restraints on moddable feature (faction size, unit size, diplomacy etc).
This game was released in 2004, it's the later half of 2005 and all we've seen is two patches. Converserly, Blizzard entertainment just released the eleventh patch for diablo 2 (17 for Warcraft 3), it consists of new goodies and a new challenge for players to fight. Diablo 2 is no longer making money for blizzard. The fact that they are still improving and adding features to this old title just goes to show how much they appreiciate their fan base.
Ya, CA made the engine. Fact is it's mired with flaws which they ignore for long periods of time (still pending). The old "shut up they made the game so you can't complain" line is a bit diffcult to swallow since they CAN upgrade the game, they just choose not too.
I would like to see other companies tackle this engine and improve on it. CA needs some competition to show them that their fan base does not come cheap. We demand the best. The motto "we give the best" does not hold true at the moment down at CA. "we give you a really good engine, then allow a number of issues to interfere with your enjoyment of the game, have fun"
The same goes for the developers of Cossacks. That game is filled with bugs, but patches are about as frequent as being struck with lighting. As it stand the developers have no competition. People are stuck with that game since it's the only game that really depecits Napoleonic warfare. Ditto with RTW.
CA falls short of greatness in my books. I've downloaded almost every single modification just to see if any of them tackle the problems i have. Of course they don't, since it's all hardcoded. I find the new skins and maps a good distraction for short while. Then the old issues began to appear. Very annoying.
Well Blizzard and CA are in completely different leagues...
How so? Why point it out if you're not going to tell why.
the_handsome_viking
08-18-2005, 03:27
theres nothing more historically accurate than fairy dusty floating around a berserker...
why the hell did they do that? i noticed it in the demo and though " um ...what the fuck "
i also thought it was funny how those berserkers do a funny little dance attack where they spin round like some sort of disco dancer.
Dux Corvanus
08-18-2005, 12:24
Mmmm, looks like that's Neo, in a previous version of Matrix.
Geoffrey S
08-18-2005, 13:16
I quite enjoyed the demo. No better, no worse than the original RTW.
I thought the BI demo was weak. I like how RTR slowed down the movement of troops. After performing clavary charges in RTR, the BI demo felt like NASCAR.
While I'm upset with CA's fantasy approach, I'm far more furious with their blatant disregard for the gaming community. Their lack (and often late) patches topped off with the inability to mod features or putting restraints on moddable feature (faction size, unit size, diplomacy etc).
This game was released in 2004, it's the later half of 2005 and all we've seen is two patches. Converserly, Blizzard entertainment just released the eleventh patch for diablo 2 (17 for Warcraft 3), it consists of new goodies and a new challenge for players to fight. Diablo 2 is no longer making money for blizzard. The fact that they are still improving and adding features to this old title just goes to show how much they appreiciate their fan base.
Ya, CA made the engine. Fact is it's mired with flaws which they ignore for long periods of time (still pending). The old "shut up they made the game so you can't complain" line is a bit diffcult to swallow since they CAN upgrade the game, they just choose not too.
I share your pain, CA's behavior of late has been just short of impolite. That said, I do think you are a little unfair to them here. They are nowhere near as big or established as Blizzard so they cannot keep up the same level of support. Also, Blizzard can QA its own patches whereas CA needs the help of the publisher for that. For M:TW and R:TW, they were stuck with Activision, who only allowed one patch per game. Perhaps Sega does better: the fact that there may be a 1.3 patch for R:TW vanilla indicates Sega is better disposed towards customer support. Perhaps.
All but the simplest of games are very complex and issues can be burried deep in the engine. It requires many man-hours to correct them and even more to find them. Just think how long it took for the primary/secondary or charge issues to be uncovered. Blizzard rellies on a large and dedicated fanbase for balancing and spotting bugs; CA, for whatever reason does not. Again, this maybe related to publisher's constraints and/or manpower issues.
Relations between CA and the fanbase took a nose-dive after R:TW's release and I think CA's stance was a major cause for this. That said, the community did get a lot more aggresive after the release of the R:TW demo, so I sometimes pity the developers who still take time to post here. At othertimes, when I just played a particulary frustrating battle, I want to go after them with a club ~D .
While I'm upset with CA's fantasy approach, I'm far more furious with their blatant disregard for the gaming community. Their lack (and often late) patches topped off with the inability to mod features or putting restraints on moddable feature (faction size, unit size, diplomacy etc).
