View Full Version : Creative Assembly No further patches for M2TW or Kingdoms (update: Kingdoms patch announced)
guyfawkes5
10-14-2007, 20:06
An update for kingdoms has been announced. You may read about it here (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=95556).
~sapi
---
Linkage (http://shoguntotalwar.yuku.com/reply/296124#reply-296124)
Caliban (CA)[/color]"]There are no plans for a patch at the moment.
Opinions?
FactionHeir
10-14-2007, 20:25
I didn't expect anything else really. But then, I won't be getting ETW either because of the lack of proper support and bugfixing patches ever since RTW.
SecuROM and co don't help that either.
Yeah it kind of fits their current apparent company policy: make a game with kick-ass graphics and mediocre gameplay (compared to what they could do if they really went for it) and dish it out as soon as possible to as many customers as possible, then move on to the next add-on or game without bothering to pick up the pieces. Don't care too much about bugs on the way unless people complain extremely loudly about a certain thing.
Seriously, I expected it (although I had a few more "insider informations" than most of you guys did)
Zajuts149
10-14-2007, 21:05
So, its abandonware already?:laugh4:
Seriously, this is a blow, and I will certainly not buy any new TW game, or other SEGA game for that matter..
:thumbsdown:
guyfawkes5
10-14-2007, 21:17
Post your thoughts in the linked thread, perhaps CA can be persuaded of their error by communal pressure. Even if you doubt the likelihood of this, it is worth the few seconds of post-writing even for the smallest chance.
Remember to maintain discipline, any unreasonable attacks on CA would result in our goal being damaged beyond compare.
lancelot
10-14-2007, 21:54
Not surprised in the slightest...although we have to make some allowances for the qualifier 'not at the moment'. But even so this does indeed seem like a big FU to the fanbase.
I mean seriously...is this legit? Are CA trying to sabotage their own marketability? Or are they counting on a fresh crop of sychophantic newbies to start playing their games each year and really dont give two hoots???
I wont be getting ETW if this is what CA has become...
uruk-hai
10-15-2007, 01:00
No plans for a patch for kingdoms?i sure hope that's not the case, and are working on a patch and just said that for some evil joke.some thing tells me its for real and not just some evil joke.I hope that we get one patch for kingdoms that does just fixes some or all of the bugs.like the stone forts bug in the crusades campaign.Now i am strating to rethink about if i should buy empire total war.
lets look at a game two games called stronghold 2 and stronghold legends.if i remember right stronghold 2 only had only 2 patchs for it by the time stronghold legends came out.stronghold legends did how some mp bugs like in a 1v1 or 2v2 games you were unable to talk sometimes,but a few patchs later and its fixed,with better mp.Now lets look at stronghold 2 , two more patchs come out for it,after stronghold legends out.
so if firefly can patch a game even after a new game of theres came out.i think ca and sage should be able to make at lest one patch for kingdoms.
CA have always been parsimonious with their patches. I am not sure this marks a big change.
The decision not to make a significant 1.3 patch for M2TW was a bigger blow to me - it seemed clear then that it was considered too much work to bring the vanilla game up to the level of the expansion. That the passage of time has not changed this evaluation is not a surprise. I am not that bothered about Kingdoms - I am not aware of major bugs, but I don't read the bug list (I want to remain a happy gamer).
What I would like to see is a bit more tweaking of the AI.
The strategic AI is the most in need, IMO. I kept a log of the battles in a England VH/VH AAR and they were nearly always with the odds in my favour. Typically, the AI can't organise an offensive determined enough to catch me at a disadvantage. Nor can it avoid such offensives being organised by me. Now that does not sound so bad - given that I am a human and it a dumb AI. But because I like to wage war on a shoestring, the AI should be able to get me at a disadvantage - I know I can still win battles outgunned. However, the AI just does not get its act together. It dithers and divides.
Also, playing around with the game for a PBM in crazy ways (trying to make it harder, not easier), it is clear that there are still whacky failings of the strategic AI. For example, it will sometimes ignore empty enemy settlements, turn after turn - just walk right past them. You literally can't give the settlements away. And it seems to prefer full stacks to be led by captains and leaves generals with penny packets. You can use the consol to give a good army to a general and next turn the AI will hand it over to a captain. :dizzy2:
The battlefield AI also has problems, although I still maintain that it can often give players a run for their money if the odds are 2:1 in its favour. However, it does still suffer from passivity in the face of fire and undue exposure of its general to risk (suicide generals). A few days ago, I fought a siege assault where the AI crippled itself by making its general one of the first units to - literally - walk into my schiltron. Today, I watched my son fight a 1:1 sally which was basically just a turkey shoot.
Ramses II CP
10-15-2007, 03:38
Seems to be the way things are going with the industry in general. Good slides to adequate slides to 'Well, they aren't crash bugs, so who cares?' As long as the consumer continues to enable it, the slide will deepen. :thumbsdown:
Maybe this is a chance for some up and comers to make a decent game, take good care of it and dethrone CA from this niche market. More likely the niche itself dies, and that might be for the best.
:egypt:
Seems to be the way things are going with the industry in general. Good slides to adequate slides to 'Well, they aren't crash bugs, so who cares?' As long as the consumer continues to enable it, the slide will deepen. :thumbsdown:
Maybe this is a chance for some up and comers to make a decent game, take good care of it and dethrone CA from this niche market. More likely the niche itself dies, and that might be for the best.
:egypt:
No, what its a chance for is for consumers to recognize that this trend is well established in the gaming industry, and reliant on thier consumption.
No big surprise here, they wont be issuing another patch, why should they? Some clever modder will come along and mod the game anyway, not only that the modders will be revered on fan baords all over the web.
By the same people who whine about not getting patches from the producer. :rolleyes:
i tend to think people are OTT with criticism of CA over bugs and patches... but no patches for kingdoms combined with no bug fixes in 1.3 gets a big :thumbsdown: from me.
broken crescent over kingdoms for me.
Daveybaby
10-15-2007, 17:03
This is... inexcusable.
I find it staggering to comprehend that they can leave the game in a state where it provides no challenge whatsoever on even the hardest difficulty level.
At the very least the grand campaign should be brought up to kingdoms standards.
crpcarrot
10-15-2007, 17:19
well with considering the fact that patch 1.3 is nothing not even including unit balancing i'm not in the least suprised. although i stopped playing rome after a couple of months and never bought any of the expansions at least they kept patching itand the comunity seemed satisfied with v1.5 (or whatever it ended at). but now even that trend has stopped. building an expansion that wasnt compatible with the original signalled the end of any patching to me.
although i would love to buy kingdoms i wont due to securom. its funny cos without securom CA would already have my money :)
i guess it will beack to waiting for the buglist and patch info before i spend my money on ETW (asuming ther is no securom and the likes to contend with)
I'm starting to think that it's not that they wouldn't fix the game. They simply don't know how to do it.
The fact that the ETW forum already has as many posts as it does right now doesn't help this case either. Good luck to anyone willing to reward this kind of behavior.
I am not that bothered about Kingdoms - I am not aware of major bugs, but I don't read the bug list (I want to remain a happy gamer).
I tend to avoid reading the bug list, too, but there is one decent sized bug that may cramp your enjoyment of a campaign(if you don't expect it). A feature mentioned in the book, reinforcements for Wales if they conquer towns on their border, doesn't work.
I wasn't as bothered as some by the Securom thing(comes on most accounting software anyway, according to a friend of mine in that field), but I'm pretty disappointed by this. Kingdoms is far above MTW2 in most ways in my opinion, and I'm willing to ignore all the little spelling and other errors that should be easily fixed, but I'd at least like them to fix some of the features mentioned in their own game manual.
:no:
TevashSzat
10-16-2007, 02:07
Sigh....too bad.
I, unfortunately, am one of those people that stay by a series. I know, M2TW is a huge dissapointment bugwise, but IMO the TW series is the only of its kind and is not something that you can easily find a replacement for like cookie cutter FPS/RPG/RTS games.
TW series is the only of its kind and is not something that you can easily find a replacement for
I look forward to the day when this will not be the case any more.
TheLastPrivate
10-16-2007, 04:48
There are very few companies that seem to actually follow up with customer service patches and support - namely Blizzard, which I credit their success with their continuous support/patches of their games.
Really, I think CA has potential to be a megamonster in the industry by their own rights, they just don't play up to it for some unknown reason - probably involves money and in-group politics.
crpcarrot
10-16-2007, 11:25
I look forward to the day when this will not be the case any more.
yeah me too a little competition wouldnt hurt this sellers market.
Really, I think CA has potential to be a megamonster in the industry by their own rights, they just don't play up to it for some unknown reason - probably involves money and in-group politics.
And I think it involves the lack of ability. You all need to take into consideration the fact that they could not knew how to make ai better and fix those bugs.
pevergreen
10-16-2007, 11:44
There are very few companies that seem to actually follow up with customer service patches and support - namely Blizzard, which I credit their success with their continuous support/patches of their games.
Really, I think CA has potential to be a megamonster in the industry by their own rights, they just don't play up to it for some unknown reason - probably involves money and in-group politics.
They still patch Warcraft 3 even though they dont need to. Subtle Balances. That dedication (and the huge tournaments that still go on for it) is beautiful.
Prodigal
10-16-2007, 12:03
Dunno about this, I'm more of a "does it run" player, if it does that's enough for me. Sure there are bugs but nothing that crashes out of the game & that's pretty much good enough for me.
Since stw I've played every TW game to death & beyond, and that amounts to alot of enjoyable hours killing & being killed.
Thing is that I can really only play these games for just so long, (essentially until I've exhausted every faction & all the different things I can think of to do). Based on this I'm happier knowing that CA's resources are being put into the development of the next release, rather than tweaking the current game.
FactionHeir
10-16-2007, 13:46
Thing is that I can really only play these games for just so long, (essentially until I've exhausted every faction & all the different things I can think of to do). Based on this I'm happier knowing that CA's resources are being put into the development of the next release, rather than tweaking the current game.
It will still come out unfinished though, so I don't quite understand your point :yes:
CA has just lost a customer. Me.
Shame really considering how i have to fight armies made up of literally nothing but Artillery and Millitia Crossbowmen in my Teutonic campaigns and pikemen which are still really really really broken in the ass.
Well at least they pushed me off the fence as to whether or not I should buy Kingdoms.
Zenicetus
10-16-2007, 20:08
Well, to be fair... I think many of the things we'd like to see fixed, like the strategic and battle AI, are actually major game engine redesign issues. That's not the kind of thing we'd see in a patch. What they'd been doing lately are mostly band-aid fixes, like giving the AI factions more money to boost the challenge in Kingdoms, and tweaking the stat balance. Both of those options are available by modding the vanilla game even without a patch.
Yes, it would have been nice to see one more patch to fix whatever minor things they could still tweak without rebuilding the AI. But since it wouldn't be a major rebuild, we'd still be griping about "poor AI". Hopefully we'll be getting more of the changes we really want in ETW since they're doing a major rebuild of the AI, and I'd rather see them spend maximum effort on that.
I'm more angry at CA/Sega for the SecureRom thing (the reason I won't buy Kingdoms) than the lack of a final patch. I can still manage to have some fun with M2TW, using house rules to get the level of challenge I want.
This is sad, but very much expected considering the number of problems the game had upon release and the pace of patching as yet.
As many have posted countless times eversince the game came out, quantity has been taking over quality in TW eversince RTW. The games have simply too many features to keep reasonably under control or to allow balancing within the limited hours/resources a developer can dedicate to them. It follows that the new games suffer from bugs and imbalances and this is in a time that CA teams are considerably larger than in the past, when efforts towards a bug free and balanced game were more at least in number.
I have left the .com permanenty and do not wish to post there again, yet i commend positively on the OP stance and also on the resignation of the .com moderator (toxicseagul) relative to the matter.
Noir (aka excetchzebe)
lancelot
10-17-2007, 22:42
Dunno about this, I'm more of a "does it run" player, if it does that's enough for me. Sure there are bugs but nothing that crashes out of the game & that's pretty much good enough for me.
Since stw I've played every TW game to death & beyond, and that amounts to alot of enjoyable hours killing & being killed.
Thing is that I can really only play these games for just so long, (essentially until I've exhausted every faction & all the different things I can think of to do). Based on this I'm happier knowing that CA's resources are being put into the development of the next release, rather than tweaking the current game.
Dont take this as a personal attack but do you enjoy buying stuff that is half-broken? because that is what you are doing.
And more to the point, its not about how serious the bugs are or are not, rather that CA is laughing at us (or rather- you) for being suckered into buying an unfinished product and/or getting away with not fixing said product before they abandon it to get more money out of a fresh new bunch of suckers...
Tweaking is what you do when you have a bug free game and play around with it. Most people are asking for fixes, which is a whole different ball game.
I can't say I'm surprised by this, but I'm hopeful that ETW will be better. Though I won't be surprised if it isn't.
SenseiTW
10-18-2007, 12:36
Hi guys,
First of all apologies for the delay in a response on this. We have been working behind the scenes and talking to the CA OZ development team about the situation but I wanted to be clearer on where things are before posting.
Each of our titles has a scheduled development time on which we can work on them, and we did not anticipate the few issues that surfaced with Kingdoms after release. The Oz team have since begun work on a new project, which is why a previous post stated that at the present time there are no scheduled updates in the pipeline for Kingdoms.
We are however listening to your concerns, examining the issues in question and are currently looking into ways to support you to the fullest extent with the resources at our disposal.
Thanks,
Mark O'Connell
(aka SenseiTW)
Thanks for the update.
I doubt many of the serious issues with the current engine could be fixed in a patch, at any rate.
Mori Gabriel Syme
10-18-2007, 17:55
Thank you for the update. :yes: Is there a chance that they will remove SecuRom while they are at this?
FactionHeir
10-18-2007, 18:00
While I appreciate the update from CA, and this is not aimed at SenseiTW in particular, the post was a diplomatic way of saying we may or may not do something, but more likely we won't.
Its part of company policy though to not say anything that could be seen as binding, but until there is a concrete yes or no on a future patch that will fix more than what 1.3 "fixed" and hopefully come close to or exceed 1.2, I wouldn't hold my hopes too high.
fallen851
10-18-2007, 18:16
So happy I didn't buy M2TW. RTW was enough to turn me away. Now I get to play EB though!
Well posters should at least take solace in the fact that a rep from CA replied to the thread and is reading the posts. I tend to be more in the camp of factionheir in my feelings on this (although he is far more diplomatic) but one only needs to read a couple of lines from sensei's post which are very revealing.
Each of our titles has a scheduled development time on which we can work on them, and we did not anticipate the few issues that surfaced with Kingdoms after release.
So one can assume based that the "scheduled development time" has expired, one can also assume that since there was no anticipation of the few issued that surfaced, there was never a plan to address them.
Cavaet Emptor, really gents its all about you and your purchase. CA reads the posts, is a pretty reasonable company, they just are apart of an industry that relies on user fixes and modification to propel the life of the games.
Nothing wrong with this, but as a consumer you have to decide if thats what you want to support or not. Now the SecuRom business, thats a different animal, but 2 handed fixes, rebalanced units, bad text files thats all out there and can be modded.
Expecting CA to do it when there are others who do it efficiently and for free via the modding community displays a lack of understanding of the business model. RTW seems a notable exception, but really I think expecting another through patch from CA is like getting blood out of a stone.
Look to the modding community, and your wallet.
Hi guys,
First of all apologies for the delay in a response on this. We have been working behind the scenes and talking to the CA OZ development team about the situation but I wanted to be clearer on where things are before posting.
Each of our titles has a scheduled development time on which we can work on them, and we did not anticipate the few issues that surfaced with Kingdoms after release. The Oz team have since begun work on a new project, which is why a previous post stated that at the present time there are no scheduled updates in the pipeline for Kingdoms.
We are however listening to your concerns, examining the issues in question and are currently looking into ways to support you to the fullest extent with the resources at our disposal.
Thanks,
Mark O'Connell
(aka SenseiTW)
This is not aimed directly at you Mark and I want you to know I'm usually pretty civil in my comments and lately defended you guys who come visit the forums and actually talk to us (breaking the self-imposed silence of your management which I'm thankful for) but this is not an understatement, it's an insult.
I know that you probably can't really talk about it freely, but make your chief read this.
Jeez you can't expect me to believe this junk. I am sure that the management knew about a lot of these issues. The Kalmar Union not working is not something you can overlook if you try it even once (judging from what I hear anyways). They just decided that they don't care because people will buy it anyways. Then they decided that they wouldn't need a patch afterwards because simply put, you already have our money.
If what you say was true and you "didn't anticipate the few issues that came up with kingdoms" you should seriously fire your project manager in down under as soon as possible because he's definitely not up to the job.
This is the last drop, I won't buy another game from CA until I am 100% convinced that this totally arrogant and disparaging company policy changed. A lot of us aren't stupid you know, so don't try to sell us bullshit as truffle-pâté
And I hope some more people from the community will arrive at similar conclusions about buying Empires.
FactionHeir
10-18-2007, 18:49
I think Odin and alpaca have brought up another valid point.
How can the development time be over by the time you just released an expansion pack already? IMHO there should be support for both the game and the expansion pack, but at least the expansion should gain additional support for at least the same amount of time the main game has and not be shelved the moment it is released, which is what seems to have happened.
To say it bluntly, while you may have anticipated that a patch would not fix all the issues optimally, you could have put all these hardcode fixes on the expansion to make it more than just another simple mod to M2TW. This would also have raised the number of buyers I am sure (if of course you had not opted for SecuROM either).
It is unfortunate that Total War is being run into the ground like this, really, but if you think its SEGA limiting you, you probably should be choosing another publisher.
Alternatively, as alpaca suggested, fire the persons responsible for project management and Q&A, because they really do not deserve to work on this title.
Originally posted by Odin
...but 2 handed fixes, rebalanced units, bad text files thats all out there and can be modded.
Disagree. Not all of it can be modded - the CA appointed team to re-balance kingdoms (Palamedes & Celtiberos clan) did the re-balancing and they were in all probability restricted by various parameters in what they can "mod" to rebalance the game. Such parameters include most notably the new animations that tie up the people that do the balancing. These are to my understanding predetermined by graphics artists and are most likely very hard work to change afterwards - so they won't be. That's all for the sake of the "finishing moves".
Mtw2 vanilla (not kingdoms) recieved two patches (one of them "day zero":laugh4: ) that were huge (it meant that there was a lot to be done), and is left as is from then on even if its still not up to the level of the expansion, and you are saying that this is fine? RTW received 5 patches and MTW had more than enough passes to actually make it the technically most well working and balanced engine version of TW so far. But according to you M2 does not merit the same fate - all who bougth the game should have known better, i guess.
What about the mp community that gets fragmented with every version and mod that tries to introduce balance? I guess they are buying the game for nothing, right? It is to their best interest that the vanilla game is up and working and has received as much effort in balancing as possible. At least if you believe what CA promised prior to release they wanted to deliver along these lines, but it turns out that the game is left with 5 uncompatible exe's after kingdoms.
Modding is an extra thing the community added to TW on its own account - its not an excuse in my eyes for a developer to offer a product with bugs and broken features.
Noir
Daveybaby
10-18-2007, 19:40
Thanks for the heads up.
...and we did not anticipate the few issues that surfaced with Kingdoms after release... at the present time there are no scheduled updates in the pipeline for Kingdoms.
Firstly I do find it incomprehensible that there was no contingency set aside for a patch to kingdoms. IIRC every TW release to date has required at least one patch, so the decision not to plan for one for kingdoms is frankly baffling. In fact can't think of any strategy game (going back to the civ/moo days) of any kind of complexity that didnt require patching - there is so much stuff that can only get noticed once you have thousands of people playing the game repeatedly.
Secondly I, for one, think that the need to patch kingdoms is actually secondary to the need for a further patch for the main campaign - the game just doesnt provide any kind of a challenge for an even halfway competent player, even on the hardest difficulty. While i will concede that rewriting the strategic AI is off the cards, it would be nice to at least make the AI offer some kind of challenge by fixing its invariably bad economy - even if all you do is give it financial bonuses on hard and very hard.
Go on - just sneak a few config variables in there for us to play with:
ai_econ_bonus_easy 1.0
ai_econ_bonus_normal 1.0
ai_econ_bonus_hard 1.5
ai_econ_bonus_vhard 2.0
We wont tell anyone. Promise.
Disagree. Not all of it can be modded - the CA appointed team to re-balance kingdoms (Palamedes & Celtiberos clan) did the re-balancing and they were in all probability restricted by various parameters in what they can "mod" to rebalance the game. Such parameters include most notably the new animations that tie up the people that do the balancing. These are to my understanding predetermined by graphics artists and are most likely very hard work to change afterwards - so they won't be. That's all for the sake of the "finishing moves".
Your disagreement is based on an assumption "were in all probability", thats hardly evidence of the fact, but okay I am going to assume you know what your talking about, i am no modder.
Mtw2 vanilla (not kingdoms) recieved two patches (one of them "day zero":laugh4: ) that were huge (it meant that there was a lot to be done), and is left as is from then on even if its still not up to the level of the expansion, and you are saying that this is fine?
