View Full Version : Swedish Pre-order "Mistake"
Faenaris
11-03-2006, 15:02
Apparantly, somebody in Sweden already has his copy of M2TW.
http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotalwarfrm55.showMessageRange?topicID=5524.topic&start=41&stop=60
He has posted some screenshots and will post more (see the bottom of the page). Apparantly, 2 copies were shipped before the Distributor realised that he shouldn't be doing that. Looks like someone is gonna get the hammer on the head. ~:)
I'm happy though. This means that M2TW will be released on the 10th in Europe. Woohoow!
Dave1984
11-03-2006, 15:13
So presumably this means copies are now at European suppliers?
It is already made around to various Black market in Asia.... Just kidding!
Anniep
OMG WHAT A LUCKY GUY! :laugh4:
The countdown is 7 days now, so i guess european suppliers have started to receive copies. Cheers to the lucky guy anyway! :2thumbsup:
Heh if I was him it'd be on ebay by now and being sold for at least 100 Euros ;)
Being first to report a bug is priceless! :D
Anniep
Being first to report a bug is priceless!
and that's when you begin wishing the game was priced less.
Being first to report a bug is priceless! :D
Anniep
Nonsense, my price for reporting a bug is one buck :whip:
Nah, you will be too happy to report the bug that you would forget to name your price.
It is 40 bucks preordered through Frys.com. I didn't buy RTW/BI, so the money remains :)
Anniep
Faenaris
11-03-2006, 18:00
Being first to report a bug is priceless! :D
Anniep
and that's when you begin wishing the game was priced less.
Pure gold! :grin:
satchef1
11-03-2006, 18:14
i wonder if my local games shop has their copies yet? they always start selling stuff as soon as its in...
Bugger, I doubt Amazon will be that silly and send it off early, god that is annoying!
Basileus
11-03-2006, 20:50
hehe lucky dude
well? is this lucky guy at least providing any feedback to us, the miserable have-nots?
Yes, he's posted lots of screenshots in the thrad, and been answering questions. He's said the battle ai is
The AI is great ive had some realy hard battles witch i would have won easy on RTW. They flank the move archers from the wall when you get closer with you units. All in all they are you bloody smart now
I think atm he is busy playing the game and enjoying himself, and will likely give more feedback tomorrow.
ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
11-03-2006, 21:55
dumb question, but I ask anyhow. Where has he been posting at,just wondering??
Furious Mental
11-04-2006, 10:15
Apparently the ability to dismount cavalry before a battle, which I had thought was in the game all along, is out. Lame. Very, very, very lame.
edyzmedieval
11-04-2006, 12:04
Lucky doog... I want M2TW too. :embarassed:
Apparently the ability to dismount cavalry before a battle, which I had thought was in the game all along, is out. Lame. Very, very, very lame.
CA said they make their game conform to popular conception rather than historical actuality.
CA said they make their game conform to popular conception rather than historical actuality.
Yeah but everyone does like dis-mountng cav. before battles so they haven't made it to popular conception or historical actuality.
Does anyone know whether Amazon ships early?
Furious Mental
11-04-2006, 12:34
Indeed. Personally I am not familiar with this popular conception that dismounted cavalry were in fact infantry with the word "dismounted" in front of their name. Such a conception seems unlikely to be popular except possibly among those unfamiliar with the English language because it entails a complete reversal of the plain meaning of the word "dismounted". In fact what CA have done is simply not bothered to make a meaningful effort beyond naming some units one thing and not another. That's just disappointing I'm afraid.
Yeah but everyone does like dis-mountng cav. before battles so they haven't made it to popular conception or historical actuality.
I doubt the majority of people who play the game think dismounted knights fight better than mounted knights. CA does make decisions on the basis of what they ascertain to be the popular conception, and this conception is largely shaped by movies. Also, the people within CA who advocate historical accuracy and realism has steadily lost influence over the years. Just prior to the release of RTW, CA said that historical accuracy and realism are not their focus. This was their reason for why hoplites didn't use overhand spears, Egyptians had chariots and the game had exploding projectiles.
Did anyone notice this (https://img171.imageshack.us/img171/2994/18medievalzc0.jpg)?
Seems there still are "years" in the game.
Furious Mental
11-04-2006, 13:59
"I doubt the majority of people who play the game think dismounted knights fight better than mounted knights. "
It might not be obvious to people in field battles but nonetheless it should be intuitive to anyone that in, for example, a siege situation, dismounted knights may be more useful because horses cannot ride up to the battlements. In any case it is not that CA has chosen not to include small units of heavily armoured foot soldiers and such. Rather it has simply chosen not to bother including under the rubric of an ability to dismount cavalry before a battle. That is not a result of a decision to promote a particular type of gameplay to conform to popular concepts. That is a result of a decision not to bother doing something properly.