This game was released in 2004, it's the later half of 2005 and all we've seen is two patches. Converserly, Blizzard entertainment just released the eleventh patch for diablo 2 (17 for Warcraft 3), it consists of new goodies and a new challenge for players to fight. Diablo 2 is no longer making money for blizzard. The fact that they are still improving and adding features to this old title just goes to show how much they appreiciate their fan base.
Ya, CA made the engine. Fact is it's mired with flaws which they ignore for long periods of time (still pending). The old "shut up they made the game so you can't complain" line is a bit diffcult to swallow since they CAN upgrade the game, they just choose not too.
I would like to see other companies tackle this engine and improve on it. CA needs some competition to show them that their fan base does not come cheap. We demand the best. The motto "we give the best" does not hold true at the moment down at CA. "we give you a really good engine, then allow a number of issues to interfere with your enjoyment of the game, have fun"
The same goes for the developers of Cossacks. That game is filled with bugs, but patches are about as frequent as being struck with lighting. As it stand the developers have no competition. People are stuck with that game since it's the only game that really depecits Napoleonic warfare. Ditto with RTW.
CA falls short of greatness in my books. I've downloaded almost every single modification just to see if any of them tackle the problems i have. Of course they don't, since it's all hardcoded. I find the new skins and maps a good distraction for short while. Then the old issues began to appear. Very annoying.
I totally agree with you!!
I saw the interview with one of CA developers (the one where he says there are only a dozen history freaks that want historic realism) and I think he was deliberatly trying to put all the weight of the complaints on this historical issue. From reading his interview you would never guess what CA lacked in minimal support with this game.
I mean, it's their game...if they want to make it Fantasy Total War it is their right, but the point is not that.
I think you forgot to mention that not only they totally failed to give this game proper support, but also there were some very weird inconsistencies(sp?) with the videos, screenshots and features advertised before the release of the game and what we really got. Some of the things that were missing than are now being advertised as features for BI???? This was the first time I ever felt this kind of cheated by a game company. ( I don't buy EA games ~;) )
All this coming from a company I had in high regards (together with Paradox and the old people from Impressions) after all they game me two awesome games in STW and MTW. But their behavior with RTW is really not something to be proud of and it makes me think twice before ever buying a game from them again.
kayapó
I share your pain, CA's behavior of late has been just short of impolite. That said, I do think you are a little unfair to them here. They are nowhere near as big or established as Blizzard so they cannot keep up the same level of support. Also, Blizzard can QA its own patches whereas CA needs the help of the publisher for that. For M:TW and R:TW, they were stuck with Activision, who only allowed one patch per game. Perhaps Sega does better: the fact that there may be a 1.3 patch for R:TW vanilla indicates Sega is better disposed towards customer support. Perhaps.
I think you touched the point. They were very unpolite and disregardful for their fan base. But the size of the company does not matter. The 1.2 patch was soo buggy that any company would have been ashamed to release it like that. But not only they released it but also it was their FINAL patch.
Yes Blizzard might be bigger but Paradox isn't. Impressions isn't either. Paradox for example uses their fan base to ful capacity. I mean, who needs QA when you can release a public beta and have the people that matter balance out the bugs and gameplay.
I think it is all a matter of good relationship with it's fans and CA, for some reason, failed this time around.
This thing about Activision not letting them do another patch sounds weird. I think Activision woudn't finance another patch. But they were free to patch up if they wanted to. I never heard of a game left full of bugs by a developer because the publisher didn't let them patch it.
Well, call me naive but I still think CA will come out with a descent explanation for everything (that's all it takes).
As an example: After releasing Crusader Kings, Paradox had to start working with HOI2 right away, as that was the money making title that keeped them afloat. So CK got less atention in the beggining. That didn't generate any problems as they were always very correct and straight forward about it. And also gave CK atention whenever they had a chance.
kayapó
The 1.2 patch was soo buggy that any company would have been ashamed to release it like that. But not only they released it but also it was their FINAL patch.
Yes Blizzard might be bigger but Paradox isn't. Impressions isn't either. Paradox for example uses their fan base to ful capacity. I mean, who needs QA when you can release a public beta and have the people that matter balance out the bugs and gameplay.
Buggy? As far as I know the 1.2 was not buggy at all. There were a few glitches, yes, but most major patches have these. The patch definitely improved things for me and a lot of other patrons, so it wasn't buggy.
While you have a point, a public beta is a risky venture, because of illegal copies and idea-stealing, and the publisher might object to it. Since Activision does not seem to care much for patching, it is likely that they would forbid an open beta as well. Also, to sort out all the issues or even keep track of the flurry of reports created by a public beta requires a lot of manpower. I agree however, that CA should make more use of their fan base.