I didnt say anything was fine, I said its confirmed gaming practice, pick a PC release since 2003, and you'll either find patches (based on consumer bug finding) or mods that correct balance and add content. Its a fact of the gaming industry, I didnt create it, but dont take my word for it, go ahead pick the title you want and go investigate.
As further evidence of this practice as a condition of the industry, remember patch 1.02? the promised release date, the "leaked" version and then the subsequent 2-3 week wait while items were corrected?
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, its a duck. While I cant verify this absolutely (my insinuation) I ask the same modicum of assumption I gave you in the first quoted paragraph.
RTW received 5 patches and MTW had more than enough passes to actually make it the technically most well working and balanced engine version of TW so far. But according to you M2 does not merit the same fate -all who bougth the game should have known better, i guess.
Yes they should have, the condtions of games (gasp) Total war series included is not a guarded secret. Again, I challenge you to find a title post 2003 that hasnt had patching, user feedback on bugs and modification of released content.
unless your suggesting that this was the first PC release to go to the consumer with problems?
All I am saying is nothing here should be surprising to anyone, the industry is well defined at this point, heck you have users on fan boards who recieve board citations, badges, titles for creating fixes to said games, and they wear links to them in thier sigs, or did you miss all of that?
What about the mp community that gets fragmented with every version and mod that tries to introduce balance? I guess they are buying the game for nothing, right?
Dont know what your talking about here mate, but if it makes you feel better to point the finger at someone else, by all means go ahead.
Modding is an extra thing the community added to TW on its own account - its not an excuse in my eyes for a developer to offer a product with bugs and broken features.
We agree ! :thumbsup: it isnt an excuse at all, but it is a reason, like it or not.
Originally posted by Odin
...i am no modder.
Funny then that you comment on the potential of modding to solve certain issues.
I said its confirmed gaming practice
Its confirmed practice in companies that make it bigtime - smaller independent companies keep much more adequate support and even some large ones (like for example Blizzard) that kept on promoting their older games and their cult by continuous support.
...unless your suggesting that this was the first PC release to go to the consumer with problems?
No i am suggesting that M2 & Kingdoms are the first TW releases that get considerably less support than the previous ones. I am not interested in other games, the industry or its trends.
Dont know what your talking about here mate, but if it makes you feel better to point the finger at someone else, by all means go ahead.
I am certainly not pointing fingers to you or anyone else - if you played mp TW ever you'll well know what i am talking about if not i apologise: there was a whole thriving mp community eversince STW that got fragmented with every subsequent release due to the bugs and imbalances and the engine discontinuity; that community apparently was as big or bigger than the current one, even though internet was not as widespread those days. Mods fragment the community even more because mp players need to "abandon" their winning strategies to get accustomed to a mod or version; also it is vital that bugs like the 2hand are fixed directly for that community to grow.
All i am saying is that modding may be the a very good answer for SP, but it isn't for MP - that vanilla game needs to work for the folks that play the game in that mode.
...but it is a reason, like it or not.
Maybe so, then perhaps CA can confirm your view that so we can all start finding better things to do with our free time then.
Noir
Funny then that you comment on the potential of modding to solve certain issues.
Whats funny about it? I used LTC to correct the two handed bug issue and the shield fix. I didnt mod it myself, but I know it worked.
Its confirmed practice in companies that make it bigtime - smaller independent companies keep much more adequate support and even some large ones (like for example Blizzard) that kept on promoting their older games and their cult by continuous support.
Small independent companines support thier games because they need to be supported, and the additional content engenders a broader fanbase. It dosent negate the fact that at release, thier products needed help as well, again, you pick the title...
No i am suggesting that M2 & Kingdoms are the first TW releases that get considerably less support than the previous ones. I am not interested in other games, the industry or its trends.
If your not intrested in the industry or its trends then this conversation is pointless, and so is your particpation, because we are commenting on a trend in the gaming industry.
I am certainly not pointing fingers to you or anyone else - if you played mp TW ever you'll well know what i am talking about if not i apologise: there was a whole thriving mp community eversince STW that got fragmented with every subsequent release due to the bugs and imbalances and the engine discontinuity; that community apparently was as big or bigger than the current one, even though internet was not as widespread those days. Mods fragment the community even more because mp players need to "abandon" their winning strategies to get accustomed to a mod or version; also it is vital that bugs like the 2hand are fixed directly for that community to grow.
I didnt take your comment personally, its just a matter of speak really. I did play STW many moons ago, I get your point.
Maybe so, then perhaps CA can confirm your view that so we can all start finding better things to do with our free time then.
Why confirm the obvious? Again, pick the title you want, most games released now have an avid fanbase doing bug checks and reporting them at fan forums like this one.
For free ! why would any gaming company not encourage this?
Slug For A Butt
10-18-2007, 20:39
Each of our titles has a scheduled development time on which we can work on them, and we did not anticipate the few issues that surfaced with Kingdoms after release. The Oz team have since begun work on a new project, which is why a previous post stated that at the present time there are no scheduled updates in the pipeline for Kingdoms.
Does this insinuate that you get X time to work on a piece of software, and after X time is up the software gets released whether it is ready for release or not? Also, that starting work on a new project takes precedence over correcting the issues prevalent in the existing software, purely because you have pre-scheduled your programmers without verifying the integrity of their work?
If this is the case as you seem to insinuate, I feel vindicated in my decision to no longer blindly buy TW games on release as I always used to. Kingdoms will probably be a second hand buy as will all my games in the TW series since the M2TW debacle.
This is NOT CA bashing, this is me reading between the lines and stating my feelings.
It is such a shame as no other game stirred me in the same way as the TW series.
It is unfortunate that Total War is being run into the ground like this, really, but if you think its SEGA limiting you, you probably should be choosing another publisher.
This isn't an option because SEGA owns Creative Assembly. I would say that Creative Assembly should limit the number of features offered in their game to what can be successfully implimented in v1.0. This means being realistic with what resources are available, and also having a reasonable cut-off date beyond which new features are not allowed. That way a patch would only have to address unforseen stability issues and playbalance issues which I would think would be less work than also having to fix a myriad of broken features in a patch. It seems to me that SEGA would be more likely to approve a patch if it could be done quickly.
They just decided that they don't care because people will buy it anyways.
That's what happens when people buy a game despite it having serious problems. They don't get a better game next time. RTW was enough to convince me that it's now a better policy for players to take a wait and see attitude with games made by Creative Assembly.
Zenicetus
10-18-2007, 22:27
Thank you for the update. :yes: Is there a chance that they will remove SecuRom while they are at this?
More specifically.... will they release a utility for completely removing hidden SecureROm files left behind on the system, after the game is uninstalled? If they do that, I'll buy Kingdoms. Otherwise, no.
Same deal with ETW. I sure hope they've been paying attention to people's feelings about this issue. I'm really looking forward to ETW, but there are limits to what I'll let software do to my system, just to be able to play a game. Especially when there are other games around to play, that don't do this.
What about the mp community that gets fragmented with every version and mod that tries to introduce balance?
Hello,
Not sure whether I understood this and something in a follow up correctly.
Mods are not a bad thing for the MP community and are not responsible for a decline in MP players (is there -STW-M2TW-? absolute or relative?).
I agree that the vanilla needs to be solid, especially the (battle)engine and all that is around that. Mods for MP that offer something new, and decent support for that are good (sure you may get people going right while others go left, but I'm also convinced that MP mods will attract more people and avoid others just leave).
A load of MP mods that just try to fix vanilla (and fail because of hardcoded restrictions) are not good.
Thanks for the update, SenseiTW. For what it's worth, I think a majority of players would be happy with a small fix for some of the advertised campaign features (i.e. Welsh reinforcements, Kalmar Union, stone castles for Crusades or changing their appearance on the campaign map to the wooden forts they appear as in battles).
candelarius
10-18-2007, 23:59
Hi guys,
First of all apologies for the delay in a response on this. We have been working behind the scenes and talking to the CA OZ development team about the situation but I wanted to be clearer on where things are before posting.
Each of our titles has a scheduled development time on which we can work on them, and we did not anticipate the few issues that surfaced with Kingdoms after release. The Oz team have since begun work on a new project, which is why a previous post stated that at the present time there are no scheduled updates in the pipeline for Kingdoms.
We are however listening to your concerns, examining the issues in question and are currently looking into ways to support you to the fullest extent with the resources at our disposal.
Thanks,
Mark O'Connell
(aka SenseiTW)
Thanks for a written reply to our concerns, but, you still didn't answer if you plan on making a patch for Kingdoms or not. How about commissioning Unspoken Knight to release another one-dev unofficial patch? I'd be happy with that...or how about a "hotfix" to solve the major issues? Finally, the "resources at your disposal" were willfully misallocated...you should have planned on at least one patch for Kingdoms, and should have at least some people who are not working on new projects to fix the existing ones. Please consult with the Higher Ups, and advise them that making new games is nice, but, nobody will buy them if they stop supporting their games properly.
Originally posted by TosaInu
Mods are not a bad thing for the MP community and are not responsible for a decline in MP players
Hi Tosa,
i meant that mods aiming for the mp community can never replace a fully workable and balanced vanilla game; it is my undersatnding that a solid, bug-free working vanilla game may offer the best in that department from an mp point of view including the fact that it will probably contribute in the potential for modding.
I agree that the vanilla needs to be solid, especially the (battle)engine and all that is around that. Mods for MP that offer something new, and decent support for that are good (sure you may get people going right while others go left, but I'm also convinced that MP mods will attract more people and avoid others just leave).
A load of MP mods that just try to fix vanilla (and fail because of hardcoded restrictions) are not good.
Agreed and exactly how i meant it.
Originally posted by Odin
If your not intrested in the industry or its trends then this conversation is pointless, and so is your particpation, because we are commenting on a trend in the gaming industry.
Not really IMO. Modding is without arguing a good thing - depending on modding to fix basic issues on new releases and leave them without taking them up to a certain level cannot be good IMHO though either. If you or anyone else wishes to accept this because of the context the gaming industry opertates then fine - yet, i compare current TW releases with older TW releases and with the potential the TW game conceptually and otherwise has for good gameplay. Solving basic bug issues with patches cannot ever be substituted by workarounds done by modders IMO.
For example you mention balacing of units in your post - yet the new animations make balancing more difficult because altering the balance is not based on the stats alone anymore. LTC fixes some issues not all issues by workarounds and it was in my understanding the model for the rebalancing in Kingdoms - well done to Lusted and all others that were involved as i noted elsewhere.
Where we disagree is that you seem to suggest that mods should be taken for granted instead of patching support as a policy from the developers while i suggest that they should patch the games either by adopting fixes and balance from certain mods or otherwise in, however official patches.
A major reason for this is that the majority of people who buy the game do not frequent forums and do not even know that mods exist - it is unfair to them to say the least. Another major reason is that mods can't work around all hardcoded limitations and there are plenty to my understanding.
Noir
madalchemist
10-19-2007, 00:29
I think I realized why developers and employees cannot say anything about patches/future projects.
Anything they do, either speak or stay silent when there are problems does not help much the community's opinion.
The sad fact is, the above statement is true because the community had valid reasons to rant (as it has valid reasons now).
Alpaca has been quite polite, everyone can see huge bugs that appear the first time you play and could not be ignored, and we aren't stupid, either.
So it comes naturally for many to drop completely TW series, at least until you release playable games (and deal with the customers as if they were paying ones).
If the game would have been playable (maybe after 2-3 patches, not vanilla), you could have said anything and have the community stay its size, but as long as the opposite is true I'd say there is no way for you to keep it from growing smaller.
So, they (whoever pulls the strings at least) thought they will be able to release a bug-free game, but in the end there was a lack of skill to do it. Despite all this, there is still not a shred of excuse for abandoning the grand campaign altogether even before the expansion.
What's totally baffling to me is that people are once again willing to forgive this kind of behavior and give it another go. How many times is it going to take, I wonder, before this kind of policy ceases to be rewarded? I stopped buying TW games after original RTW (I got both M2TW and Kingdoms as presents, but that's fixed now). I don't see how anyone can just shrug shoulders and rush to buy ETW, and then go through all this all over again. But to each his/her own, I guess.
The CA official post above just show that nothing changed from m1tw. theyre just a machine that you must pay for if you want it to work even slighty more.
edyzmedieval
10-19-2007, 09:12
but this is not an understatement, it's an insult.
Jeez you can't expect me to believe this junk. I am sure that the management knew about a lot of these issues. The Kalmar Union not working is not something you can overlook if you try it even once (judging from what I hear anyways). They just decided that they don't care because people will buy it anyways. Then they decided that they wouldn't need a patch afterwards because simply put, you already have our money.
If what you say was true and you "didn't anticipate the few issues that came up with kingdoms" you should seriously fire your project manager in down under as soon as possible because he's definitely not up to the job.
This is the last drop, I won't buy another game from CA until I am 100% convinced that this totally arrogant and disparaging company policy changed. A lot of us aren't stupid you know, so don't try to sell us bullshit as truffle-pâté
And I hope some more people from the community will arrive at similar conclusions about buying Empires.
Ditto. Insulting CA, VERY insulting.
That seals it. Kingdoms is the last TW title I have bought. Empire:TW, bye bye!
Hi Tosa,
i meant that mods aiming for the mp community can never replace a fully workable and balanced vanilla game; it is my undersatnding that a solid, bug-free working vanilla game may offer the best in that department from an mp point of view including the fact that it will probably contribute in the potential for modding.
Agreed and exactly how i meant it.
Noir
Hello Noir,
We look at it the same way then.
Prodigal
10-19-2007, 10:57
It will still come out unfinished though, so I don't quite understand your point :yes:
Was looking at it from the position that "it does what it says on the packet"
Issues such as suicidal generals, ranged melee etc. can be construed as simply game balance, not an outright bugs.
But, I've just been reading that during the Teuton campaign the alliance between Danes & Nowegians does not allow you to use the unique units, and that, no matter how you look at it is a 100% pure gold bug which needs to be fixed.
I can't see how they can simply omit a whole freaking feature from a quater of the product and expect customers to smile happily and go about their buisiness. :thumbsdown:
I think I realized why developers and employees cannot say anything about patches/future projects.
Anything they do, either speak or stay silent when there are problems does not help much the community's opinion.
The sad fact is, the above statement is true because the community had valid reasons to rant (as it has valid reasons now).
Alpaca has been quite polite, everyone can see huge bugs that appear the first time you play and could not be ignored, and we aren't stupid, either.
So it comes naturally for many to drop completely TW series, at least until you release playable games (and deal with the customers as if they were paying ones).
If the game would have been playable (maybe after 2-3 patches, not vanilla), you could have said anything and have the community stay its size, but as long as the opposite is true I'd say there is no way for you to keep it from growing smaller.
To be honest I believe that saying "yes, we made mistakes but we're trying our best to fix them" would be much better for the company's reputation than keeping silent, or pretending to not have known about obviously apparent problems before. The former is slightly smelly because it shows that CA/SEGA didn't take enough time to work on and polish their product, but unfortunately that's usus in the industry. The latter however shows all signs of a blatant and deliberate falsehood.
It's still better than not saying anything at all. At least it clearly reflects the company policy.
Edit: I wouldn't immediately have bought ETW anyways. M2TW taught me to stay wary of CA's games. I also waited with kingdoms, and it turns out I was right as I can now just not buy it.
Each of our titles has a scheduled development time on which we can work on them, and we did not anticipate the few issues that surfaced with Kingdoms after release.
Oh come on! Name one game or expansion you guys have released that did not require a patch. Thinking that there wouldn't be any issues with the software upon public release is just crazy.
Any decent development house would plan for some level of support after a release.
lancelot
10-19-2007, 18:24
While I appreciate the update from CA, and this is not aimed at SenseiTW in particular, the post was a diplomatic way of saying we may or may not do something, but more likely we won't.
Its part of company policy though to not say anything that could be seen as binding, but until there is a concrete yes or no on a future patch that will fix more than what 1.3 "fixed" and hopefully come close to or exceed 1.2, I wouldn't hold my hopes too high.
Completely agree.
I hope Im proved wrong, I really do but given the current trends shown by CA (and the remarks about 'development time' which to me suggests CA gets x amount of time and if it dont work in that time-tough.) I cant see any TW game ever again being brought up to spec unless by some miracle it comes out of the box that way.
I have to say after reading all the posts that the majority of you posters have been extremely naive. CA has never supported its products adequately and has been blowing smoke by blaming the game publishers, deadlines, and ofcourse the "suits". Remember Activision and how everything was their fault and how much better things would be under Sega? Seriously, if there was an honest intent to support any of their games, there would be support. Its that simple.
Expect more of the same with 'Empire'. It will have loads of eye candy but as always will be at the expense of gameplay.
Remember Activision and how everything was their fault and how much better things would be under Sega?
Yeah I remember.... Cavaet Emptor :wiseguy:
invalidopcode
10-19-2007, 19:15
Thats too bad. :thumbsdown:
I was waiting for the patch before I went out and bought Kingdoms. I just don't have the free time to waste fighting bugs... Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.... :)
Unfortunately, this sort of behavior by the PC game developers is becoming the norm rather than the exception. It's too bad really.
Unfortunately, this sort of behavior by the PC game developers is becoming the norm rather than the exception. It's too bad really.
So if we except this as fact (and this comment is to anyone still reading really) why then do we still purchase these games at release?
The only way to change the current gaming industry standard is through consumer activism. They know it, you know it, i know it, yet here we are at a fan site gushing over the latest mods that fix game issues and stamping around cussing out a dev who ventures in and confirms the process for you.
Its all on the consumer, always has been, always will be. If it dont sell, you can bet your ass they will fix it.
I take no joy (honestly) in saying this but.. I told you so, and have been telling you so.
CA is a business and the bottom line always, always, always, always, always takes precedent. Clearly CA has done the math and determined that their best course of action would be to let M2TW and Kingdoms go, as there is no more financial benefit to them in fixing it. One only need look at RTW post 1.5/1.6 to see a consistent theme. The hidden message here is that they believe they can afford to piss off 99% of us here reading these forums, lose all/some of us as customers, and still be able to sell the next game well. Loyalty is nothing, so long as one can sell enough copies to the next bunch of "casual gamers".
For the record, THIS is/was loyalty from day 1:
https://img150.imageshack.us/img150/1690/1000858cj8.th.jpg (https://img150.imageshack.us/my.php?image=1000858cj8.jpg)
(not depicted is my long lost Mongol Invasion CD)
As Mel Gibson said in The Patriot, "I have run my course." If CA wishes to earn my business back, they need only listen to us, the real community.
Something else that I would like to point out that is significant in my view is Alpaca's posts. Alpaca's contributions to the modding community are well known, indeed I would refer to him as a "heavyweight" of sorts. It is very significant to me that he has apparently thrown in the towel as well, because he is not the first major figure in the modding community both here at the Org and the other major TW sites to say "hell with it".
Bottom line people. Vote with your dollars, this is the only way to send a message. Odin's posts are a spot on, it's not just you, but your friends as well, word of mouth works wonders. If enough people stop buying the games to make a serious dent, then and only then will CA be forced to stop and rethink their strategy. That said, we do need to be prepared for CA to "pull a Bethesda" so to speak, which is to say they might decide to largely abandon their core fanbase at some point and radically change direction with their games in attempt to reach a broader fanbase. I certainly hope not, but we shall see. It's largely in our hands everyone.
sassbarman
10-19-2007, 21:03
It's all about bonuses if you don't make your deadlines bonuses for employees and the company are reduced. Why waste time on a patch when your feverously working to meet your next deadline. Tis the way of the world.
Zenicetus
10-19-2007, 21:42
The only way to change the current gaming industry standard is through consumer activism. They know it, you know it, i know it, yet here we are at a fan site gushing over the latest mods that fix game issues and stamping around cussing out a dev who ventures in and confirms the process for you.
Its all on the consumer, always has been, always will be. If it dont sell, you can bet your ass they will fix it.
I agree, but we're all going to draw the line a little differently. I could live with the current state of M2TW and Kingdoms without another patch, but I'm not going to put up with one more game installing SecureRom without a means to completely remove it after the game is uninstalled. That's where I draw my personal line, and it's why I didn't buy Kingdoms. So, some of us are actually "voting with our wallets," but we may not all be doing it for the same exact reasons.
It would also help if we had more competitors in this market. I'll buy just about anything Stardock (GalCiv2) puts out at this point, because they have great support, a continuing patch schedule, zero DRM, and they don't treat their customers like software pirates. But they don't make the same type of game as CA, it's strategy-only. I wish there were a few more players in this market so I'd have a choice of options, and we could let Darwinian competition weed out the companies that deliver half-finished games and put intrusive DRM on their customers' computers.
I take no joy (honestly) in saying this but.. I told you so, and have been telling you so.