I think their problem there was that the RTW engine treated the horse and the rider as one entity, which means they can't be split. This is also the reason why rider and horse always die at the same time by the way.
So my guess is that it would have entailed a re-code of quite a large part of the engine, so they delayed it to see if they'll have time for it towards the end of the development period, and then they saw they hadn't and stuffed it...
I think their problem there was that the RTW engine treated the horse and the rider as one entity, which means they can't be split. This is also the reason why rider and horse always die at the same time by the way.
It was the same in MTW but they figured it out then.
CBR
Well maybe it'll come in an expansion pack...
They could have figured it out but as I said they probably didn't think it'd add enough to the game compared to what they were working on.
x-dANGEr
11-04-2006, 16:35
Talk about hype.. (How much they advertised the "dismounting" feature)
Talk about hype.. (How much they advertised the "dismounting" feature)
I totally agree!
edyzmedieval
11-04-2006, 17:39
Talk about hype.. (How much they advertised the "dismounting" feature)
:laugh4:
Exactly. Another marketing error...
ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
11-04-2006, 18:00
CA said they make their game conform to popular conception rather than historical actuality.
of course m8, they want to make money, so they will tend towards the populaar conception and let the modders deal with the historical acutsalliy.
Incongruous
11-04-2006, 21:34
I am certain that they said one could dismount knights.
Oh the disgrace!
I don't think people would just drop it and leave it if it was historically accurate. Most people who have common conceptions are easily swayed anyways, I bet they'll stay with the only game on the market that combines RTS with TBS strategy into one glorified, glinty, glowy package.
I have just seen the 1st pirate copy of MTW2 at a warez site last night , I wont post the name of the site , went there this morning an the sites been taken down ,lol
Kralizec
11-05-2006, 18:47
I suppose that means that units such as "dismounted boyars" and "dismounted Gothic knights" we've seen so far, were in fact just trainable infantry types.
I've been mislead into the belief that the "dismount" function was back. Suddenly I get the feeling I get when I'm ripped off, without myself having actually bought the game yet.
:shame:
If I get some good reviews from actual players (such as on this site), I might still buy MTW2 but only if the price drops to something more reasonable, like 20 euro.
I'm bummed about apparently not being able to dismount my knights.
Buyt that's not a big enough reason for me to drop the game altogether
Phalaxar
11-05-2006, 20:08
"I doubt the majority of people who play the game think dismounted knights fight better than mounted knights. "
It might not be obvious to people in field battles but nonetheless it should be intuitive to anyone that in, for example, a siege situation, dismounted knights may be more useful because horses cannot ride up to the battlements. In any case it is not that CA has chosen not to include small units of heavily armoured foot soldiers and such. Rather it has simply chosen not to bother including under the rubric of an ability to dismount cavalry before a battle. That is not a result of a decision to promote a particular type of gameplay to conform to popular concepts. That is a result of a decision not to bother doing something properly.
Meh, it's easy for you to dissect their ideas from the outside and arrive at the conclusion that they're stupid.
Give them some credit. They're not a bunch of lazy retards who are trying to screw over history so that X-Box gamers will pick up the game.
They're clearly just trying to make the game as fun as possible (to sell more) and make some money.
It's not that they just "didn't bother" like they thought, hey, you know what, we could check the little box that says "let knights dismount" or, you know, we could eat some crisps.
Letting knights demount would have been a lot more work (to code, to make the models and skins, animations and the like) for them for very little benefit (they reckon), and I think that's fair enough.
On these boards, it's easy to get carried away and think that everyone, or everyone that matters, is a bit of a history buff. In real life, the vast majority of players aren't. It makes good sense for CA to make the game for their biggest demographic. Get over it. CA were never different.
Finally, I think people are just generally being too down on MTW II before it's even out. You won't like it if you pick it up, pop it in and say, "omsg wtf the install screens were better on MTW." Give it its chance.
Kralizec
11-05-2006, 20:58
Letting knights demount would have been a lot more work (to code, to make the models and skins, animations and the like) for them for very little benefit (they reckon), and I think that's fair enough.
There will be dismounted boyars and various other dismounted [insert cavalry], but you can only get them by training.
Buyt that's not a big enough reason for me to drop the game altogether
There's been various other stuff that bothers me as well. I just don't like being misled. It's obvious that CA raised a smoke screen of confusion to make buyers believe that mount/dismount was back.
Phalaxar
11-05-2006, 21:30
There will be dismounted boyars and various other dismounted [insert cavalry], but you can only get them by training.