I think you touched the point. They were very unpolite and disregardful for their fan base. But the size of the company does not matter.
I think it is all a matter of good relationship with it's fans and CA, for some reason, failed this time around.
I think Activision woudn't finance another patch. But they were free to patch up if they wanted to. I never heard of a game left full of bugs by a developer because the publisher didn't let them patch it.
Size does matter a lot when it comes to how much issues (read: bugs) they can adress in a given time period.
Activision has a bad reputation when it comes to support, or so I understand, but R:TW certainly is not a buggy game. Yes, there are plenty of issues, but this is not the same as buggy. However, CA probably cannot go without a publisher to release a big patch. QA is necessary to prevent buggy patches and small developers, like CA, do not have the resources to do this. Blizzard has, but Blizzard does not qualify as a small developer.
In other words, Activision has to do this, and they have a one-patch policy. CA could make another patch, but without QA there is a distinct risk that it will make things worse.
Well, call me naive but I still think CA will come out with a descent explanation for everything (that's all it takes).
As an example: After releasing Crusader Kings, Paradox had to start working with HOI2 right away, as that was the money making title that keeped them afloat. So CK got less atention in the beggining. That didn't generate any problems as they were always very correct and straight forward about it. And also gave CK atention whenever they had a chance.
Yes, more openness from CA to the fan base would definitely help.
I think we both agree that CA's attitude towards its fans is not what should be. Perhaps they were provoked by their fans' hostility, but R:TW seems to be designed for a different market share, and if CA expected us to accept this, they were very wrong.
I quite enjoyed the demo.
blesphemer! stone him! stone teh heretic!
http://www.scholia.net/images/The%20Stoning%20of%20Stephen.gif
~:joker: nah...
Reverend Joe
08-22-2005, 20:06
blesphemer! stone him! stone teh heretic!
http://www.scholia.net/images/The%20Stoning%20of%20Stephen.gif
~:joker: nah...
Oh, man... if that wasn't so huge I would put that in my signature. That was classic.
Buggy? As far as I know the 1.2 was not buggy at all. There were a few glitches, yes, but most major patches have these. The patch definitely improved things for me and a lot of other patrons, so it wasn't buggy.
I just meant that 1.2 has some bugs that were very obvious. They might not be huge bugs that compromise stability. But the fact that not even the difficulty settings work properly is very telling.
As I said I am sure CA has reasons. Why do I think that? Because they have in the past given me two awesome games that are in my all time favorites list, and they're both very near the top.
Yes hostility might have been the case, at least it seems that they're pointing in this direction. But what did they expect? It was their decision to make RTW a more "open for all ages and types of players" so I say they should have been prepared.
I'm an academic, and I know very well the feeling of someone openly bashing the work that sometimes took all your adult life. But I don't use that as an excuse to close myself down in my room.
When I said size doesn't matter I meant that you don't have to be big to be polite and open to criticism. I guess we agree on this.
Anyway CA has credit with me. STW and MTW gave me much more than the few dollars that end up going to the developer.
kayapó
Greek_fire19
08-22-2005, 22:48
I think it's important to keep in mind too that while RTW isn't what we were hoping for or what we were maybe expecting...when you compare it to the Real time strategy game competition (almost a year ago) it's actually quite good.
pezhetairoi
08-23-2005, 07:19
yes, but expectations always get higher, don't they? There's always a higher mountain to climb beyond the present one, and so on, and so on...
I just meant that 1.2 has some bugs that were very obvious. They might not be huge bugs that compromise stability. But the fact that not even the difficulty settings work properly is very telling.
We may be meaning different things with "buggy". A bug used to be a major error, so I only call a game or patch buggy if it really does not work as it ought. Neither R:TW 1.1 nor R:TW 1.2 was buggy by these standards.
As I said I am sure CA has reasons. Why do I think that? Because they have in the past given me two awesome games that are in my all time favorites list, and they're both very near the top.
Yes hostility might have been the case, at least it seems that they're pointing in this direction. But what did they expect? It was their decision to make RTW a more "open for all ages and types of players" so I say they should have been prepared.
(....)
When I said size doesn't matter I meant that you don't have to be big to be polite and open to criticism. I guess we agree on this.
I agree with everything you say here. R:TW is a good game, but its launch was a PR-disaster towards the hard-core fans of the series.
Does this mean I am not going to buy BI? No, not neccesarily.
Will I complain about BI too? Probably.
Will that stop me from buying TW4? I don't think so ~D .
It's all a matter of perspective. ~:smoking:
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.