CA is a business and the bottom line always, always, always, always, always takes precedent. Clearly CA has done the math and determined that their best course of action would be to let M2TW and Kingdoms go, as there is no more financial benefit to them in fixing it. One only need look at RTW post 1.5/1.6 to see a consistent theme. The hidden message here is that they believe they can afford to piss off 99% of us here reading these forums, lose all/some of us as customers, and still be able to sell the next game well. Loyalty is nothing, so long as one can sell enough copies to the next bunch of "casual gamers".
For the record, THIS is/was loyalty from day 1:
https://img150.imageshack.us/img150/1690/1000858cj8.th.jpg (https://img150.imageshack.us/my.php?image=1000858cj8.jpg)
(not depicted is my long lost Mongol Invasion CD)
As Mel Gibson said in The Patriot, "I have run my course." If CA wishes to earn my business back, they need only listen to us, the real community.
Something else that I would like to point out that is significant in my view is Alpaca's posts. Alpaca's contributions to the modding community are well known, indeed I would refer to him as a "heavyweight" of sorts. It is very significant to me that he has apparently thrown in the towel as well, because he is not the first major figure in the modding community both here and at the Org to say "hell with it".
Bottom line people. Vote with your dollars, this is the only way to send a message. Odin's posts are a spot on, it's not just you, but your friends as well, word of mouth works wonders. If enough people stop buying the games to make a serious dent, then and only then will CA be forced to stop and rethink their strategy. That said, we do need to be prepared for CA to "pull a Bethesda" so to speak, which is to say they might decide to largely abandon their core fanbase at some point and radically change direction with their games in attempt to reach a broader fanbase. I certainly hope not, but we shall see. It's largely in our hands everyone.
I agree. :yes:
trolls whacker's post, etc etc.
runs off to find more whacker post's
It's all about bonuses if you don't make your deadlines bonuses for employees and the company are reduced. Why waste time on a patch when your feverously working to meet your next deadline. Tis the way of the world.
Shouldn't you then employ someone who can actually deliver within that timeframe?
Seriously, if there was an honest intent to support any of their games, there would be support. Its that simple.
I agree. I wish I had informed my friends sooner.
It's all about bonuses if you don't make your deadlines bonuses for employees and the company are reduced. Why waste time on a patch when your feverously working to meet your next deadline. Tis the way of the world.
Bolded emphasis mine. Well said, but the reason one patches their games is to both avoid lawsuits and to maintain reputation/satisfied customers. To my knowledge noone has every tried a lawsuit or class action suit for a horribly unpatched, broken game, but it'd be interesting to see how one would play out. $50 isn't chump change for anyone these days. As for maintaining customer sat, it boils down to a calculated risk. Are the majority of customers satisfied? Can they "live" with what you've put out? Are you likely to drive them and future customers away given the current status? Are there any significant repercussions in the marketplace that would affect sales due to the "infamy" of having a poorly patched game? Questions like these go into the math that management uses to decide whether or not they patch. For a parallel situation, look at what happened with KOTOR2, it had a token patch, and then was completely abandoned by CA and Obsidian. They made their money, and the fans be damned.
Shouldn't you then employ someone who can actually deliver within that timeframe?
Another worthy point, but to be fair, any project both large and small is subject to any number of snags, roadblocks, delays, etc, no matter how competent the technical folks and leadership team are. If one looks at some of the more experienced developer studios, one can see general trends where both game release dates are somewhat generalized (eg. 3Q2008), and they hit those deadlines with a product that's in good shape at release. Conversely, the "when it's done" mantra doesn't always work either, as people by nature have expectations of deadlines that they can look forward to.
I agree. I wish I had informed my friends sooner.
Don't feel bad mate, it took me several times before I learned my lesson, I know others are in the same boat.
trolls whacker's post, etc etc.
runs off to find more whacker post's
INSOLENCE!!!!
I agree, but we're all going to draw the line a little differently. I could live with the current state of M2TW and Kingdoms without another patch, but I'm not going to put up with one more game installing SecureRom without a means to completely remove it after the game is uninstalled. That's where I draw my personal line, and it's why I didn't buy Kingdoms. So, some of us are actually "voting with our wallets," but we may not all be doing it for the same exact reasons.
I view the SecureRom issue as seperate from support. I dont buy games at release, I buy them after 6 months so patches and mods can fix glaring bugs. I will play MTW2 as is, without kingdoms.
I am no computer techy, but I read the boards pretty avidly and the SecureRom issue has been discussed by people who know far more then I (didz, whacker to name a few).
It would also help if we had more competitors in this market. I'll buy just about anything Stardock (GalCiv2) puts out at this point, because they have great support, a continuing patch schedule, zero DRM, and they don't treat their customers like software pirates. But they don't make the same type of game as CA, it's strategy-only. I wish there were a few more players in this market so I'd have a choice of options, and we could let Darwinian competition weed out the companies that deliver half-finished games and put intrusive DRM on their customers' computers.
I think your point is fair, competition breeds better output from the dev, but in my view that does not address the real problem. As I have stated, I believe its simple supply and demand economics here. I understand these guys need to eat, and perfections is a hard concept to attain.
It does not however absolve all of us from being part of the problem, these games are being pumped out because consumers buy them, the whole industry is geared around postive reviews from online mags, gold releases, patches released a week after release, encouraged modders, more patches from user input.
The only aspect of the equation that is out of the gaming industries control is the consumption of the consumer, and it is the only thing that will change these circumstances.
Don't feel bad mate, it took me several times before I learned my lesson, I know others are in the same boat.
Well, I learned my lesson after seeing what mess RTW really was. I just didn't take into account that some kind people will actually spend their hard earned money to give me a TW game as a gift. But as I said, that's quite unlikely to happen again.
I frankly still cannot understand how people, as the customers, can just shake their heads and say "you got away with it this time... well, the last couple of times.... ok, more than a few times, but I'll trust you one more time and you better not do it again with ETW." I mean, come on...
INSOLENCE!!!!
I'M TELLING MOMMY!!!!! :bigcry: BIG MEANIE
Ramses II CP
10-20-2007, 04:09
The wait six months policy is a solid one, after I waited six months for Rome: TW and the community still loudly said it was an unfinished, unpolished mess I gave up. I've never bought Rome or it's expansions, despite loving MTW (And especially VI) and Shogun quite a lot. With MTWII it seemed that the 1.2 patch satisfactorily took care of the most glaring bugs and so I sucked it up and snagged the game. While the AI is disappointing I've still found the game enjoyable, but I'm very glad I waited. SecuRom killed Kingdoms for me, and this idea of ending support for Kingdoms/MTWII with no patches makes me very glad I didn't purchase the former. CA moved off my trusted developers list with Rome, but this decision puts them squarely on my ban list.
As with anything else you might buy gamers have a right to functional products, particularly to functions used in advertising to sell the game. If you are unwilling to release a product that works, and unwilling to fix it after you release it broken, you will rapidly find that many of us are unwilling to pay you for it.
Good luck CA. Seems like you'll need it.
:egypt:
Whacker: Yes, in fact I was already wondering if I should buy M2TW but decided to give CA another chance (and give CA: OZ a first chance). With Kingdoms I was a lot more hesitant, and as a result I don't have it yet.
Somewhere in between I realized that CA officially decided to be a "big bad mean company" on the lines of Microsoft :laugh4:
We shall see... I for one am not at all optimistic about CA. It already sounds like it's going to be another rushed game with glaring bugs that were not anticipated and caught the guys totally unawares :rolleyes:
I don't agree that this approach is the natural state of things though. Looking at companies like Blizzard (who incidentally don't have an external publisher iirc), reputation today is a hard currency. If CA suddenly find themselves bereft of any modding community, or community in general, to speak of, they will definitely perceive a drop in expansion sales for ETW. Casual gamers will be their answer to such a thing, so I do hope that we'll get some competition like some other posters here, because casual gamers probably won't buy two games of the same type.
redriver
10-20-2007, 17:57
I always knew RTW was their last greatest product.. it's the only TW game me ever purchased/played anyway. and I'm not regretin' it :P
Tafferboy
10-22-2007, 15:04
Each of our titles has a scheduled development time on which we can work on them, and we did not anticipate the few issues that surfaced with Kingdoms after release. The Oz team have since begun work on a new project, which is why a previous post stated that at the present time there are no scheduled updates in the pipeline for Kingdoms.
So, I take it there was never any intention to support the game any further once it was released since that's considered past "schedule" and all resources became committed elsewhere. Considering their own track record for previous games, it is unbelievable how staff can say they "anticipate no issues" for this one. As in m2tw, I wonder how some of the bugs even made it past testing or if CA chose to ignore them thinking they could get away with it. Advertising features like Khalmar union and Welsh reinforcements in the game, using them as selling points, and then refusing to fix the broken features is sheer arrogance and highly insulting to customers who paid to see them included. And to date, of course, not a damned word on Securom. The company has lost all credibility with me.
crpcarrot
10-22-2007, 17:15
i agree wholeheartedly with what whacker and odin and others are sayings.
it is only the consumers dollers that will change anything unfortunately for us who look for long term enjoyment of a game and take immense enjoyment from minute details ( V&V in MTW) the games consumer base seems to be have a majority of casual gamers who will have moved on to the next game so quickly that they will only notice the most glaring bugs. and unfortunately TW now seemes to be geared towards this market.
although i would have stilled bought kingdoms even without the support just to play ltc 4 (at the right price) securom was where my line was drawn. i dont spend money and time keeping my pc free of unwanted software (malicious or not is not the issue) for someone to install one so he can prevent me from copying?playing a game i already have! and o top of that if i dont want to play the game anymore i cant install it! doesnt make sense to me
Slug For A Butt
10-23-2007, 03:36
i agree wholeheartedly with what whacker and odin and others are sayings.
it is only the consumers dollers that will change anything unfortunately for us who look for long term enjoyment of a game and take immense enjoyment from minute details ( V&V in MTW) the games consumer base seems to be have a majority of casual gamers who will have moved on to the next game so quickly that they will only notice the most glaring bugs. and unfortunately TW now seemes to be geared towards this market. doesnt make sense to me
Exactly, and TW is moving towards being a game that my 8 year old neice can and will play. "Let's give 'em eye candy and easy playability" is the way to go, "let's make it graphically wonderful and release an new piece of dog poo that the kids will badger their parents for" is the marketing strategy that they have so obviously adopted.
Fine, but they won't see another penny of my money as I'll just buy second hand. I won't give CA another penny of my money while they release crap like this and refuse to fix it because they are busy releasing the next piece of half finished rubbish. Now I'm aware that they won't care about my money because someone else will fill my shoes, but at least I wont be fooled again, and that's good for my soul. :2thumbsup:
And when are people going to stop sucking up to the likes of SenzeiTW, starting their posts with things like "I really appreciate you reply/concerns/time" etc yet finishing making a point of how disappointed they are. I'll make no bones about it, I am hacked off with the quality of CA's products and thought his post was patronising in the extreme. ~:pissed:
I just can't wait for someone to fill CA's vacant TW shoes. :yes:
Mori Gabriel Syme
10-23-2007, 17:41
And when are people going to stop sucking up to the likes of SenzeiTW, starting their posts with things like "I really appreciate you reply/concerns/time" etc yet finishing making a point of how disappointed they are. I'll make no bones about it, I am hacked off with the quality of CA's products and thought his post was patronising in the extreme. ~:pissed:
I just can't wait for someone to fill CA's vacant TW shoes. :yes:
It is in our better interest that the person reading our posts be favorably disposed to us personally. The likeliness of things changing may be very small, but it would be zero if we manage to convince him that we are, from his perspective, unreasonable and there is no sense in wasting time trying to please us. If he has read much on this board, he has already seen many posts that make no bones about our feelings about CAs recent products and practices.
Indeed, it's possible to be polite (for the most part) while still delivering a "You sux lol" message. In fact, delivery is often the most important part.
From our perspective, we appreciate CA's interactions with the community. Dialogue is critical to ensuring that our concerns and issues are properly raised and addressed. Coming from a similiar mindset, I can appreciate how some folks prefer to be blunt and forward on topics, but after being married for almost 5 years now I've learned to appreciate how to soften a message some.
Now, with that said, I think most of us would agree with you Slug. While we appreciate SenseiTW's posting, there really was no real message of value whatsoever. It's not that we don't recognize statements for what they are worth, it's that we must maintain our positions staunchly, and stay our course as long as we see fit, and we must be civil and level headed as we go about it.
It boils down to "These games are garbage, you jerks never listen to us, screw you and die, etc etc" vs "We appreciate your interactions, and are deeply concerned about the current status of the games, namely in the areas of ... etc etc". Which would you rather listen to, honestly?
It is in our better interest that the person reading our posts be favorably disposed to us personally.
Disagree.
its in our better intrest to remove the person reading this from the equation completely and take complete responsibility for our choice to purchase the game.
Its so simple that its hard for me to fathom why others make it complex with demands and expectations for performance and patches from devs. There in a business where the business model dictates this outcome, fueled by the purchase of the consumer.
Remove the fuel and the model ceases to be effective, hence change.
Whinning about a patch on a fan site might garnish some attention, but as evidenced by the thread title, its hardly effective. Talk with your wallet fella's. :thumbsup:
Marcus Orentius
10-23-2007, 18:38
A few things.
I haven't had any problems playing other games with securom on kingdoms, though I cannot see anything on their manual or packaging that says they do. (Maybe I'm just blind)
Also, I don't give a toss that they won't release another patch. Sure, it's a pain those features mentioned in the manual not being there, but it's still a good game, no matter how much you claim it's a load of 'half finished rubbish'
I will be getting Empire, and maybe others after that. No matter how buggy, or how crap the AI is, I still enjoy playing them. And how can you say that earlier games before RTW were better? I got the PC Gamer version of MTW/VI and I always get a CTD when I play a campaign. If that's not game destroying, nothing is.
And also, you can all boycott CA, but I don't think it will make a huge difference, as there will always be a fresh bunch of newbs to fill the gap.
This is the most clichéd and stereotyped saying ever, but get a life. It's a computer game, not a case of every potato having a worm in it or something.
The only thing we can do now is hope to god that they listen to our concerns about the next game. If not then there's not much we can do other than not buy the game, but that won't help much because we're too small of a group to have any really effect on the money they'll make from the game. So, we're basically screwed unless CA decides that we're worth listening too, but I highly doubt they care much about our concerns. What can you do? :shrug: M2TW will be the last game from CA I'll buy, unless their are some drastic changes from M2TW to ETW.
A few things.
I haven't had any problems playing other games with securom on kingdoms, though I cannot see anything on their manual or packaging that says they do. (Maybe I'm just blind)
Also, I don't give a toss that they won't release another patch. Sure, it's a pain those features mentioned in the manual not being there, but it's still a good game, no matter how much you claim it's a load of 'half finished rubbish'
I will be getting Empire, and maybe others after that. No matter how buggy, or how crap the AI is, I still enjoy playing them. And how can you say that earlier games before RTW were better? I got the PC Gamer version of MTW/VI and I always get a CTD when I play a campaign. If that's not game destroying, nothing is.
And also, you can all boycott CA, but I don't think it will make a huge difference, as there will always be a fresh bunch of newbs to fill the gap.
This is the most clichéd and stereotyped saying ever, but get a life. It's a computer game, not a case of every potato having a worm in it or something.
Telling a message thread full of posters to "get a life" is very cavalier of you, particularly since your replying in the same thread i assume that helped you draw the conclusion that we needed to get a life in the first place?
Of course one shouldnt assume, but wouldnt that be hypocrticial of you?
No matter, your technically correct on a lot of points, the game isnt horrible, was playable at release and has had support. On top of all that the game itself is stunning in its scope and beauty of battles. However the devil is always in the details and while your most likely right, that a 100 or so customers chose not to buy the next title wont really effect the final outcome of the TW series, it will absolve said people from responsiblity from supporting a process they percieve to be broken (based on the comments here).
Thus, no more hypocrisy marcus :thumbsup:
The only thing we can do now is hope to god that they listen to our concerns about the next game. If not then there's not much we can do other than not buy the game, but that won't help much because we're too small of a group to have any really effect on the money they'll make from the game. So, we're basically screwed unless CA decides that we're worth listening too, but I highly doubt they care much about our concerns. What can you do? :shrug: M2TW will be the last game from CA I'll buy, unless their are some drastic changes from M2TW to ETW.
To be honest I think they listen, and i think they attempt to incorporate as much of our feedback as possible. This isnt a CA issue really, its an industry issue. Most games are released 90% of the way there and the rest is left to be sorted out by prepaying customers and free modders.
Rather brilliant business model if you ask me, and while I dont advocate purchasing games at release, I think if you had waited 6 months, bought MTW2, got something like LTC 3.0 you'd have a fine investment for your money.
Marcus Orentius
10-23-2007, 18:54
Ok, it was hypocritical, but I just felt like saying it. It's just that I feel people are putting too much heart and soul into bitching about a computer game of all things. I know I'm outnumbered, and will probably be flamed to death, but i don't really care. It's fun. :eyebrows:
Ok, it was hypocritical, but I just felt like saying it. It's just that I feel people are putting too much heart and soul into bitching about a computer game of all things. I know I'm outnumbered, and will probably be flamed to death, but i don't really care. It's fun. :eyebrows:
It dosent make your point invalid Marcus but, well never mind, you really dont care. :medievalcheers:
Marcus Orentius
10-23-2007, 19:00
Beer for all. :D
lancelot
10-23-2007, 19:23
A few things.
I haven't had any problems playing other games with securom on kingdoms, though I cannot see anything on their manual or packaging that says they do. (Maybe I'm just blind)
Also, I don't give a toss that they won't release another patch. Sure, it's a pain those features mentioned in the manual not being there, but it's still a good game, no matter how much you claim it's a load of 'half finished rubbish'
I will be getting Empire, and maybe others after that. No matter how buggy, or how crap the AI is, I still enjoy playing them. And how can you say that earlier games before RTW were better? I got the PC Gamer version of MTW/VI and I always get a CTD when I play a campaign. If that's not game destroying, nothing is.
And also, you can all boycott CA, but I don't think it will make a huge difference, as there will always be a fresh bunch of newbs to fill the gap.
This is the most clichéd and stereotyped saying ever, but get a life. It's a computer game, not a case of every potato having a worm in it or something.
I bet CA loves suckers who think in similar terms as you, because that is what CA is treating you like- a sucker...who will cheerfully buy a product that is half finished...do you do the same with TV's, stereos etc? Im sure Sony would love to hear from you and exchange some of your cash for a broken car stereo or some other bit of kit they have hanging around a factory somewhere...
In fact I find it completely inconceivable that anyone could find fault with the people in this thread who have expressed dismay and anger at CA's half assed attitude towards game support...it really boggles the mind.
Just a general reminder (not pointed at anyone, I swear) to keep this thread civil. Criticism is a good thing and healthy for the forum and the community as a whole, so long as it is done constructively. Insulting CA and other posters does not help anyone and is a bad thing. Thank you for your cooperation.
Marcus Orentius
10-23-2007, 19:49
Sure, I'm giving them money because i think the games are still worth buying. But you make it sound like CA are the evil monster of doom. They're not. How many other companys show this attitude? A fair few I bet. I'm annoyed as well, but I'm not going to go moaning, because I really see no point, there just isn't enough of us to make a difference.
I bet CA loves suckers who think in similar terms as you, because that is what CA is treating you like- a sucker...who will cheerfully buy a product that is half finished...do you do the same with TV's, stereos etc? Im sure Sony would love to hear from you and exchange some of your cash for a broken car stereo or some other bit of kit they have hanging around a factory somewhere...
That's a tad over the top there my handsome but air headed knight, of course I wouldn't want a broken stereo, but I don't think the game is only half done. It's 95% done. the other five percent being the bugs.
A couple of things folks.
First, I call bull on everyone saying that we can't and won't make a difference. I guarantee you there's more than just 100 of us, a great deal more. I further contend that there is a much greater silent majority out there, and that statistically more than a few of them are probably of the same mindset as us. Take me for example, I've been reading the Org forums since 00, and finally just joined up about a year back. I know no less than five people who were in the same situation. Even if someone doesn't sign up and actively participate here or at TWcenter, there's a very good chance that they've browsed the forums at least a little at some point in owning the game. Perhaps looking for bug reports, perhaps guides, who knows. There's always going to be a vocal minority.
Second,
But you make it sound like CA are the evil monster of doom. They're not. How many other companys show this attitude? A fair few I bet. I'm annoyed as well, but I'm not going to go moaning, because I really see no point, there just isn't enough of us to make a difference.
I'm sorry, this logic is ignorant, there is no polite way of saying it. Evil monster of doom is a bit childish, but they are indeed displaying the tendencies that plague the rest of the industry in terms of dumbing down their games. And what you call "moaning" is voicing legitimate criticism as a group, if you don't like it, then the door is that way, don't go whining in other's threads about it. Talk about :rolleyes: . And as for not enough of us to make a difference, again that's ignorance, you are directly part of the problem for maintaining that attitude and mindset. I'm going to make a guess that you're probably a teenager from the tone and content of your posts. The reason I state that is because anyone who works knows that the most powerful place by far to hit a business is in it's wallet. Absolutely nothing makes more of an impact than taking your money elsewhere, and losses tend to add up very quickly. Even if we were to go with the lame "100 of us" argument, that still amounts to $5000 split between the developer/publisher, retailers, etc, and $5000 is no small chump change, even when one counts profit, not revenue, in millions. And again, I guarantee you there's quite a bit more than "just 100 of us" who are ticked off enough to vote with our cash next round. You can do the math from here.