There's been various other stuff that bothers me as well. I just don't like being misled. It's obvious that CA raised a smoke screen of confusion to make buyers believe that mount/dismount was back.
I thought they were seperate units?
That's not obvious at all. Things make sense even if there's no Evil Empire of Profit-tasting Doom with CA as a greasy eminence.
Prince of the Poodles
11-06-2006, 03:45
There will be dismounted boyars and various other dismounted [insert cavalry], but you can only get them by training.
There's been various other stuff that bothers me as well. I just don't like being misled. It's obvious that CA raised a smoke screen of confusion to make buyers believe that mount/dismount was back.
Oh my god, who actually buys the game based on the stupid mount/dismount function?! Some people are acting like this is a horrible, despicable act committed by CA.
It was probably just confusion because a lot of the knights and horse infantry can be trained as either.
I didnt even use it in MTW... ~:rolleyes:
IPoseTheQuestionYouReturnTheAnswer
11-06-2006, 03:58
I didnt even use it in MTW...
Yeah, me neither. The dismounted units were too small to be that effective, and the lances were better anyway.
I've been mislead into the belief that the "dismount" function was back. Suddenly I get the feeling I get when I'm ripped off, without myself having actually bought the game yet.
That's exactly the ripped-off feeling that everyone I know has who bought RTW.
That's exactly the ripped-off feeling that everyone I know has who bought RTW.
Why does everyone hate Rome???
I liked it thanks to the great campaign map and really liked the chosen time period. LEAVE ROME ALONE!
(Hey that rhymes, lol)
Kralizec
11-06-2006, 20:57
Eh, no it doesn't.
Almost everybody who complains about Rome (and now, about MTW2) were in fact great fans of MTW and/or STW.
A lot of great features (of wich dismount was only a minor one) were abandoned for no apparant real reason, with the excuse "that it would just confuse non-hardcore players"
The fact that dismounting is out is only the last drop. I'd still buy MTW2 without hesitation if I knew for a fact that the faction limit is up to over 26, if the developers made an effort to emulate the great civil wars of MTW original, if CA made a credible pledge to support the modding community, et cetera. But the cold hard truth is that likely we'll have none of that.
@ Poodle: CA isn't evil, not sure where I gave you the idea that I thought so. They're no better or worse then the average company trying to make a profit. If you love CA's work so much, good for you. Spend your own money as you see fit.
edit: spelling
Freedom Onanist
11-06-2006, 21:16
That's exactly the ripped-off feeling that everyone I know has who bought RTW.
:inquisitive:
3 options:
Puzz3d, Kralizec, if it really bugs you that much - don't buy it.
Get enough people to agree with you and the numbers should impress CA enough to take you seriously - shouldn't be that difficult if everyone you know felt cheated. Strange how word of mouth didn't spread to stop RTW becoming a best seller though isn't it? Ah, what fools we all were to fall for the hype eh?
The other option is wait for a mod. Again, this won't take long since CA have engaged with the modding community - nasty deceivers that they are.
Dr_Who_Regen#4
11-06-2006, 22:30
I am sure there are "features" that have been removed in place of a different "feature" CA thought was valuable...or just removed because they did not want to spend $5000 or whatever to build something if it does not change their sales numbers....
My job is related to managing software development (not games or products for end consumers) and there are always choices to be made. You have a budget of so much and you have to prioritize things. I can tell you that my users are not always happy (Hopefully they are happy more times then not or I will need a new job). This is just how things are as end users (us for M2TW) are not part of every decision because they do not see the big picture.
I would love CA to add in a lot of features that used to be there or that are great ideas from people here, but they have made a financial decision on their part that they hopes gets them the most profits. We can all make our own decision of either buying the game now, waiting for reviews/mods, waiting for the price to drop, or decide not to buy it ever...
I for one find this series as the only reasonable Strategy game out there (maybe I have not looked hard enough). Although I do find that RTW was at best poor on challenge it is still the only game (along with MTW) I have found with a feel that I like....of course others can choose not to like it...
Anyways about a week to go and I am hoping for my early chicago release....Maybe EB Games gets confused like the company in sweeden and gives me my copy early...
Prince of the Poodles
11-06-2006, 22:31
@ Poodle: CA isn't evil, not sure where I gave you the idea that I thought so. They're no better or worse then the average company trying to make a profit. If you love CA's work so much, good for you. Spend your own money as you see fit.
Sorry for the rant against your post.
It just seemed that - out of all that Maeg88 said in the thread - people were picking up on a function that was not that important and making it into a big deal.
However, i can see where people would definately be angry about being mislead.
:shame:
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.