Lastly,
but I don't think the game is only half done. It's 95% done. the other five percent being the bugs.
That's your opinion. A great deal of us would tell you it's closer to 75-80% complete.
A couple of things folks.
First, I call bull on everyone saying that we can't and won't make a difference. I guarantee you there's more than just 100 of us, a great deal more...snip
Second,
Snip...The reason I state that is because anyone who works knows that the most powerful place by far to hit a business is in it's wallet. Absolutely nothing makes more of an impact than taking your money elsewhere, and losses tend to add up very quickly. Even if we were to go with the lame "100 of us" argument, that still amounts to $5000 split between the developer/publisher, retailers, etc, and $5000 is no small chump change, even when one counts profit, not revenue, in millions.
Lastly,
That's your opinion. A great deal of us would tell you it's closer to 75-80% complete.
Hope you don't mind if I cut some stuff out to reduce clutter and specify my reply :book:
Yes some people may be unhappy about the circumstances and will not shell out their 50bucks for the next iteration of TW etc
Yes SEGA/CA will lose out on their money.
Finally Yes the most powerful place to hit a business is in the wallet.
So now you have to measure the difference between keeping these customers and GETTING X amount of dollars, or fixing these bugs and SPENDING X amount of dollars to pay for the programmers/testers when they could be used to work on EmpireTW or whatever secret project.
I'm not gonna make up random statistics (because we all know 84.3% are made up on the spot) so the best I can do is see how long it takes between patches.
Exhibit A:
I used the dates on the strategyinformer website from wikipedia
Game Release (1.0)
Released : 14.11.2006
Patch 1.1
Patch added: 15.12.2006
Patch 1.2
Patch added: 04.05.2007
Patch 1.3
Patch added: 04.09.2007
Not counting between 1.0 and 1.1 (because usually they're working on patches on the release version before its released) the average time it took to release a patch was about 4.5 months.
That's DEFINATELY a lot of money.
Zorbane, that's a fair point, but the thing that you don't take into account was the status of the game at launch. You won't find many here save for a few of the most staunch CA apologists who will tell you that M2TW should have spent quite a bit more time in the oven. Personally, I found it to be almost unplayable at launch after a few weeks, but again that's just my personal opinion. Regarding the patches, in essence what you then have is them spending that time post-launch getting the game up to the point where it should have been at upon release. The reality of what CA did was release the game half-baked, after which they spent the rest of the time patching the game to a point where they felt it would be "acceptable" to abandon it and work on other projects. It would appear that, unless management has a change of heart, we've reached that point for M2TW vanilla 1.2 and Kingdoms 1.3.
Edit - In short, "What can we get away with?" is the real question.
Zorbane: However the patches weren't really worked on full-time. There was parallel work going on on kingdoms, so it's more like maybe 20% of the maybe 5 devs work time being spent on it (totally made up numbers), which together makes something on a scale of 1 to 10 devs working on this. In my opinion that's definitely not too much money if you have a reputation at stake, and could easily be paid for by the potential loss you can observe with ETW (and still some with kingdoms) now.
If maybe 10000 people won't buy the game because of CA's attitude, that alone will generate the same loss that paying a few devs to make another patch part-time would cost, and potentially more (expansion sales loss, etc.)
A couple of things folks.
First, I call bull on everyone saying that we can't and won't make a difference. I guarantee you there's more than just 100 of us, a great deal more. I further contend that there is a much greater silent majority out there, and that statistically more than a few of them are probably of the same mindset as us. Take me for example, I've been reading the Org forums since 00, and finally just joined up about a year back. I know no less than five people who were in the same situation. Even if someone doesn't sign up and actively participate here or at TWcenter, there's a very good chance that they've browsed the forums at least a little at some point in owning the game. Perhaps looking for bug reports, perhaps guides, who knows. There's always going to be a vocal minority.
Heh, it's impossible to figure out how many people actually view the forums, but I doubt enough people notice, care, or anything else enough to stop buying the games just because some people are arguing in a thread.
Even if we were to go with the lame "100 of us" argument, that still amounts to $5000 split between the developer/publisher, retailers, etc, and $5000 is no small chump change, even when one counts profit, not revenue, in millions. And again, I guarantee you there's quite a bit more than "just 100 of us" who are ticked off enough to vote with our cash next round. You can do the math from here.
I don't see how that would effect them. :shrug:
... there just isn't enough of us to make a difference.
To the best of my knowledge, the community (read: customers, gamers, on forums) found the majority of bugs in previous TW games, and it's no different with the latest one. Those bugs were fixed because people publicly reported them, and at least in part because they were making noise in a public place where everyone can read it. If that does not qualify as "making the difference" then I don't know what does. But now it seems that even such flimsy support policy is being abandoned by CA, and is being replaced by no policy at all.
The problem is that a lot of the people left after the said situation kept repeating with every subsequent game release. So yes, currently it doesn't seem like much, but that's mostly because so many people have been driven away. However, it wasn't always like that, and the end result is that quite a few sales were lost due to this sole reason. How that reflects on the bottom line, I don't know. Maybe the compensation from newcomers is adequate, maybe more than adequate, but what the bottom line would be if it wasn't for such support policy is anybody's guess.
Marcus Orentius
10-23-2007, 23:32
Ok, I've voiced my opinion, maybe a tad vehemently, but there you go. I'm definitely gullible, naive, ignorant, etc. yep it's all true.
My god, that sound childish, but like I said before, I don't care.
Anyway, with that out of my system, I'll just say one thing the bugger off to leave you to your rambling. I do agree that there are so many things that could be improved, and yes it is rather unfinished, but it is still a very playable and decent game. Better than EE2 by any standards. CA have done a great job just bring this style of game to us, and they should get a bit of credit.
Yes I know what you're going to say, 'they're a big gaming company with lots of money and workers and whatnot' but still, it's good they've got this out at least. I look forward to ETW, though I need a new comp. I'm sure it'll be a great game.
Smite me, oh unbelievers.
Naively,
Marcus.
Galain_Ironhide
10-23-2007, 23:32
I have a Suggestion.
How about somebody here, maybe a senior member, who is better with words than I, start a thread as a petition & message to CA to "drop what they are doing and fix M2TW and Kingdoms" or something to that effect. (definately not how it should be worded but you get the drift)
The aim of the petition is to raise awareness to CA of just how many customers they will lose or have lost from their recent incompetence through lack of patches, product backup and everyones favorite - Securom.
The rule of the thread will be that your reply is your 'signature' as such and that you must only reply once, so not to screw the number of signatures up.
I must apologise, but I am starting to get tired of the "theres nothing we can do" thing. CA must start listening to our complaints.
:furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3:
Most people that have been regular fans and frequent boards are aware of the situation - the thing is that apparently the majority of the TW fanbase does not frequent forums, does not know mods exist and in all probability does not notices or even cares about bugs as basic as the shield bug.
How much effective posting about these issues really is, is arguable - yet it seems to me that it can't be a bad thing in any case.
Noir
Marcus Orentius
10-23-2007, 23:46
I know I said I would bugger off but I'm curious. How do we know securom is on Kingdoms? I looked on the packaging and manual for info, but didn't find anything. Where did people find this out?
I know I said I would bugger off but I'm curious. How do we know securom is on Kingdoms? I looked on the packaging and manual for info, but didn't find anything. Where did people find this out?
Dont bugger off, dissenting views of the majority are often the catalyst for a broader analysis of the issue. Plus you have a touch a moxy, not bad for your 40th post :wiseguy:
The Securom issue I read about at TW center (stop over sometime, nice place) and here on these boards. Wont buy kingdoms myself as its a new release. Also Whacker, while passionate and animated at times, is very knowledgable, hes posted about it.
So has a board member named Didz who has been here for a long time and has seen just about every TW issue come down the pike. All that said, I cant personally confirm its there or not, but you have it loaded on your pcright? you should be able to go through the registry.
AS far as not giving them the business, Ichigo is most likely correct that a 5k loss isnt going to harm thier operations. However, as the gamer/end user thats the only absolute option you have, its not without value. :logic:
Slug For A Butt
10-24-2007, 01:43
I know I said I would bugger off but I'm curious. How do we know securom is on Kingdoms? I looked on the packaging and manual for info, but didn't find anything. Where did people find this out?
You know how to use a search engine?
And yes, you unintentionally hit the nail right on the head there. Nowhere on the packaging does it tell you that you are installing an intrusive, potentially harmful (and incidentally... unremoveable) piece of software on your PC.
BINGO!
Maybe you are going to talk yourself out of being an unashamed apologist at this rate. ~;)
Papewaio
10-24-2007, 03:39
I have a Suggestion.
How about somebody here, maybe a senior member, who is better with words than I, start a thread as a petition & message to CA to "drop what they are doing and fix M2TW and Kingdoms" or something to that effect. (definately not how it should be worded but you get the drift)
The aim of the petition is to raise awareness to CA of just how many customers they will lose or have lost from their recent incompetence through lack of patches, product backup and everyones favorite - Securom.
The rule of the thread will be that your reply is your 'signature' as such and that you must only reply once, so not to screw the number of signatures up.
I must apologise, but I am starting to get tired of the "theres nothing we can do" thing. CA must start listening to our complaints.
:furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3:
Have you seen Black Adder goes Forth?
Edmund: Now, would this brilliant plan involve us climbing out of our trenches and walking slowly towards the enemy sir?
Darling: How can you possibly know that, Blackadder? It's classified information!
Edmund: It's the same plan that we used last time, and the seventeen times before that.
Melchett: Exactly! And that is what so brilliant about it! We will catch the watchful Hun totally off guard! Doing precisely what we have done eighteen times before is exactly the last thing they'll expect us to do this time!
Shoguns View on Petitions (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1177176&postcount=92)
However there is no need for a petition, in fact you should all be aware of our opinion on these by now. Online petitions have to be disregarded as a measure of opinion as they are completely open to abuse there is no email authentication so any one make multiple signatures.
They rely on a short attention span that we get distracted by the next bauble. The standard practice has been to have at most 3 patches for a TW series. People keep going 'But in the next version they will support it more surely.' Hasn't happened yet and isn't likely to happen in the future. With Shogun CA blamed EA that they couldn't get the patches, then when it was Activision being the publisher they got the blame for the patches. One of the key points loudly marketed when SEGA bought up CA was that they would get a publisher that would more fully support the games. Fool me once it is your fault, fool me twice it is mine. Fool me three times and it had better be a menage-a-trois.
You can choose not to buy any more TW games and just enjoy the Tavern. I know I do, as I haven't bought a SEGA published game since getting Rome: BI
Galain_Ironhide
10-24-2007, 04:41
Have you seen Black Adder goes Forth?
Shoguns View on Petitions (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1177176&postcount=92)
They rely on a short attention span that we get distracted by the next bauble. The standard practice has been to have at most 3 patches for a TW series. People keep going 'But in the next version they will support it more surely.' Hasn't happened yet and isn't likely to happen in the future. With Shogun CA blamed EA that they couldn't get the patches, then when it was Activision being the publisher they got the blame for the patches. One of the key points loudly marketed when SEGA bought up CA was that they would get a publisher that would more fully support the games. Fool me once it is your fault, fool me twice it is mine. Fool me three times and it had better be a menage-a-trois.
You can choose not to buy any more TW games and just enjoy the Tavern. I know I do, as I haven't bought a SEGA published game since getting Rome: BI
Like I said, it was a suggestion, but what Shogun says there is fair enough.
However I havent seen a computer who can come up with more than a handful of different responses to one issue such as this.
If a petition is going to be disregarded, then hows about someone think outside the square to how to get some kid of action from CA.
I am hesitant to wade into a sea of anti-CA negativity, but I am not convinced from SenseiTW's post here that we won't see a patch for Kingdoms at least:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1716434&postcount=31
Kingdoms has only been out for a couple of months or so, and I can understand CA wanting to let things settle before making a patch decision. (I think the shield bug was only discovered three or four months after M2TW came out.) CA have NEVER been one of those companies that give you patch 1.20 etc; they've always been parsimonious and not exactly speedy.
I think the most productive thing for posters to do here would be to emphasise what needs patching - from this thread, I've picked out only two things with Kingdoms (the Khalmar Union and the Welsh reinforcements). If there are just two things, I can see why a patch might not be green lighted. I think almost all CAs previous titles have been left with a few bugs unpatched - GA points in MTW being the obvious one and arguably a more serious bug than what is left in M2TW. If people highlight half a dozen issues with Kingdoms that are non-trivial, I think CA could be persuaded.
Patching M2TW seems more of a lost hope and it is disappointing to me that this was not updated with Kingdoms - as previous core games were with their expansions.
R'as al Ghul
10-24-2007, 11:55
(I think the shield bug was only discovered three or four months after M2TW came out.)
The game was published in Nov. 06. The inconsistencies with shields were felt and posted about as early as Dec. 06 and we had the problem pinned down in mid or late Jan. 07. In Feb. 07 we already had a self made fix. CA released their shield-fix in May 07. So, it took the community 3 months to come up with a mod solution, while the CA and its publisher needed 6 months to release a patch.
How the shield bug made it into the release is still beyond me because it became fairly obvious that something was wrong once you started playtesting different units in custom battles. Besides, the problem became obvious when spearmen underperformed against cavalry (any cavalry), this and similar balancing problems have been discussed since Day 1 of STW and have more or less occurred in any TW title since then. CA patched the Cav behavior in the first patch but again overlooked the shield bug. Perhaps it wouldn't even have been necessary to change the Cav if the shield had been fixed before.
Anyway, M2 seems to be an abandoned game and seeing that Empire is scheduled for the near future I can't imagine that they spent much time or resources on the old titles.
Ugh, horrid memories coming back. I still remember the bad taste that was left in our mouths based on CA's responses to that earlier petition.
Like I said, it was a suggestion, but what Shogun says there is fair enough.
Disagree completely. The logic and reasoning that was presented by CA as to why they'd ignore it was total bunk, thus what was said was nothing more than an attempt to silence fan dissent.
If a petition is going to be disregarded, then hows about someone think outside the square to how to get some kid of action from CA.
Here's the thing though. CA disregards or ignores us at their own peril. Petitions and other organized movements that gain a certain critical mass will often move on their own inertia. Simply because perhaps 200-300 of us Orgahs sign something doesn't mean that there aren't dozens, hundreds, if not thousands of others who agree yet don't participate, not only here but also at TWcenter and in the general userbase.
Quite often the best way to obtain results and responses by fans is through organized, consolidated movements such as petitions organized through sites such as the Org and Twcenter. Again, the devs/pubs ignore these at their own peril. Actions that tend to grow in size will invariably gain recognition beyond just the sites or means that they were started in, and if ignored will tend to generate quite a bit of bad press and word of mouth (esp. when significant news outlets get ahold of the story, witness the latest EA Securom fiasco), thus impacting current and future sales.
In short, everyone should simply ignore CA's statements about ignoring petitions, etc, for the above reasons. Ignored, blown-off, or half-hearted responses are recognized for what they are, and if enough people are annoyed, it's going to be evident in sales/income. The best way we can make an impact is to work collectively. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts.
Jack Lusted
10-24-2007, 13:24
We do not listen to petitions for a variety of reasons. It is not to do with silencing dissent, it is to do with other issues.
We will, and do, read the forums and we are well aware of people's feeling on this issue given the large of posts on it, and it has been the subject of a lot of discussion. As SenseiTW said over at the official forums, an answer on this issue will be forthcoming soon.
Marcus Orentius
10-24-2007, 13:53
@Slug for a Butt:
I know what securom is, I was just wanting some proof that it exists in Kingdoms, I'll have a look for myself, thanks.
Well, I'll give Lusted credit for a reasonably straightforward response at least.
We do not listen to petitions for a variety of reasons. It is not to do with silencing dissent, it is to do with other issues.
And you (you being CA) ignore your customers at your own peril. If those "reasons" and "issues" are what were stated in responses to the petition in the past, we already shot down every single one of them, which were supported by responses from Tosa and other experienced forum admins/mods.
We will, and do, read the forums and we are well aware of people's feeling on this issue given the large of posts on it, and it has been the subject of a lot of discussion. As SenseiTW said over at the official forums, an answer on this issue will be forthcoming soon.
So you'll ignore petitions signed by hundreds/thousands, yet you'll lend weight to forum threads with thousands of views and posts by a few dozen people (again you being CA)??
:dizzy2:
Edit - OK, so after thinking about this a minute, I'll pose a question to CA. If you're going to ignore petitions, what format would you listen to then? Forum threads? Only posts in certain venues, like the .com forums? Preemptively, suggestions that involve us doing things individually are totally unacceptable, we are collectively a whole and will act as such, so do not try to divide us. In other words, something like "send an email feedback" or "call such and such a hotline" is not acceptable.
Empress_Zoe
10-24-2007, 14:52
Haha, you guys are still buying CA's products?
I remember the big stink that we put up over the 'Die at 56' bug in the MTW1 expansion. That worked actually...A new patch came out to fix it due to the whining. It taught me a lesson though.
Still, I am enjoying my 10 dollar RTW+Expansion with EB on it. Not that I would have bought it brand new, the vanilla game sucked badly. I learned back in the days of 'Viking Invasion' that this company wasn't to be trusted when it came to a polished product, and even less when it comes to fixing said product. The only surprise to me is seeing all these names who went through the same thing three or more times now, and STILL haven't learned anything:laugh4:
I really loved Shogun. I also enjoyed MTW, until the bugs started kicking in and then CA started jacking up about making patches for it. That attitude is what totally put me off the company, and I haven't bought a full priced (Nowhere near full price) product of theirs since Viking Invasion. The fantasy units in RTW Vanilla also put me off, though I only bought the thing for EB. I had to see the Vanilla game in all its glory before I put the mod on of course...
I really hope another company can get their act together and put some competition on the table though.
Anyway, see you all at the opening whine fest for Empires. You know what to expect so dress appropriately:tredmil:
So you'll ignore petitions signed by hundreds/thousands, yet you'll lend weight to forum threads with thousands of views and posts by a few dozen people (again you being CA)??
Well, to be fair - academic discourse works the same way. To discern the truth of something, it does not matter how many people say something - it is the quality of what is said. To games designers like Lusted, I suspect what matters when discussing a patch is what bugs there are, how serious they are and how easy to fix. They have to make a case to the people above them who control the company resources. If one poster on a forum zeroes in and identifies the shield bug, that it is likely to be much effective in eliciting a patch than an internet petition.
I remember the big stink that we put up over the 'Die at 56' bug in the MTW1 expansion. A new patch came out to fix it due to the whining.
I doubt it. The VI patch came out because the 56 years thing was a (literally) killer bug. I don't remember any CA resistance. There was no "whining" - just pointing out the obvious and, as I remember it, any complaints were pushing at any open door. In my recollection, VI had a good reception here - the "whining" came with RTW.
Well, to be fair - academic discourse works the same way. To discern the truth of something, it does not matter how many people say something - it is the quality of what is said. To games designers like Lusted, I suspect what matters when discussing a patch is what bugs there are, how serious they are and how easy to fix. They have to make a case to the people above them who control the company resources. If one poster on a forum zeroes in and identifies the shield bug, that it is likely to be much effective in eliciting a patch than an internet petition.
If I am reading you correctly, then I have a few thoughts in response. It's not just bugs that we're including here in the patch discussion, it's features that existed in prior games or ones that we've been clamoring about for awhile and don't have/were removed. Though to be fair bugs do seem to be the biggest focus.
And regarding the bugs/features, patching, and management, I have a somewhat pessimistic view based on my years in the business world and dealing with suits. One person finding a bug isn't going to move an exec at all to release funding for game repair work. Hundreds and thousands of angry customers chomping at the bit to have a bug fixed/feature added is going to provide a lot more incentive, as it represents a much larger risk and potential loss of face and income. The execs are thinking about what they can get away with in terms of saving money, and it's our job as the customers and fans to make it very clear to them what we think. If the folks responsible for gauging customer reaction don't properly relay that to upper mgmt, that's not our fault.
Thus, a single person working diligently to find and document bugs like (with all due respect to my boy) Factionhair and others is going to mean squat to the execs and financial controllers, esp. to the people trying to put together a business case with cost/benefits. A horde of angry fans yelling collectively is going to get a lot more attention and represents a much larger potential loss, hence a bigger incentive.
Originally posted by Whacker
A horde of angry fans yelling collectively is going to get a lot more attention and represents a much larger potential loss, hence a bigger incentive.
I'm sure that this will be very effective as long as the horde (of fans) remains convincing in that it yells because of the issue at hand rather than because it likes yelling.
Noir
I doubt it. The VI patch came out because the 56 years thing was a (literally) killer bug. I don't remember any CA resistance. There was no "whining" - just pointing out the obvious and, as I remember it, any complaints were pushing at any open door. In my recollection, VI had a good reception here - the "whining" came with RTW.
I remember it too. They were unwilling to release a patch for that either. There was a huge petition here, and a lot of outcry, and they ended up releasing a small patch just to fix that and they threw in fixed reinforcements order for good measure. However, IMHO if it wasn't for all that yelling we wouldn't have gotten that. In other words, MTW would have been left in an unfinished state that M2TW seems destined to remain in. Whether that sort of critical mass and willingness to respond exists today is questionable.
Ramses II CP
10-24-2007, 16:39
I have to say I absolutely understand ignoring petitions, in my experience they are a rather blunt instrument with little reasoning behind them. Responding to them encourages a brute force approach (Find more signatures, by any means necessary) whereas listening to posters on a forum at least guarantees that there is a potential for debate and dissention. The suggestion is that if a number of clearly reasonable people present a well developed case for a patch that their reasoning will be at least considered.
With that in mind let me say that if a substantive patch for MTWII and Kingdoms comes out I will reconsider my position on not purchasing Kingdoms. SecuRom is (Pulling no punches) a vile and purposeless thing to inflict on your customers, but a company that follows fan discussions and considers them deserves some consideration in return.
:egypt:
I remember it too. They were unwilling to release a patch for that either. There was a huge petition here, and a lot of outcry, and they ended up releasing a small patch just to fix that and they threw in fixed reinforcements order for good measure. However, IMHO if it wasn't for all that yelling we wouldn't have gotten that. In other words, MTW would have been left in an unfinished state that M2TW seems destined to remain in. Whether that sort of critical mass and willingness to respond exists today is questionable.
OK, my memory was hazy - the search function does reveal an awful lot of yelling. Whether it was necessary to get the patch, I don't know - I guess only Captain Fishpants or another CA insider could tell us that.
The chronology is interesting for reference:
VI was released on 9/5/2003
Mount Suribachi started a "I'm won't buy RTW until VI is patched" thread here on 8/6/2003
Captain Fishpants announced a patch on 17/7/2003
The Patch was released - or leaked - on 13/10/2003
Maybe I am just getting old and used to a more leisurely pace of life, but the gap between VIs release and the patch announcement (a couple of months) does not seem that egregiously long. The final patch release did get held up in testing etc, but CA themselves were not happy with that.
I suspect we may see something similar with Kingdoms.
Well, to be fair - academic discourse works the same way. To discern the truth of something, it does not matter how many people say something - it is the quality of what is said. To games designers like Lusted, I suspect what matters when discussing a patch is what bugs there are, how serious they are and how easy to fix. They have to make a case to the people above them who control the company resources. If one poster on a forum zeroes in and identifies the shield bug, that it is likely to be much effective in eliciting a patch than an internet petition.
Based on my experience working on CA beta teams this is correct except for the last sentence. Players identifying bugs is only the first step in getting a patch. The players then have to make a case that the bugs are serious enough to affect the company's reputation in the eyes of it's customers. In the past, this worked because the Total War was aimed at a niche market. Now the game is aimed at a broader market that's more likely to find v1.0 acceptable. As long as v1.0 runs on most machines, there's no reason to patch the game for that market. That market isn't going to notice things like "all kings die at 56" in MTW or the shield bug in RTW.
I doubt it. The VI patch came out because the 56 years thing was a (literally) killer bug. I don't remember any CA resistance. There was no "whining" - just pointing out the obvious and, as I remember it, any complaints were pushing at any open door. In my recollection, VI had a good reception here - the "whining" came with RTW.
There wasn't any CA resistance to making the VI v2.01 patch, but there was Activision resistance. In fact, Activision refused to pay for the patch, so the CA programmers made the patch after hours on their own time. I can't envision the current incarnation of CA making a patch on their own time without pay.
Just pointing out the obvious isn't going to work anymore. Witness the load/save bug of RTW. After that was discovered by a player and verified by other players, CA insisted that the game was intentionally designed that way. Obviously, they knew about this all along and never said anything. Only after a great deal of public outcry, in spite of the topic being banned from discussion at .com, did CA back down and change load/save to retain the state of the game when saving. When the players who care that the game works properly are up against that kind of resistance from the company there really isn't much hope of getting things fixed up let alone maintaining the quality of the tactical simulation or having the strategic game be something more than a huge number of clicks to an inevitable conclusion.
Zenicetus
10-24-2007, 19:26
We will, and do, read the forums and we are well aware of people's feeling on this issue given the large of posts on it, and it has been the subject of a lot of discussion. As SenseiTW said over at the official forums, an answer on this issue will be forthcoming soon.
Thanks for the update. Can we please get separate responses on the issue of a final patch, and the SecureRom issue?
Will CA/Sega release a utility or patch for completely removing SecureRom after the game is uninstalled? I don't think that's too much to ask for. If they will, then I'll buy Kingdoms. Otherwise I (and I suspect many others) will continue to pass on it, and I'll recommend that my friends not buy it either.
There wasn't any CA resistance to making the VI v2.01 patch, but there was Activision resistance. In fact, Activision refused to pay for the patch, so the CA programmers made the patch after hours on their own time. I can't envision the current incarnation of CA making a patch on their own time without pay.
Nor should they be expected to. CA is not a two men and dog outfit anymore - after RTW, the series is presumably making good money and should be properly funded. If I were in CA, I would not be volunteering to do it without pay, but making the case to the high ups which as you say is required (the volunteering would undermine the case). I am hoping they will succeed with the case for a Kingdoms patch, but I'd be surprised if they do with one for M2TW.
But I think you are doing something of a disservice to the present CA staff. Lusted's done - and I think is doing - a lot of pro bono work as a modder and another CA staffer produced the retrofit mod for M2TW since it was decided not to rebalance it to the Kingdoms standard.
Posts have now been deleted from this thread twice. I will not give any more warnings. Further CA bashing or personal attacks will result in a locked thread.
Please keep your comments polite and constructive. Thank you.
And yet more silencing of dissent. Sad that such behavior has spread here as well.
Your posts were insults, not dissent. There are plenty of other posts in this thread which are heavily critical of CA that have not been touched. Those posts have been made in a mature and constructive manner. Your posts have been insulting, lacking in any constructive content, and useful only for creating flame wars.
Welcome to the Org. We do not permit trolls. Enjoy your stay.
Jack Lusted
10-24-2007, 22:15
Edit - OK, so after thinking about this a minute, I'll pose a question to CA. If you're going to ignore petitions, what format would you listen to then? Forum threads? Only posts in certain venues, like the .com forums? Preemptively, suggestions that involve us doing things individually are totally unacceptable, we are collectively a whole and will act as such, so do not try to divide us. In other words, something like "send an email feedback" or "call such and such a hotline" is not acceptable.
I would say your best bet would be threads like this, threads which grow to a lot of pages and show how strongly the community feels about an issue are the best way to draw our attention. As we read all the fansites we can gauge the general community feeling on an issue this way.
Mori Gabriel Syme
10-24-2007, 22:37
With that in mind let me say that if a substantive patch for MTWII and Kingdoms comes out I will reconsider my position on not purchasing Kingdoms. SecuRom is (Pulling no punches) a vile and purposeless thing to inflict on your customers, but a company that follows fan discussions and considers them deserves some consideration in return.
The SecuRom issue is a complete non-starter for me. I have neither the time nor frankly the desire to endure the process of removing it myself. If CA were to patch the game to remove SecuRom upon uninstallation of the game I would consider buying Kingdoms. I would probably decide against it even then, however, because I don't want that thing on my machine at all.
Just pointing out the obvious isn't going to work anymore. Witness the load/save bug of RTW. After that was discovered by a player and verified by other players, CA insisted that the game was intentionally designed that way. Obviously, they knew about this all along and never said anything. Only after a great deal of public outcry, in spite of the topic being banned from discussion at .com, did CA back down and change load/save to retain the state of the game when saving. When the players who care that the game works properly are up against that kind of resistance from the company there really isn't much hope of getting things fixed up let alone maintaining the quality of the tactical simulation or having the strategic game be something more than a huge number of clicks to an inevitable conclusion.
True. The discovery and subsequent treatment of the load/save bug in RTW was what made me leave, as it simply felt pointless to even argue that something that serious just has to be fixed.
Reading those old VI threads surely brings back memories of a somewhat different age.
SpencerH
10-25-2007, 01:18
Its amazing to me to see how the attitudes of "old hands" have changed over the years with each successive TW disappointment. The whole situation is just sad.
Papewaio
10-25-2007, 03:32
Maybe I am just getting old and used to a more leisurely pace of life, but the gap between VIs release and the patch announcement (a couple of months) does not seem that egregiously long. The final patch release did get held up in testing etc, but CA themselves were not happy with that.
It was a significant amount of time that when it was released there were no more copies of VI to be found on the shelves so I never bought a copy. And I really wanted to play the Welsh.
This in turn made me delay buying Rome until I saw that all the major issues had been resolved. Meaning that I when I did get it, it was half price (and hard to find too)... actually I think it was a Valentine present from the wife as I was still umming and arring if to get it.
I didn't bother with Alexander, and I can't remember what motivated me to get BI. I do know that I ended up playing the Dawn of War demo more then the Rome TW titles.
M2TW I was about to get when I heard poor reviews of Kingdoms (both gameplay and bugs) so I haven't got either.
My favourite game at the moment is Dwarf Fortress. :2thumbsup: When I get time that is.
=][= BTW were suicidal generals an issue in M2TW or Kingdoms... they had to be patched out in every other iteration of TW.
Tafferboy
10-25-2007, 05:05
I would say your best bet would be threads like this, threads which grow to a lot of pages and show how strongly the community feels about an issue are the best way to draw our attention. As we read all the fansites we can gauge the general community feeling on an issue this way.
It disgusts me that we have to ask for further support for M2TW/Kingdoms in the first place. I am sure CA are well aware themselves of the buggy and unfinished state their products are in. The worst part is it reflects very poorly on CA's responsibility and credibility as a developer when they promise features in their product that are broken, make money out of them, and then need evidence of customers' dissatisfaction in online communities before they would even consider fixing them. Sure seems to me CA couldn't care less with us customers because after all they got our money, and are only becoming concerned with this issue because the negative publicity potentially threatens the sales of their next unfinished release.
It disgusts me that we have to ask for further support for M2TW/Kingdoms in the first place. I am sure CA are well aware themselves of the buggy and unfinished state their products are in. The worst part is it reflects very poorly on CA's responsibility and credibility as a developer when they promise features in their product that are broken, make money out of them, and then need evidence of customers' dissatisfaction in online communities before they would even consider fixing them. Sure seems to me CA couldn't care less with us customers because after all they got our money, and are only becoming concerned with this issue because the negative publicity potentially threatens the sales of their next unfinished release.
Unfortunately after MTW/VI (some might say that signs of this first appeared in STW/MI) the Total War genre has radically changed direction and aimed for a younger and generally more diverse market. This entailed a general "dumbing down" of the product at tactical battle level, removal of the risk campaign map and it's replacement with the familiar tiled movement points based one (greater complexity at strategic level to capture the huge Civ/AoE market that CA had previously been left out of), addition of arcade battle mode, RTS camera, unlockable factions and other bells and whistles. Since CA can now sell to a wider consumer base, they are no longer restricted to supplying the needs of the type of gamer that frequents the .org. That is, those that are worried by game balancing issues and bugs that some might see as minor, are clearly no longer assumed to be a significant part of the consumer base, and are as such probably not given any kind of priority.
Apologies for going off topic, but anyway...
=][= BTW were suicidal generals an issue in M2TW or Kingdoms... they had to be patched out in every other iteration of TW.
I think they are less of a problem than in RTW, where it is still not unheard of for the AI to start the battle by hurtling its general at your lines.
In M2TW field battles, the general tends to hang back at the very beginning, but sooner or later gets stuck in. Not really suicidal generals, but reckless generals. On one level, it is understandable as TW generals have always been very powerful units that - early in the campaign -can swing a battle, as any STW vet knows. But I'd prefer more them to be more evasive and stay out of combat longer/more often.
While defending bridges and attacking in sieges recently, I have been disappointed that the AI launched its general into the battle very early on. In those situations - where there is usually a very narrow chokepoint for the combat - the general really should be kept out of the killing zone.
Apologies for going off topic, but anyway...
I think they are less of a problem than in RTW, where it is still not unheard of for the AI to start the battle by hurtling its general at your lines.
In M2TW field battles, the general tends to hang back at the very beginning, but sooner or later gets stuck in. Not really suicidal generals, but reckless generals. On one level, it is understandable as TW generals have always been very powerful units that - early in the campaign -can swing a battle, as any STW vet knows. But I'd prefer more them to be more evasive and stay out of combat longer/more often.
While defending bridges and attacking in sieges recently, I have been disappointed that the AI launched its general into the battle very early on. In those situations - where there is usually a very narrow chokepoint for the combat - the general really should be kept out of the killing zone.
I agree, suicide generals have always been a problem, certainly in STW and also in MTW where bodyguard units were small and all too often led from the front. Their death would see morale utterly disintegrate, which is acceptable, though they were far to easily picked off right at the beginning of a battle.
With RTW this was never fully resolved as one would expect. The preferred (cheap and dirty) solution was to simply give generals two hit points to increase their survival rate. I find that this doesn't really help and turns the unit into a suicidal juggernaut that is overused by the AI in pitched battles, typically scores the most kills in any battle and is finally, and inevitably, overhwhelmed and killed. In RTW the general does hang back for a while, especially in sieges, but in pitched battles still gets involved too early and in the wrong areas of the battle.
Also the problem with the general hanging back is that he is not close enough to postively affect the morale of the troops or charge in and try to rally when their morale is plummeting. In many siege battles I have destroyed the enemy force entirely and then seen the generals unit a good way out from the city turn around and withdraw, on other occasions I have been able to sally a few units out to deal with him after wiping out his army. IMHO this is not a good example of an even half decent AI. To simply keep the general out of arrowshot of the walls seems like the quick and easy way out. After all the AI units really need all the morale boost they can get when assaulting a city.
The strategy map has it's issues with the handling of generals also. Instead of stacking a general with an army, they are often to found wandering about alone while "captains" tend to lead big AI stacks. This wasn't really an issue in MTW as an army in a province fought under the best general available or the king if present.
If this has dramatically improved in M2TW then I'd be rather impressed.
:bow:
I would say your best bet would be threads like this, threads which grow to a lot of pages and show how strongly the community feels about an issue are the best way to draw our attention. As we read all the fansites we can gauge the general community feeling on an issue this way.
This is me, helping make this thread grow to "a lot of pages".
Not releasing even a single patch for a broken product is a new low in game support. (And that's quite an accomplishment!)
I'm assuming that it's the "suits" at fault, here, but whoever it is, figure out who needs sense slapped into them and start aslappin'!
I enjoy Kingdoms a lot, but I had to spend a day of MY time fixing confirmed bugs, and there are some I simply can't fix. Not gameplay tweaks to make me happy, but obvious bugs.
I hope I sounded properly outraged, since outrage is supposedly something that motivates a new patch.
Oh, and it's nice to see you posting again, Lusted. I was worried you'd fallen into the professional pit of no return. ^_^
I would say your best bet would be threads like this, threads which grow to a lot of pages and show how strongly the community feels about an issue are the best way to draw our attention. As we read all the fansites we can gauge the general community feeling on an issue this way.
You read all the fansites, and can gauge the general community feeling on issues, yet you didn't anticipate releasing another patch for either M2TW or Kingdoms? You weren't able to gauge how the community feels about certain bugs/troublesome issues that remain in the original game/grand campaign, and that's why 1.3 patch did nothing to remedy them? If this is the case, then the only sensible explanation is the one I proposed earlier in this thread....
Just for the record:
While absents's latest post was perhaps not entirely on topic, I don't think that it should have been deleted.
Originally posted by econ21
Patching M2TW seems more of a lost hope and it is disappointing to me that this was not updated with Kingdoms - as previous core games were with their expansions.
I agree with econ21 - a patch for Kingdoms is very well needed and yet - leaving M2 as is and not updated with the expansion is what's really dissapointing.
Heh - in the past as it has been mentioned the publisher or lack of resources have been blamed for the lack of patches - yet now, persuasion with multipage threads is "required" in order for CA to even start considering a patch for basic issues - not to make gameplay/playbalance improvements (heaven forbids!) - but just to make the game working as intended - despite the fact that the series now sells quite well - or is it exactly because of that? :laugh4:
In all probability it seems that numbers actually do matter here since its advised that multipage threads are the best bet, so correctness and importance of argument regarding bugs are not really the issue but rather how many people are actually bothered (have noticed the bugs? :laugh4: ) about having a game that works properly.
Those that come back from the past to shower with irony whoever "still hangs on" - seem to have a point - CA doesn't really need anymore a dedicated fanbase it seems, they just probably decided to "live with it it" :laugh4:
The ghost majority the games are aimed for now, fills the numbers apparently anyway.
Whatever they do in terms of support nowdays no matter how low compared with what they did in the past or what they "should" be doing, feels like a move of "bona fede" i guess, just so there isn't enough noise to really affect sales and perhaps even a bit for "old time's sake" :laugh4:
Sometimes i seriously wish that i'd have never bought STW.
Noir
Just for the record:
While absents's latest post was perhaps not entirely on topic, I don't think that it should have been deleted.
The post included a personal attack and had nothing whatsoever to do with the discussion. Further actions on absents are pending. Please keep this thread on-topic.
If I were in CA, I would not be volunteering to do it without pay, but making the case to the high ups which as you say is required (the volunteering would undermine the case).
They had already made their case to Activision without success that "all kings die at 56 years of age" should be fixed. Volunteering to do it got the v2.01 patch made. If they hadn't volunteered there would have been no v2.01 patch.
But I think you are doing something of a disservice to the present CA staff. Lusted's done - and I think is doing - a lot of pro bono work as a modder and another CA staffer produced the retrofit mod for M2TW since it was decided not to rebalance it to the Kingdoms standard.
Those aren't code changes, and can't correct the underlying problems. For example, look at the impossible situation faced by the person trying to balance RTW tactical battles with the shield bug and reversed charge bug present. The underlying algorithms have to be correct or else people like Lusted are defeated before they start.
IceTorque
10-25-2007, 14:45
Not too long after M2 was released, I decided not to post here at the org anymore, because I felt the mods were too quick to close threads like this one. Thanks to Jack Lusted's post suggesting that the only way we'll get a patch is if many of us complain. I felt the need to add my 2 cents worth, and am now thinking that the heavy handed censorship of negative threads is the reason why we don't get "No further patches for M2TW or Kingdoms".
M2 still has many bugs, and still needs quite a bit of optimisation as far as unit cohesion and AI are concerned. Not to mention the unspecified errors causing a CTD. The community has taken the time to make buglists that have simply been ignored by CA/Sega.
The decision not to support the game after patch 1.2 is an absolute shame, and will lose more customers than those few who take the time to post their opinions would suggest. I think most gamers who dislike certain gameplay features or just buggy software in general don't even bother to complain, they just don't buy anymore products from that company. Which is what I do with all other games, except of course TW.
Kingdoms is not an expansion, it is just a mod. So, the decision not to touch the game code and risk the need for another patch was obviously made long ago. CA/Sega sold us all a cheap mod, dressed up as an expansion, this alone is an outrage, and they deserve to be dragged over the coals for this fact alone, not just for refusing to support their product. If they would have tried this with their previous games the community would have been up in arms. The absence of a call to arms indicates to me that most long time fans have already given up on TW and moved on.
So, who is responsible for this sad state of affairs? The heavy handed (don't scare away the devs) moderation, corporate greed, lack of manpower or all of the above. Whatever the reason(s) the lack of support and the cheapskate xpac leave a sour taste in my mouth, I won't say i'll never buy another CA/Sega game, but I will say if I do it will be a very long time after that games initial release before I even consider doing so.
Jack Lusted
10-25-2007, 16:32
Thanks to Jack Lusted's post suggesting that the only way we'll get a patch is if many of us complain.
That is not what i was saying. Whacker was asking what the best way to bring thing to our attention would be as we do not like petitions, that is what i was responding to. Please do not take my words out of context or to say things they don't. I was just saying what the best way to bring any issue that is very important to the community to our attention, not just specifically this one.
FactionHeir
10-25-2007, 16:40
That is not what i was saying. Whacker was asking what the best way to bring thing to our attention would be as we do not like petitions, that is what i was responding to. Please do not take my words out of context or to say things they don't. I was just saying what the best way to bring any issue that is very important to the community to our attention, not just specifically this one.
By the way, judging from the number of posts and views of the buglist, will that ever be fixed? :grin2:
One thing I am rather curious about is why CA will not listen to petitions but rather to forum threads with large numbers of posters/posts. Both are in a way the same I think.
By the way, judging from the number of posts and views of the buglist, will that ever be fixed? :grin2:
One thing I am rather curious about is why CA will not listen to petitions but rather to forum threads with large numbers of posters/posts. Both are in a way the same I think.
It is a lot easier to just reply to a post with a "I sign" message than writing a detailed post which means that people can do it without a lot of fuss. That's the whole point of petitions, to make the petitioners as little work as possible.
For CA (or probably a lot of companies) I guess the reasoning goes like: "If they can't be bothered to write detailed posts explaining their problem, it's not too important to them, therefore we can get away with ignoring them"
The thing is that with petitions there's a very small percentage of people who will actually take steps if CA doesn't heed it, whereas with such a thread you can see that some people already claimed they wouldn't buy another game from CA/SEGA in the near future (including myself), and they did it in a way that is a lot more credible than a random petition you can sign with two words...
frogbeastegg
10-25-2007, 17:21
IMO the worst thing about this entire series was the old one patch policy.
Again IMO, the best thing Sega brought to the series was the death of this policy.
As I write my Kingdoms guides for the official site I'm having to leave sections with "This is currently bugged but if it is fixed in the future it should ..." Credit must be given that those sections are not edited out before the guide is put up for download. I hate having to write them, and was originally doing so in the belief that one day those sections would benefit players because the issues would be addressed.
It would be a shame of the greatest sort of I were wrong on both counts.
Not too long after M2 was released, I decided not to post here at the org anymore, because I felt the mods were too quick to close threads like this one. Thanks to Jack Lusted's post suggesting that the only way we'll get a patch is if many of us complain. I felt the need to add my 2 cents worth, and am now thinking that the heavy handed censorship of negative threads is the reason why we don't get "No further patches for M2TW or Kingdoms".
The org has to be careful not to go too far because Creative Assembly will take legal action against them.
Kingdoms is not an expansion, it is just a mod. So, the decision not to touch the game code and risk the need for another patch was obviously made long ago.
Good point, and this is probably why they didn't anticipate any problems with Kingdoms. Unfortunately, CA has demonstrated time and time again that the debugging method they use on initial releases fails to catch many problems. The number of bugs in RTW v1.0 was staggering, and the readme for the RTW v1.2 patch doesn't list all that was fixed. This is where the community and the community based beta teams used for patch testing were very helpful in bringing the game up to a more finished level. CA went away from using community based beta teams to hiring a single experienced player to help identify problems, but it hasn't worked out as well eventhough he is there working before the v1.0 release.
So, who is responsible for this sad state of affairs?
I think it's the decision to move away from the niche market to the broad market.
IMO the worst thing about this entire series was the old one patch policy.
Again IMO, the best thing Sega brought to the series was the death of this policy.
That was an improvement with RTW getting v1.2, v1.3 and v1.5 patches, but apparently was a failed experiment since SEGA has now gone away from that policy. The RTW v1.2 community beta team put in a strong request for a subsequent v1.3 patch. It was still quite a while before approval for a v1.3 was granted, and I don't know what it was that eventually resulted in the go ahead on a v1.3. It may have been the discovery by a player of the non-reversal of the cav charge bonus when cav charged into the front of a phalanx plus the Parthian shot not working. Despite all those patches, RTW was still left with some known bugs, but it's in a much better state than if it had never gotten those patches. It's important for the sake of mods to get all the bugs ironed out of the game otherwise much of the modding effort is wasted effort. Imagine EB running off of v1.2 instead of v1.6. I can tell you that if RTW was still at v1.2, I wouldn't be helping with the Ran no Jidai mod.
Kingdoms is not an expansion, it is just a mod. So, the decision not to touch the game code and risk the need for another patch was obviously made long ago.
I doubt that is true. I thought the rationale for not patching M2TW to Kingdoms standard was because the code had diverged two much between the two products - it would be too much work.
I don't see much of a difference between Kingdoms and the earlier expansions. It is more substantial than MI and VI. BI was more attractive to me, because of the scale. But I don't think you can accuse CA of producing a cheap expansion - producing those four campaigns probably took a lot of work. (As did rebalancing the combat.)
So, who is responsible for this sad state of affairs? The heavy handed (don't scare away the devs) moderation, corporate greed, lack of manpower or all of the above.
The answer is obvious - it is the heavy handed Org moderators who are to blame. :smash:
The answer is obvious - it is the heavy handed Org moderators who are to blame. :smash:
Finally, we are cutting through all the manusha and getting to the real problem. :wiseguy:
Considering Jack lusted said that petitions dont really work, and that message board posts are what they look at, and he is posting here, it would seem the message has gotten through to someone who has influence on the process.
Perhaps a step back from the venom might be in order, while I still advocate the concept of conumers taking repsonsibility and not purchasing at release, I think the angles of this issue have been well represented if not exhausted.
I doubt that is true. I thought the rationale for not patching M2TW to Kingdoms standard was because the code had diverged two much between the two products - it would be too much work.
Code divergence can't be the issue. Kingdoms started with the M2TW battle engine code, so all that has to be done is to apply the same changes to the M2TW battle engine. What CA obviously considered to be too much work was rebalancing and debugging it. This is the bind you get into when you are still fixing battle engine mechanics in the expansion a year after initial release and the deadline to end-of-life the product is approaching.
I don't see much of a difference between Kingdoms and the earlier expansions.
That's because you aren't particularly concerned with battle mechanics. In all the previous games, improvements to the battle engine were incorporated into the main game.
Empress_Zoe
10-25-2007, 19:08
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?p=406337#post406337
Kraxis himself posted:
Oh, I could hardly agree more.
But we have to take CA's word on this and expect a small patch that does little but fix the 56 bug. Such a fix does NOT mean the game will be fine and clean, it means it has been done because they noticed we were complaining, not because they found it to be something they could not accept. Again I have to bring in Blizzard, they release patches that fix things I never even knew was there... They are dedicated to the games they have sent out, using a lot of strength to keep them running and making them better.
I normally don't complain that much, but it is surprising that, what is supposed to be a minor patch takes so long (remember they were at it before they told us). It has soon taken the same time as the big patch for MTW. That in itself could be a good pointer that it might be a big patch.
Just as a little history reminder for those who are a little....sleepy:2thumbsup:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=25030
The actual great thread in all its glory, in case anyone wanted to see it. Those were the days...:whip:
Whacker was asking what the best way to bring thing to our attention would be as we do not like petitions,...
Of course you don't. Lots of signatures on an organized petition makes CA look bad. After the RTW petition, The Shogun announced that CA would no longer consider petitions, and the org moderators blocked futher attempts of players to organize petitions.
RTW multiplayer patch petition org signers, 22Oct2004, (this petiton picked up more signatures at .com):
1 [cF]Adherbal
2 [cF]Maharbal
3 [FF]Tyrone
4 [FF]Anniep
5 [FF]Blackpanther
6 [FF]Crandaeolon
7 [FF]Darkhalf
8 [FF]Gustavus2
9 [FF]Hammer
10 [FF]Hobbes
11 [FF]Louis-St-Simurgh
12 [FF]mIcK
13 [FF]n3xt
14 [FF]Nopileos
15 [FF]Phoenix
16 [FF]Sequence.7
17 [FF]Sir_Killalot
18 [FF]Tempiic
19 [FF]Will
20 [LEGIO] VII CLAUDIA
21 [LEGIO]Alex
22 [LEGIO]Angelius
23 [LEGIO]capago64
24 [LEGIO]Cheros
25 [LEGIO]DIX
26 [LEGIO]Dracula
27 [LEGIO]Edi
28 [LEGIO]Emperor
29 [LEGIO]fenix legion
30 [LEGIO]Flea
31 [LEGIO]Franied
32 [LEGIO]Highlander
33 [LEGIO]Kiedis
34 [LEGIO]Lord Feanor
35 [LEGIO]Lordthefenix
36 [LEGIO]Lucio Decimocis Cospuccio
37 [LEGIO]musketeer
38 [LEGIO]PILUM
39 [LEGIO]Pompeo il Magno
40 [LEGIO]Primigenia
41 [LEGIO]Silvanus
42 [LEGIO]TITUS AUGUSTUS
43 [LEGIO]XXI Rapax
44 [LEGIO]XXX ULPIA
45 [LEGIO]XXX ULPIA
46 [UoY]Acidd_UK
47 [UoY]Mr.Tinkles
48 [VDM]Troys
49 [VDM]Xenophon
50 {DC}Fire
51 {DC}Fire
52 {DC}PIG_yobaboink
53 {DC}PIG_yobaboink
54 {DC}Player
55 {DC}Player
56 {DC}Rider
57 {DC}Rider
58 {DC}Shade
59 {DC}Shade
60 {LORE}Chimpyang
61 {LORE}Maximus Aurelius
62 {LORE}Maximus Aurelius
63 {LORE}Monk
64 {LORE}Quid
65 {ME}_Bramsi
66 {ME}Oselly
67 {Pendragon}Achille
68 {Pendragon}Bastard
69 {Pendragon}Cid Campeador
70 {Pendragon}Crash
71 {Pendragon}Cynh
72 {Pendragon}DGMerlin
73 {Pendragon}Dmlolo
74 {Pendragon}Droit-de-cuissage
75 {Pendragon}Free
76 {Pendragon}Jibbs
77 {Pendragon}Le Duc
78 {Pendragon}Maarek
79 {Pendragon}Moonshine
80 {Pendragon}Philou
81 {Pendragon}Wallace
82 {Pendragon}Widukind
83 {Pendragon}Willcourt
84 {Raven}Crfyder
85 {TL}Lord Fubar
86 {TL}Lord Kenlee
87 {TL}Lord Krutz
88 {TL}Lord MegaMatt
89 {TL}Lord Okoru
90 {TL}Lord Wiskey
91 {TL}Lord_Lonewarrior
92 1dread1lahll
93 1master1hymir
94 7Bear7Clips
95 7Bear7Grizzly
96 7Bear7Kuma
97 7Bear7Saxon
98 7Bear7Scar
99 7Bear7Tooth
100 7Bear7Yogi
101 7Bear7Yoyoma
102 Ae2
103 AggonyDuck
104 AggonyRaven
105 Ah_dut
106 AK_SG
107 Almircar
108 Ambassador Sacrifice
109 Antek
110 AoM_Azrael
111 AoM_Horus
112 Apollonius
113 ArmaEtLorica_Arbi
114 ArmaEtLorica_Diackon
115 ArmaEtLorica_Mongoclint
116 ArmaEtLorica_Vandershot
117 Arnaud
118 Asterix909
119 B@njer
120 Bachus
121 Balamir
122 Barrakud
123 Bitchi
124 Boudicca
125 CanCritter
126 Carlos
127 Carrasca
128 CeltiberoAcre
129 CeltiberoAlba
130 Celt¡beroAlioven
131 CeltiberoAmebo
132 CeltiberoBichoco
133 CeltiberoCapi
134 Celt¡beroCid
135 CeltiberoEmbirrado
136 CeltiberoEpG
137 CeltiberoFigueroa
138 CeltiberoFrog
139 CeltiberoFurase
140 CeltiberoIdibil
141 CeltiberoIhatsu
142 CeltiberoJuanjo
143 CeltiberoKarmipoka
144 CeltiberoKoln
145 CeltiberoLaertes
146 CeltiberoLerend
147 CeltiberoLion
148 CeltiberoLoky
149 Celt¡beroMandonio
150 Celt¡beroMencey
151 CeltiberoMordred
152 CeltiberoMori
153 CeltiberoMutilador
154 Celt¡beroSkullXIII
155 Celt¡beroSubur
156 CeltiberoVirio
157 CeltiberoVito
158 CeltiberoWallace
159 CeltiberoZuri
160 CelticFalcon
161 ChaosAchilles
162 Cheetah
163 Chris
164 CitizenDrifta
165 Colovion
166 Cort
167 CrackedAxe
168 CrazyHorse
169 Crusty_Ator
170 Cyndre
171 D6veteran
172 D6Veteran
173 Deadpool
174 DegtYarev14.5
175 DonGarcia
176 DoragonBarocca
177 DoragonGeisha
178 DoragonGregoshi
179 Dunhill
180 Dux of Earl
181 ELITEoFarfane
182 ELITEofBavaria
183 ELITEofBill
184 ELITEofBismarck
185 ELITEofBLIZZARD
186 ELITEofBomilkar
187 ELITEofBoon
188 ELITEofBuddy
189 ELITEofCreb
190 ELITEofDschingis
191 ELITEofFarfane
192 ELITEofFogolin
193 ELITEofGazoz
194 ELITEofJERICHOPRIME
195 ELITEofKYL
196 ELITEofLoki
197 ELITEofMARCAUREL
198 ELITEofOrkus
199 ELITEofRage
200 ELITEofRedchaos
201 ELITEofSpartanian
202 ELITEofWheatus
203 ELITEoIfmperator
204 Emix
205 Ender1101
206 Estivi
207 Excalibur_Primordial
208 Falconne
209 FearAMP
210 FearHector
211 FearofCromwell
212 FearYoussof
213 FearZeus
214 Felix Iuvenis Invictus
215 Folgore Jimi
216 frogbeastegg
217 GoldenKnightX2
218 Gordio
219 Greek_Warrior_Gwc
220 Hach
221 Hades
222 Hamhock2
223 Hatefulemperor17
224 Hedon
225 Helliax
226 HighFistRW
227 HM Assassin
228 HM Cowman
229 HM Oswald
230 HM Pathfinder
231 Hunter Devastator
232 Hunter El Rey Santos
233 Hunter Hikaru
234 Hunter King George
235 Hunter_RedDragon
236 IceTorque
237 Ichi
238 Ignacio
239 Indortes
240 InsaneApache
241 InsaneGnomeSlayer
242 InsaneHighlander
243 InsaneHorse
244 InsaneMarauder
245 IPainI_King
246 Irish Fenian
247 Ivar
248 Jacin1
249 Jango Fett
250 Jollyroger
251 Kalle
252 Kanamori
253 Kas
254 Kenchi_Andy
255 Kenchi_AsajiShimazu
256 Kenchi_Baz
257 Kenchi_Malekith
258 Kenchi_Mordred
259 Kenchi_Nem
260 Kenchi_Romero
261 Kenchi_Shaka
262 Kenchi_Skomatth
263 Kenchi_Subadai
264 Kenchi_Tera
265 Kenchi_TGI
266 Kenchi_TheWitchKing
267 Kenchi_Tib
268 KenchiSullasan
269 Khaldaz
270 Komonit
271 KotrSirGreyFox
272 Krasturak
273 Krusader
274 l33t
275 Lechev
276 Legatus Maximus
277 LegioXGemina Antoninus
278 LegioXGemina Romulus
279 LegioXGemina Vespasian
280 LegioXGemina Vitus
281 Liblap
282 Londinium
283 LORE}Chimpyang
284 LRossa Caesar
285 LRossa Duca
286 LRossaCiliegio
287 LRossaCily
288 LRossaCrux
289 LRossaDOCmatte
290 LRossaFalco
291 LrossaJubo
292 LrossaLordChoj
293 LRossaMauri
294 LRossaPedroneCommodo
295 LRossaRaubal
296 LRossaRikimaru
297 LRossaTerrore
298 LRossaTraiano
299 LrossaVinsitor
300 LrossaWwwolf
301 LuminousSun
302 MAGO_V
303 marechal[N]ANUBIS
304 marechal[N]BUCH
305 marechal[N]DAWAFRED
306 marechal[N]LANNES
307 marechal[N]LEGION
308 marechal[N]MAXIMUS
309 marechal[N]SPARDAMUS
310 marechal[N]TIGERTAT
311 marechal[N]TOVI
312 marechal[N]VERSEAUX
313 marechal[N]VYSE
314 marechalABC
315 marechalAKHENATON
316 marechalALBINUS
317 marechalALCAZAR
318 marechalATONE
319 marechalCID
320 marechalCLEMENT
321 marechalDROW
322 marechalEURINYS
323 marechalFERRANT
324 marechalFINROD
325 marechalFRED
326 marechalHERVE
327 marechalHINDENBURG
328 marechalKEYMAR
329 marechalKIETENSEI
330 marechalLAFAYETTE
331 marechalMADMONKEY
332 marechalMARIUS
333 marechalOYONICOLAS
334 marechalPHILIPPE
335 marechalPOPE
336 marechalPROMETHE
337 marechalREBSAY
338 marechalREVEUR
339 marechalRICARD57
340 marechalRODOFF
341 marechalROILOIC
342 marechalROLEND
343 marechalROTTOR
344 marechalSCORPION
345 marechalTOINOUMOU
346 marechalTOTOREMITO
347 marechalVANMIA
348 marechalVERCINGETORIX
349 marechalVONPOPOP
350 marechalWERRA
351 Maximus Decimus Meridias
352 Merlin271
353 Merovech
354 Mitra
355 Mizu_Orda Khan
356 MizuCBR
357 MizuJochi Khan
358 MizuMarcus
359 MizuSp00n
360 MizuYuuki
361 MK_Crusader
362 MK_MadMick
363 MK_Ubica
364 MK_Znake
365 Monkey Kid
366 Necro-Chu
367 Nick123
368 Nigel
369 Nightplayer
370 Oldman44
371 PanzerJager
372 PaolinoPaperino
373 ParthianWarrior
374 Paul Morris
375 PFJ_bejazuz
376 PFJ_darkknight
377 PFJ_lancecaptain
378 PFJ_nethermancer
379 PFJ_opey
380 PFJ_scrofula
381 PFJ_span
382 PFJ_swarm
383 Phoinix_Corbelius
384 Phoinix_Costantin
385 Phoinix_Daevorn
386 Phoinix_Javal
387 Phoinix_KnightWilliam
388 Phoinix_Lord
389 Phoinix_Mas
390 Phoinix_Vecchio
391 Phoinix_Virus
392 Phoinix_Zen
393 Pitt_Slayer
394 PK Lone
395 PoderHispanoRasta
396 PorT_AsMaS
397 PorT_Big
398 PorT_Kojima
399 PorT_Lobo
400 PorT_LoSe
401 Pretoriano
402 Prometheus
403 Pvt.Magnum
404 Rademt
405 Rashis
406 RTK Aelwyn
407 RTK Antoine
408 RTK Galahad
409 RTK Marco
410 RTK Palamedes
411 RTK Saladin
412 RTKLamorak
413 RVNAlrowan
414 RVNKyl
415 Saint-Albin
416 Saint-Antonio
417 Saint-Cainite
418 Saint-German
419 Saint-Louis
420 Saint-Marc
421 Saint-Samart
422 Saint-Sted
423 Saint-Vitus
424 Sasaki Kojiro
425 SecureZ
426 Sgt. Rock
427 Sgt.Humbolt
428 Shagall
429 Shin-GaiJin
430 ShingenKryp
431 ShingenMitch
432 Sid_Quibley
433 Silva
434 Sinan
434 SIR TARTA [ITALY]
435 Smaug82
436 Sparkmaster4513
437 Spartacus
438 Squirrel_of_Hatred
439 Stormer
440 Superpolo Wolf
441 T1master
442 TenjoArthurWellsley
443 TenjoGlacier
444 TenjoHimeLady
445 TenjoKalle
446 TenjoMercutio
447 TenjoMuneyoshi
448 TenjoRathanseril
449 TenjoSatake
450 TenjoScipio
451 The Hun
452 The Redcoats
453 The_baby_jesus
454 Tomy Says
455 Treziak
456 Tribun
457 Trooper
458 TW_Raymond
459 UglyandHasty
460 UglyElmo
461 UglySoSo
462 Ugo il Magnifico
463 Urdriel
464 VDM_Alexandros
465 Veritas
466 voigtkampf
467 Vorcid
468 WarlordAlexander
469 WarlordArion
470 WarlordAust
471 WarlordDragonFly
472 WarlordElco
472 WarlordEnslaver
474 WarlordFutuwwa
474 WarlordHashishin
476 WarlordHiji
477 WarlordKropazz
478 WarlordLavos
479 WarlordMinkus
480 WarlordShacron
481 WarlordSizzler
482 WarlordZequbus
483 Whaco
484 Wolf_Aleborg
485 Wolf_Druid
486 Wolf_Fast
487 Wolf_Grizzly
488 Wolf_Kansuke
489 Wolf_Kanuni
490 Wolf_Kocmoc
491 Wolf_Kyolic
492 Wolf_MagyarKhan
493 Wolf_Mo
494 Wolf_Nashwan
495 Wolf_Paolai
496 Wolf_Space
497 XXI RAPAX Cipius
498 XXI RAPAX Spartaco
499 XXI RAPAX Zeus
500 XXI_RAPAX_Aetius
501 XXI_RAPAX_Augustus
502 XXI_RAPAX_Brutus
503 XXI_RAPAX_Caius
504 XXI_RAPAX_Cronos
505 XXI_RAPAX_Scipio
506 XXI_RAPAX_Tiberium
IceTorque
10-25-2007, 20:03
That is not what i was saying. Whacker was asking what the best way to bring thing to our attention would be as we do not like petitions, that is what i was responding to. Please do not take my words out of context or to say things they don't. I was just saying what the best way to bring any issue that is very important to the community to our attention, not just specifically this one.
My apologies, grats on your new job, and kudos for joining in this and other discussions.
I think it's the decision to move away from the niche market to the broad market.
Thats understandable and is necessary for bigger and better future TW games, but I think the average age for gamers is around 24 yrs old and getting older, I for one need more mature, realistic and challenging gameplay to keep me interested. My 12 yr old son tried RTW and immediately exploited the greek phalanx with his cavalry by simply circling them and charging in when they changed direction and raised their spears while doing so. He got bored very quickly and did'nt play it ever again.
He's 14 now and is a leet gamer, much quicker to find exploits and flaws in games than I. Imo if they want to attract a broader/younger customer base they really need to listen to the old hands on here because that is exactly what the younger gamers want too. i.e. they aint dumb and they need more than great graphics.
I doubt that is true. I thought the rationale for not patching M2TW to Kingdoms standard was because the code had diverged two much between the two products - it would be too much work.
I don't see much of a difference between Kingdoms and the earlier expansions. It is more substantial than MI and VI. BI was more attractive to me, because of the scale. But I don't think you can accuse CA of producing a cheap expansion - producing those four campaigns probably took a lot of work. (As did rebalancing the combat.).
I have a half finished mod for M2 that has a full size map (1021x1021) has Ireland, wales, norway, sweden, saxons and normans added. The mod is about half finished and took me about 4 weeks of my spare time roughly 100 hours work, and yes for me this was a lot of work, but for a professional game studio I think it would be relatively simple and not too difficult to produce those four small campaigns in Kingdoms. Though it was probably a very small team producing it, so yeah the poor buggers probably worked their rears off, and my cheapskate comments was certainly not directed at those that actually make the game, but to those bean counting suits that make these controversial decisions.
As far as the code being too diverged from the original. Well, this may be true, but I cannot discern any noticeable difference between M2 and Kingdoms as far as AI, cohesion etc are concerned. My main attraction to the xpacs was not so much the new content but more for the improvements and bug fixes to the original game.
The answer is obvious - it is the heavy handed Org moderators who are to blame. :smash:
Wow, you actually do have a sense of humour......now please go bang your head on the floor until you are forgiven :laugh4:
Zenicetus
10-25-2007, 20:16
Code divergence can't be the issue. Kingdoms started with the M2TW battle engine code, so all that has to be done is to apply the same changes to the M2TW battle engine. What CA obviously considered to be too much work was rebalancing and debugging it. This is the bind you get into when you are still fixing battle engine mechanics in the expansion a year after initial release and the deadline to end-of-life the product is approaching.
That's because you aren't particularly concerned with battle mechanics. In all the previous games, improvements to the battle engine were incorporated into the main game.
Well, not defending CA here.... but the last expansions before Kingdoms for M2TW were BI and Alexander for RTW. Both of those were non-overlapping in time period and unit types with the original game, so it didn't expose any issues with rebalancing the original RTW units or adjusting the AI.
I think that's where CA boxed themselves into a corner with Kingdoms. They released an expansion that covers the same time period and uses many of the same units as the original game. This inevitably begs for comparison with the original game, and people will (rightly) gripe about not extending those changes to the original game. This didn't happen with BI and Alexander; they only had to debug and playtest one game, not two.
The lesson there (IMO) is -- don't make an overlapping expansion, unless you're absolutely sure you have the resources to rebalance the original game at the same time. Otherwise it's best to take the non-overlapping approach that BI and Alexander did. Just my opinion.
Respectfully to Odin and Ramses and others, petitions absolutely can and do work very well, when they are properly managed and executed. As for being "brute force", I'd somewhat disagree, as when they are done well they are powerful tools with elegant execution. Even then, sometimes "brute force" is what it takes to get a developer/publisher to move on an issue that would otherwise be ignored or dropped.
I think Puzz also said it best, and is what I truly suspect is the reason behind CA stating they won't listen; it makes them look very bad. Petitions also tend to draw quite a bit of the silent majority out of the woodwork as opposed to simple threads, which carry different weight and connotations. The other major issue that is key is that petitions and organized movements by gamers tend to be suppressed heavily. I'm not the least bit surprised that this happens at the .com, those are official forums and nothing can be said or done there that casts too much of a negative light on anything related to CA or the publishers. What does get annoying, as econ so pointed out, is when the modship at the Org and Twcenter gets too heavy handed towards legitimate forms of criticism, and efforts by the gamers with a genuine concern and good intentions that tend to get trashed by the fanboys, trolls, and paid shills. When the overall "mood" at the two major fan sites tends to take a dive, I'd think that'd be a telling message that CA and Sega would do well to heed. Further, while Puzz is right about CA possibly taking action against the Org and TWcenter, I think that would be a final "nail in the coffin" so to speak that would truly drive a very, very large chunk of their existing and possible future customer base away. A mod that I respect here once used the phrase in another thread that "CA bashing is a cancer that is eating away at the Org", to this I can only respond that I politely disagree. First I don't feel that what's occuring here is bashing at all, by and large the comments in this thread and others are well stated, delivered, and supported. Second, I think that the figurative "cancer", which I equate to the general dissatisfaction, is a symptom, not a cause.
I want nothing more than to have my good old TW games back, but I'm sick and tired of the dumbing-down mass-marketing ADD-appeasing path that the games have been taking, the shoddy support, major bugs, and lack of patching, and being treated like a criminal with facist DRM. The only way to get this message to CA is for those of us who are like minded to keep repeating our message until CA listens or we get tired/silenced, and vote with our wallets.
I agree with everything you say Whacker except for this:
What does get annoying, as econ so pointed out, is when the modship at the Org and Twcenter gets too heavy handed towards legitimate forms of criticism, and efforts by the gamers with a genuine concern and good intentions that tend to get trashed by the fanboys, trolls, and paid shills.
I have been many times critical of CA and the newer games and seen others being too here at the org - as long as that was expressed in a concise, polite and impersonal manner, all such posts were left in place. I can't speak for TW centre as i dont frequent there, but there isn't such a problem at the org as far as i can see and also econ21 was being to my understanding ironic.
Noir
The other major issue that is key is that petitions and organized movements by gamers tend to be suppressed heavily. I'm not the least bit surprised that this happens at the .com, those are official forums and nothing can be said or done there that casts too much of a negative light on anything related to CA or the publishers. What does get annoying, as econ so pointed out, is when the modship at the Org and Twcenter gets too heavy handed towards legitimate forms of criticism, and efforts by the gamers with a genuine concern and good intentions that tend to get trashed by the fanboys, trolls, and paid shills. When the overall "mood" at the two major fan sites tends to take a dive, I'd think that'd be a telling message that CA and Sega would do well to heed. Further, while Puzz is right about CA possibly taking action against the Org and TWcenter, I think that would be a final "nail in the coffin" so to speak that would truly drive a very, very large chunk of their existing and possible future customer base away. A mod that I respect here once used the phrase in another thread that "CA bashing is a cancer that is eating away at the Org", to this I can only respond that I politely disagree. First I don't feel that what's occuring here is bashing at all, by and large the comments in this thread and others are well stated, delivered, and supported. Second, I think that the figurative "cancer", which I equate to the general dissatisfaction, is a symptom, not a cause.
I would like to point out that this thread is now over 150 posts, almost all of which are critical of CA. Of these, only 3 posts have been removed for being out-of-line and all 3 of them were by one person. His first post advocated software piracy and his other two made personal attacks on another poster. I think, all considered, that we have been extremely fair and impartial in the Citadel for a long time now. We mainly crack down when people start flinging insults and being inconsiderate to others. Surely that is not such a bad thing.
I have been many times critical of CA and the newer games and seen others being too here at the org - as long as that was expressed in a concise, polite and impersonal manner, all such posts were left in place. I can't speak for TW centre as i dont frequent there, but there isn't such a problem at the org as far as i can see and also econ21 was being to my understanding ironic.
Perhaps we are getting a bit offtopic, but I would offer this in response.
My intent wasn't to imply that the overly harsh modship has been constant or that any forms of dissent were silenced. Specifically in the Citadel there have been period of ... "flux", where the heavy-handedness has reared it's ugly head, most of those occured around the initial game release and the subsequent patches. Many people have expressed their opinions in an acceptable manner, the problem that I've had is that there have been more than just a few threads that started well and had excellent discourse, that were summarily closed after one or two posts by trolls attempting (successfully) to derail the thread, rather than just deleting posts and/or handing out warning points. Like I said, it's not a constant thing nor is it... "excessive", but it's happened more than a few times to the point where it's been annoying and left a bad taste in my mouth. I realize the mods are human, but some of what's occured was just blatantly unreasonable in my view.
/shrug
Hello,
There are no problems with voicing critics. Apart from the problem that there are problems.
If someone wants to do bookkeeping and list the people who posted and expressed their concerns, so to show x% wants this or that fixed because; that's good.
Perhaps it's also good to list what is well. Feedback is not only negative, but also positive.
Fair enough Whalker,
i can't deny personal experiences especially when i wasn't present - this is off topic indeed and before leaving it on my part behind for good i would say that i find the .org moderation fair and impartial indeed; i have been cautioned twice so far - both times fairly, and with proper explanations. I never had a critical post that was concise, polite and impersonal deleted or even cautioned.
Back on topic Noir!:whip:
:laugh4:
I would like to point out that this thread is now over 150 posts, almost all of which are critical of CA. Of these, only 3 posts have been removed for being out-of-line and all 3 of them were by one person. His first post advocated software piracy and his other two made personal attacks on another poster. I think, all considered, that we have been extremely fair and impartial in the Citadel for a long time now. We mainly crack down when people start flinging insults and being inconsiderate to others. Surely that is not such a bad thing.
Whoops, perhaps I should expand some on my statements.
What I should have said was when I meant suppressed, I meant mainly by CA, for the reasons that Puzz and I stated. CA is pretty ruthless at the .com forums, which is why I have always avoided them and others seem to as well. Even here at the Org and Twcenter, as evidenced by several CA rep's posts, they've tended to (in my view) attempt to "suppress" significant issues that have gained momentum in the forums. The save/reload bug for RTW and the deplorable responses by CA is the poster child for this in my view.
As for the Org and Twcenter modship supressing things, I would tend to lean towards agreeing with you about generally being fair in relation to threads and issues. However, I stand by my previous statements, there have been more than a few threads that would have been excellent that were summarily closed when they should have been left open. Again as I stated in my response to Noir, it hasn't been excessive in my view, but it's happened enough that I and others have noticed.
Also I'll throw this out here just for discussion's sake. While I completely reject Lusted's "we listen to threads but not petitions" response, if one were to accept his statements as gospel, then closing even a few threads is essentially cutting off a not-insignificant chunk of our communications with CA and trying to get the message across. Of course I don't really agree with this form of logic, but again based on what's been said it's worth considering.
Also I'll throw this out here just for discussion's sake. While I completely reject Lusted's "we listen to threads but not petitions" response, if one were to accept his statements as gospel, then closing even a few threads is essentially cutting off a not-insignificant chunk of our communications with CA and trying to get the message across. Of course I don't really agree with this form of logic, but again based on what's been said it's worth considering.
For the readership of the thread let me preface this by saying Whacker and I share a mutual respect for one anothers approach and tact to posting. As Bob Dylan once said "we always did feel the same, we just saw it from a different point of view"
@Whacker I've spent plenty of time here at the org as a poster, and time at TW center as a casual observer. While my opinion of moderation at both sites has declined a lot recently, to be fair I find it hard to find an awful lot of fault with modderation of threads here at the org. TWcenter is a different animal, but at the org, tin cow is right they allow a pretty consistant soapbox.
As far as Lusted's comments if you were to step back and look at it from his point of view he really has no win position. We can all speculate as to the decision making process at CA/publisher,and business practices but in all honesty I find that his commentary and participation to be a refreshing engagement to the populace as opposed to a blatant retreat.
What I find lacking in your well thought out posts is the fact that you made the choice to purchase MTW2. You know how the pc gaming industry works, and you also know that games, expansions and even patches are never 100%. That is the current business model, and you are supporting it (I did see your pick of the discs for the tw games you posted, I think that was you).
You again make fair arguments supported by a fair degree of logic, but my friend I dont see any ownership taken by gamers. A lot of us here have been around the bloc on many games, this is hardly a new circumstance and expecting CA to change a business model (which they may or may not be contractually obligated to enforce) negates your power as the end user, and devalues your critiques of thier practices.
For the readership of the thread let me preface this by saying Whacker and I share a mutual respect for one anothers approach and tact to posting. As Bob Dylan once said "we always did feel the same, we just saw it from a different point of view"
Who is this Odin jerk that keeps quoting me!??!?! :laugh4: (/sarcasm, just in case others don't get it)
@Whacker I've spent plenty of time here at the org as a poster, and time at TW center as a casual observer. While my opinion of moderation at both sites has declined a lot recently, to be fair I find it hard to find an awful lot of fault with modderation of threads here at the org. TWcenter is a different animal, but at the org, tin cow is right they allow a pretty consistant soapbox.
Indeed my friend, you are probably right, it's just that most of what I was basing my statements off of was the first 6 or so months of the Citadel's existence, I haven't really been reading this subforum regularly for a good while now since I gave up on M2TW. I can't really remember what the old MTW and RTW subforums were like in terms of this issue, much less STW, so the Citadel is really all I can honestly comment on in good conscious. It's not that I'm trying to slam or take jabs at the mods, my point is that I think this is a valid concern that should be taken into account. I guess what I'm trying to politely say is that things can be viewed differently through other's eyes, as you've well said earlier.
As far as Lusted's comments if you were to step back and look at it from his point of view he really has no win position. We can all speculate as to the decision making process at CA/publisher,and business practices but in all honesty I find that his commentary and participation to be a refreshing engagement to the populace as opposed to a blatant retreat.
Same here as well, it's a Good Thing© and even almost a necessity that we have CA participation here. One also has to offer at least a begruding respect for folks who stick it out in the face of adversity. Of course we as a whole could also do better to ensure that our opinions, good and bad, are well and politely stated/supported to make their lives easier.
The one area that I do somewhat disagree with you in is Lusted/CA's position. The logic and reasoning that has been presented in the past as to why petitions are "ignored" was garbage, to put it bluntly. While I do appreciate Lusted's direct response to the question I posed, it was somewhat aggravating to see the response regarding threads as opposed to petitions; the very same concerns (which we debunked) apply to threads as they do petitions organized here. (I'm also trying to avoid focusing on any individual CA employee) Thus you can start to see some of the frustration that at least I personally, and I imagine others as well, are having in working with CA on this. Of course they could just haul off and ignore us, but I don't think that they are, that's not a good business choice.
What I find lacking in your well thought out posts is the fact that you made the choice to purchase MTW2. You know how the pc gaming industry works, and you also know that games, expansions and even patches are never 100%. That is the current business model, and you are supporting it (I did see your pick of the discs for the tw games you posted, I think that was you).
You again make fair arguments supported by a fair degree of logic, but my friend I dont see any ownership taken by gamers. A lot of us here have been around the bloc on many games, this is hardly a new circumstance and expecting CA to change a business model (which they may or may not be contractually obligated to enforce) negates your power as the end user, and devalues your critiques of thier practices.
Ahhhh.... now you see through my hypocrisy. :sweatdrop: :laugh4: You are absolutely correct, I did buy M2TW, not too long after it was out either. Call it blind hope, call it a last stand, call it desperate late-night drunk call, call it whatever you will. I wanted so hard for it to be all that MTW and RTW both were with the best of both, and I had to see it for myself (the demo was worthless). As I'm sure others would laugh and point out, the track record was definitely against me. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me; fool me three times, what the :daisy: was I thinking? This was/is my last CA product purchase, until such time that the TW games get back to their roots and stop catering to the largest common denominator. One won't see Kingdoms (or at this stage Empires) in my game collection until these changes are affected.
Lastly, yet again you are absolutely right, we as the gamers and supporters must take ownership and responsibility for our actions. It's just a really hard lesson to learn for some of us who've been with the TW games for so long, and want our old games back.
Ramses II CP
10-26-2007, 02:13
Regarding petitions, I certainly agree that a well run petition can often garner results, the trouble is finding one that is well run. The only ones I can recall involved hosting a webspace for people to reproduce emails that they sent on to the company in question. This has the doubled effect of bringing new people to the party with well reasoned, intelligent examples and also proving, within the limitations of the medium, that either a few very, very dedicated people were writing a lot of emails from different addresses, or there were a lot of complaints. It's great for PR too, as you can pick and choose the best material to put up front and/or sent out to news sites.
My basic point is that, from the corporate perspective, you have to figure that any raw list of names is probably at least 50% BS. I mean, why not make up names? Email addresses are free, website accounts are free, etc. One truly dedicated person could, in theory, account for dozens of new names every day.
A forum, by it's very nature, is more of a community. We have some knowledge of each other, and it would be very difficult to fake being a dozen different people on a forum. If a good number of people take the time to debate a game's flaws, and whether or not it's smart to continue buying from a particular developer, you can be reasonably sure that number of people actually exists and are dissatisfied with the product. If those people go on to send clear headed emails with their complaints, well, your average corporate lackey at least has something to show his boss, right?
One more thing, regarding moderation. IMHO we're guests here. We should behave like it. If you're uncomfortable with your host's requests there are plenty of other places to be a guest where you can do and say anything you want. Picking a fight with a moderator is a lot like charging the Mongol Horde with an exhausted unit of peasants.
:egypt:
Nebuchadnezzar
10-26-2007, 03:00
I would have to disagree Ramses II, its no surprise they don't like petitions, no organization whether private or government likes to see a petition because it throws peoples dissatisfaction directly into their faces. Its blunt and direct and just cannot be indefinately ignored. If they don't respond the list grows and becomes more vocal. But I am sure that their preferred method is by mail addressed to Kris Kringle and deposited down a disused mine shaft in rebel held Ghana.
When someone demands action from a local government its almost always begins with a petition.
Yes, its possible that petitions may be abused or spiked with false entries but this is no more likely to happen than with any other petition thats why every petition must contain a contact means so that it can be verified. Off course not every entry needs to be verified, only a small but random group to determine approx overall validity.
Papewaio
10-26-2007, 04:40
After the RTW petition, The Shogun announced that CA would no longer consider petitions, and the org moderators blocked futher attempts of players to organize petitions.
Not true. Me, myself and I started a petition on the thirty-first of May on the two thousand and sixth year (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?p=1155559#post1155559) of our lord AD.
I'm pretty sure that the year 2006 falls after 2004.
Petitions like anything else here are allowed if they remain civil.
It is the failure to meet expectations that makes people angry. Advertised features that are marketed and then not meet and refused to be patched is a ready way to fail to meet expectations.
Hello,
There are no problems with voicing critics. Apart from the problem that there are problems.
If someone wants to do bookkeeping and list the people who posted and expressed their concerns, so to show x% wants this or that fixed because; that's good.
Perhaps it's also good to list what is well. Feedback is not only negative, but also positive.
Words of wisdom. :2thumbsup:
Some things are annoying because we allow them to annoy us. ~;)
One more thing, regarding moderation. IMHO we're guests here. We should behave like it. If you're uncomfortable with your host's requests there are plenty of other places to be a guest where you can do and say anything you want. Picking a fight with a moderator is a lot like charging the Mongol Horde with an exhausted unit of peasants.Except this Mongol Horde doesn't fight back :grin2:
As always, if anyone has any issues with the moderation here, they can raise it with any of the staff - in public or in private - and it will be looked at. I'll also extend that offer to doing the same thing at TWC, should you also frequent there; neither of the major fansites are in the habit of suppressing sentiment that is somewhat anti-CA, solely for that reason.
The only things we enforce are the rules, and as long as everyone here keeps up the civility and maturity that is such a hallmark of this forum, there's next to no chance of this thread being closed (barring the banhammer needing some exercise, of course :smash:)
SpencerH
10-26-2007, 12:27
Two short points:
A lot of us here have been around the bloc on many games, this is hardly a new circumstance and expecting CA to change a business model (which they may or may not be contractually obligated to enforce) negates your power as the end user, and devalues your critiques of thier practices.
Despite my reservations when the demo came out, I expected that SEGA's ownership would have an effect on the final product, so I purchased M2TW. I expect that others felt the same way. OTOH, I'll look at Empires but unless I see a complete reversal of gameplay I wont buy it since I definitely didnt get my moneys worth from M2TW (which I could only stand for 50 turns or so).
As for the mods here, they've been pretty impartial most of the time but during the backlash against RTW they were overly protective of their relationship with CA. CA totally overreacted to the attempts to organize and voice our complaints and they incited the worst excesses. IIRC, CA were particularly incensed by the movement to publish our opinions at Amazon. IMO, the reason this thread exists, and may be considered helpful, is because CA's attitude/reaction to criticism has changed. Perhaps they're more used to it now.
Despite my reservations when the demo came out, I expected that SEGA's ownership would have an effect on the final product, so I purchased M2TW. I expect that others felt the same way. OTOH, I'll look at Empires but unless I see a complete reversal of gameplay I wont buy it since I definitely didnt get my moneys worth from M2TW (which I could only stand for 50 turns or so).
Well SpencerH with all due respect, you made a mistake then. As I have said numerous times before, the gaming insdustry has a pretty good track record of what to expect. Beta's, gold, prepay releases, user feedback, patches message board hero's (modders) etc. After the issues ith RTW did you conclude that MTW2 would be handled differently?
My point is that I have yet to see a user here ackonowledge (well one or two) that they made a mistake, and take repsonsiblity for not understanding the dynamics of the PC gaming market. That dosent absolve CA, sega or anyone of thier piece of the pie.
As for the mods here, they've been pretty impartial most of the time but during the backlash against RTW they were overly protective of their relationship with CA. CA totally overreacted to the attempts to organize and voice our complaints and they incited the worst excesses. IIRC, CA were particularly incensed by the movement to publish our opinions at Amazon. IMO, the reason this thread exists, and may be considered helpful, is because CA's attitude/reaction to criticism has changed. Perhaps they're more used to it now.
I read a lot of the RTW stuff, never bought the game because I dont like the period, and it had problems. As far as mods here, I think the fact you and I are having a discussion about thier practices without being warned or sent off ot the watchtower is evidence of thier ability to bend.
I dont think CA dressed themselves in glory over RTW, but thats yesterdays news, to be blunt perhaps thier reaction to the negative backlash worked, as from what I can tell the SecRom, and lack of future support has been fairly tame in comparisson.
Again, the business model is working, you own MTW2 after everything that went down with RTW. :medievalcheers:
crpcarrot
10-26-2007, 13:38
just to add my own reactions to the thread.
i gave up on TW when the save/load bug was discovered on RTW and CA's response to it.
i never bought any of the many expansions and gave my game away.
however when i heard MTW came out i was again hoping that CA would go back to its roots and indeed what convinced me to buy it was the many blogs and other material out there which seemd to indicate a return to the roots in terms of how the battles played at least.
anyway you are right i did buy M2TW but i wouldnt say the model is working 100%. prior to RTW i would have bought anything with TW on sight. so they did lose some of my money. i think its hard for them to judge the loss of revenue doe to that fact that RTW was aimed at a larger market and consequently the losses they made would have been covered up by all the new kiddies sales.
Not true. Me, myself and I started a petition on the thirty-first of May on the two thousand and sixth year (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?p=1155559#post1155559) of our lord AD.
I'm pretty sure that the year 2006 falls after 2004.
Petitions like anything else here are allowed if they remain civil.
Ok right. It was at .com that they were suppressed.
I guess an apology on my part is in order. I am at least partially responsible that this thread has been slightly derailed towards discussing .org policies instead of CA policies. In fact, I saw the deleted posts as being about CA policy, but I understand that it could also be viewed otherwise, i.e. as a personal attack. It wasn't my intention to turn this into an issue and for that I apologize. I would like nothing better than for this thread to remain focused and on topic, as I obviously want to see something done about the whole mess with no further patches.
Cheers,
IrishArmenian
10-26-2007, 15:31
Disappointing, I was hoping for some bug fixes and maybe the building files.
SpencerH
10-26-2007, 23:38
Well SpencerH with all due respect, you made a mistake then. As I have said numerous times before, the gaming insdustry has a pretty good track record of what to expect. Beta's, gold, prepay releases, user feedback, patches message board hero's (modders) etc. After the issues ith RTW did you conclude that MTW2 would be handled differently?
My point is that I have yet to see a user here ackonowledge (well one or two) that they made a mistake, and take repsonsiblity for not understanding the dynamics of the PC gaming market. That dosent absolve CA, sega or anyone of thier piece of the pie.
As I said, I hoped that SEGA would change what I consider to be bad trend in the direction of TW. Firaxis did just that after the debacle known as CIV3. CIV4 is a brilliant piece of gaming and their involvement with their hardcore base is (once again) great. There's no reason why CA cant turn this "trainwreck" around and produce a game for us as well as the players who enjoy shiny objects and flashes of pretty lights.
As I said, I hoped that SEGA would change what I consider to be bad trend in the direction of TW. Firaxis did just that after the debacle known as CIV3. CIV4 is a brilliant piece of gaming and their involvement with their hardcore base is (once again) great. There's no reason why CA cant turn this "trainwreck" around and produce a game for us as well as the players who enjoy shiny objects and flashes of pretty lights.
The same Civ IV that required patch 1.52 that attempt to correct memory leaks? oh wait, those were corrected by a modification by users for free first right? Yes you got a lot of new content with fraxis work, but that dosent negate the fact that your exampled company is guilty of the same business model.
Release a game, let end users report on bugs, patch and fix. The only difference is they kept fixing it (and it needed to be fixed, as I read it on some forums Civ IV wasnt a barrel of laughs for some.)
Yeah Fraxis kept support for Civ IV strong and stuck with it, I tip my hat to you nice comparisson.
:medievalcheers:
Meldarion
10-27-2007, 06:10
It is the same with most new games being released. It is unfortunately a widely accepted fact that games have bugs upon release. The very least these companies can do is persist in ironing out the bugs, but for MTW II patches have been few and far between. As usual it comes down to the mod community luckily they do a decent job and through them MTW II is a very enjoyable game.
Slug For A Butt
10-27-2007, 19:25
Ok. My new car arrives next Wednesday. When I receive it and the advertised SatNav either is non existant or doesn't work properly should I complain or hope that some guy down the road will do his best to make it work somewhat like it should have in the first place? (That is what you asking modders to do).
I'm sick of hearing how the gaming industry is exempt from the rules everyone else has to follow, the only thing that makes them any different to any other industry is the fact that children are the driving force when it comes to sales. That is where TW has headed and they know their market.
All I can do is vote with my wallet with CA (which I already have), my car would go straight back to the shop and a refund would follow. Why can't I do that with M2TW?
Ok. My new car arrives next Wednesday. When I receive it and the advertised SatNav either is non existant or doesn't work properly should I complain or hope that some guy down the road will do his best to make it work somewhat like it should have in the first place? (That is what you asking modders to do).
Absolutely, couldn't agree more. And still quite often the biggest problems are ones that we cannot fix ourselves, they're game code problems. Rebalancing units is one thing, but when doing that on top of broken mechanics, it becomes somewhat an exercise in futility.
I'm sick of hearing how the gaming industry is exempt from the rules everyone else has to follow, the only thing that makes them any different to any other industry is the fact that children are the driving force when it comes to sales.
Mostly correct, except about the children part. I was surprised to learn some time back that the largest contingent of gamers by far is males age 21-30. Really, it's something like 40-50%+ are in that category (including me).
That is where TW has headed and they know their market. All I can do is vote with my wallet with CA (which I already have), my car would go straight back to the shop and a refund would follow. Why can't I do that with M2TW?
I definitely couldn't agree more with you about the direction, but I'd question the second part. Do they really know their market? Do they know what their market should be?? I think they've got an idea of what they'd like their market to be, but I'd question if they're really reaching it. Just speculation of course.
And also, there are multiple key differences between your new ride and your new broken game. First and foremost, an improperly assembled and designed car could cause you and/or your loved ones to die fiery screaming deaths, I highly doubt a PC game could do that. Second, a car is a very straightforward physical thing, with documented and designed components and features. Your radio or Satnav not working is very black and white. With a game, you'll find often that the game's "features" and "components" are very poorly defined, and when they are it's very ambigious. Even the game manuals and in-game tutorials can often times be woefully inadequate, and a poor basis to judge on. "Why isn't feature x in the game?" "Why is component y not working right?" The answer is very easily "What you are asking for wasn't intended to be/isn't in the game.", or "You are really just misunderstanding it, it's working fine." Thus, while we'd probably agree that something is broken or missing, arguing that from a legal perspective (which is what it boils down to, in a sense) is very, very hard. You can sue over an incomplete or broken vehicle, it'd be extremely hard if not impossible to do so over a game.
Lastly, another big difference between your car and game is that your car is not going to have hordes and hordes of rabid, ignorant fanboys screaming louder than the marketing types that you are just dumb, it's working fine, it's the best thing ever, go whine somewhere else, kthx etc etc etc. Let them do the work for you. Why patch/fix something when it's likely that you can get away with it in it's current state, and the borg-like mass of fanboys can drown out any dissent? I'm exaggerating obviously in the case of the TW games, but I think the concept is perfectly valid and sound.
Odin: The points is a bit more problematic really. The thing is that in my opinion buying M2TW was not a mistake when considering that I like the game and spend a lot of time modding it.
It maybe was a mistake if you consider the signal, because I could have tried to send a signal to the devs with not buying it. However I came to TW with Rome and I wasn't ready to take that step yet; my opinion about that changed a bit, hence I was very resilient to buy Kingdoms (and I didn't). For some of us it just takes a bit longer to learn their lesson sometimes.
Whacker: There are apparently some clearly broken components that had been advertised prior to the release of kingdoms. This is not right from a legal perspective - if you advertised a database server that contains a backup system and that backup system doesn't work and even worse you refuse to fix it, your customers will sue you, and they will have success before court.
The problem is that games are much too cheap to even warrant suing the developers unless you do a massive thing with thousands of plaintiffs it'd be turned down. It's probably not exactly critical features that are broken but nevertheless...
In general I agree though, with games you often can't easily discern what is really, technically broken and what is just designed in a way you don't like.
Slug For A Butt
10-28-2007, 00:38
And also, there are multiple key differences between your new ride and your new broken game. First and foremost, an improperly assembled and designed car could cause you and/or your loved ones to die fiery screaming deaths, I highly doubt a PC game could do that.
.
SatNav is going to consign me to a fiery screaming death? No, I just expect what I pay for and my car will be sent back if it is not what I am expecting, my plumber would be called back if he did a bad job and it was leaking, the gasman will fix his bad workmanship if my newly installed pipework is leaking etc...etc...
Why the hell can a software company not be held liable for their product? :dizzy2:
Odin: The points is a bit more problematic really. The thing is that in my opinion buying M2TW was not a mistake when considering that I like the game and spend a lot of time modding it.
It maybe was a mistake if you consider the signal, because I could have tried to send a signal to the devs with not buying it. However I came to TW with Rome and I wasn't ready to take that step yet; my opinion about that changed a bit, hence I was very resilient to buy Kingdoms (and I didn't). For some of us it just takes a bit longer to learn their lesson sometimes.
In your case perhaps it wasnt a mistake. I came to TW at shogun and I didnt regret the time I put into the game, MTW came along and I bought it right away, my mistake as at the same time I was buying games from another company that was notroious for putting out almost finished games and getting feedback, yadda yadda.
However the simplicity of this is that one must understand that this is an industry issue , not exclusive to CA,and the easiest, direct and most fruitful way for the end user to affect the situation is by them assuming control over thier singular piece to the equation (that piece being the holy grail of the process).
Thats your purchase, once you give your money over, your pulled into the process. I remember playing Koei games on my SNES before message boards, heck i didnt even have a PC. Now its a right of passage to get a game and go seek out the official patchs and the community mods.
The simplicity of the process and the consumers role in it, isnt complex alpaca. Once you make the purchase it does become more problematic, but here we are years later with the TW series, do you think the cat is out of the bag yet?
If it isnt I'll let everyone in. Games are released today early with minimal testing (this is the main issue) because of fan sites, free mods, pre order, direct downloads, zealous flattering reviews, and solid sales. Hence you have issues, and they dont get corrected until after sales are made.
Very simple, the corrections are made after the games release, not before and this simple reality is all one needs to look at to understand the industry has parlayed the process into a nice business model.
Yet, through the haze there is the customer, and thier credit card or cash and thier willingness to go along. I dont propose that my solution is the end all be all, but it is the one solution offerred where the end user has 100% control, that makes it a no brainer IMHO.
:logic:
In your case perhaps it wasnt a mistake. I came to TW at shogun and I didnt regret the time I put into the game, MTW came along and I bought it right away, my mistake as at the same time I was buying games from another company that was notroious for putting out almost finished games and getting feedback, yadda yadda.
However the simplicity of this is that one must understand that this is an industry issue , not exclusive to CA,and the easiest, direct and most fruitful way for the end user to affect the situation is by them assuming control over thier singular piece to the equation (that piece being the holy grail of the process).
Thats your purchase, once you give your money over, your pulled into the process. I remember playing Koei games on my SNES before message boards, heck i didnt even have a PC. Now its a right of passage to get a game and go seek out the official patchs and the community mods.
The simplicity of the process and the consumers role in it, isnt complex alpaca. Once you make the purchase it does become more problematic, but here we are years later with the TW series, do you think the cat is out of the bag yet?
If it isnt I'll let everyone in. Games are released today early with minimal testing (this is the main issue) because of fan sites, free mods, pre order, direct downloads, zealous flattering reviews, and solid sales. Hence you have issues, and they dont get corrected until after sales are made.
Very simple, the corrections are made after the games release, not before and this simple reality is all one needs to look at to understand the industry has parlayed the process into a nice business model.
Yet, through the haze there is the customer, and thier credit card or cash and thier willingness to go along. I dont propose that my solution is the end all be all, but it is the one solution offerred where the end user has 100% control, that makes it a no brainer IMHO.
:logic:
Yes I agree, the thing is however that it's hard for people (and I include myself here) to stop buying any non-blizzard games at all. It's a really harsh step to refrain from purchasing bugged and unfinished products exactly because, as you say, the whole industry is into it. That said, I personally have to admit that I was closing my eyes to the problem until maybe half a year ago (although I didn't buy too many games in general, only strategy games really).
You're right that my posts are maybe a bit anti-CA here - I am mainly talking about CA because the guild is a TW forum. I won't buy any more games on release, and I won't buy them at all until consensus on the respective fansite forums is that they're in a decently playable state.
The_Baron
10-28-2007, 12:40
At the end of the day, I suspect there is no chance that bitching about problems that have already been declared insoluble is going to greatly improve the situation. Requesting and suggesting to a Creative Assembly representative is one thing; being inhospitable and mildly insulting is entirely another. All we can really do with any possible degree of success is to politely suggest that Creative Assembly sort out its' priorities for the next Total War release (Empire: Total War) and hope they grasp the fact that a strong fanbase is imperative for a continued fan community.
On a lighter note, I dreamt of playing Empire: Total War last night after reading one of the Sharpe's books. How... expectant of me :beam: .
Kindest regards,
-Max
SpencerH
10-28-2007, 12:57
The same Civ IV that required patch 1.52 that attempt to correct memory leaks? oh wait, those were corrected by a modification by users for free first right? Yes you got a lot of new content with fraxis work, but that dosent negate the fact that your exampled company is guilty of the same business model.
Release a game, let end users report on bugs, patch and fix. The only difference is they kept fixing it (and it needed to be fixed, as I read it on some forums Civ IV wasnt a barrel of laughs for some.)
Yeah Fraxis kept support for Civ IV strong and stuck with it, I tip my hat to you nice comparisson.
:medievalcheers:
I beta tested many many patches which had totally different numbers than the public releases so I'm not sure which patch 1.52 actually refers to. To some extent its irrelevant though, since I have no idea what "memory leaks" you're refering to either. The only reference to memory leaks that I could find was a comment from a linux user that he had a memory leak and had fixed it. IIRC there were some problems with the initial roll out with bad quality discs etc (2K games responsibility) and some people had conflicts with ATI cards. After the massive problems with CIV3 and the bad attitude from Firaxis in the early days after its release, I was more than willing to go into "attack mode" over "shoddy workmanship", and did so. As it turned out though, Firaxis "jumped through hoops" to fix problems, most of which were none of their responsibility (including the ATI "bug" - which I never had despite an ATI card that was problematic for others). Looking at it in hindsight, my conclusion was that most of the incompatibility issues were actually user problems.
Were there bugs with CIV4's release? Of course there were (and are) bugs in the game and some solutions have been posted by users (most of whom work for Firaxis or are beta testers). No game as complicated as CIV4 or TW will be bug free at release and the game developers know that (as do we). What is important, is their support for the game after release. Others have mentioned to Blizzard and Stardock as examples of good support and I pointed out Firaxis' "about face" after their disaster with CIV3. SEGA's lack of support for M2TW is not the industry norm and I would suggest that it can be changed. All it takes is a desire by SEGA to produce a finished product. You seem to suggest that we should not buy any games unless they are guaranteed perfect, and that isnt gonna happen.
SpencerH
10-28-2007, 13:06
At the end of the day, I suspect there is no chance that bitching about problems that have already been declared insoluble is going to greatly improve the situation. Requesting and suggesting to a Creative Assembly representative is one thing; being inhospitable and mildly insulting is entirely another. All we can really do with any possible degree of success is to politely suggest that Creative Assembly sort out its' priorities for the next Total War release (Empire: Total War) and hope they grasp the fact that a strong fanbase is imperative for a continued fan community.
On a lighter note, I dreamt of playing Empire: Total War last night after reading one of the Sharpe's books. How... expectant of me :beam: .
Kindest regards,
-Max
With all due respect, we've been down the "polite request/suggest" road too many times. The only thing SEGA has to decide is whether they want to support their games and keep some of their die-hard fans or continue down the road they're on now and say adios to the last of us.
Vote here: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=94304. This might be of some help ...
BTW, "obviously" CA decided that Kingdoms is good enough that it needs no patch. In a sense they are correct as indeed Kingdoms is arguably one of their best releases. Challenging scenarios, interesting and unique factions, and no serious game breaking bugs (though some missing features ...). However, that is the very reason why they should patch it. This way they ruin all the hard work that went into desinging the scenarios and factions; what everyone will remeber now is the lack of support and not the new features (controlling reinforcement armies) or new scenarios.
In a sense they are correct as indeed Kingdoms is arguably one of their best releases. Challenging scenarios, interesting and unique factions, and no serious game breaking bugs (though some missing features ...).
I voted in the poll.
And no offense mate, but you're the only "long-timer" I've seen say anything remotely like that about Kingdoms, the consensus has always been the exact opposite. It's not like it matters for me personally at any rate, I've bought my last CA game until they get back to their roots, and I am boycotting any games that are infested with Starforce or Securom v7.
Primative1
10-28-2007, 18:20
I'll add my name to the list of mugs who bought M2 and Kingdoms. I wont make the same mistake with Empire. I'll pick it up 2nd hand when there are some decent mods out for it.
How can I get rid of the SecuRom reg entries?
Mouzafphaerre
10-28-2007, 19:01
.
How can I get rid of the SecuRom reg entries?
Nice question. IMHO, installing "rootkits" or whatever they might be called on customers' computers is unforgivable. :rtwno: It's surprisingly overlooked through this thread, although it's much more important than inadequate support or missing features, not that those are negligible.
IMHO, the whole copy protection business is nonsense. There is no protection that cannot be broken. But if you really must do it, do it in a decent way, without breaking your customers' computers. ~:pissed:
Despite my total disappointment with MTW2, I was feeling very enthusiastic about Empires, its naval battles and all. But if it contains SecuRom or any other type of malware, it shall not make it to my computer. :no:
I voted no at the poll.
.
Primative1
10-28-2007, 20:08
Yea, TinCow, you appear to represent CA on this forum with deletions of critical posts and the like.
I want to know how I get rid of unwanted crap, re: SecuRom reg entries, from my pc. Do I have to reformat my hdd?
A prompt reply would be appreciated.
Guess what I voted at the poll.........no prize sorry.........
I want to know how I get rid of unwanted crap, re: SecuRom reg entries, from my pc. Do I have to reformat my hdd?
http://forums.tweakguides.com/showthread.php?t=4027
Guide to removal. It's not for non-tech folks.
Zenicetus
10-28-2007, 21:17
Here is some info on SecureRom removal from the 2K (Bioshock) forum (note to moderators: this is about removing leftover SecureRom files after the game is uninstalled, it's not about breaking the CP):
http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showpost.php?p=227835&postcount=31
And if you read through that, you'll know why some of us are refusing to buy Kingdoms, and won't buy Empire, if they do something like this again. It's absolutely insane to expect your customer to jump through those kinds of hoops (if that procedure even works... I haven't tried it), to remove copy protection that should be automatically removed when the game is uninstalled.
BTW, I bought Bioshock because in the early days it looked like the devs were promising a removal utility. Now it looks like they've kicked the ball back into Sony/SecureRom's court. Very disappointing... so I might have to actually try that method.
And if you think leaving it there is just a minor annoyance... I've already had to flag off the SecureRom directory because it tripped a failed backup warning with my current backup software (SyncBackSE). That's just a taste of the kinds of things that can happen, and cause additional user headaches, when you have hidden files that look like viruses and rootkits (even if they're not) to backup and anti-malware software.
Primative1
10-28-2007, 21:32
Thank you guys, I'll give it a try tomorrow after work.
Sad that we, legit game-players, have to do this tho given that it probably doesn't slow down hackers for 2 minutes.
cheers again.
ps. I am not going to touch bioshock now I know about this, damn shame 'cos it sounds like a great game.
And no offense mate, but you're the only "long-timer" I've seen say anything remotely like that about Kingdoms, the consensus has always been the exact opposite.
Perhaps because I am the only "long-timer" who has Kingdoms ... ~;p
Bit more seriously my impression is that most people who actually played Kingdoms are happy about it. Of course, there are some easy factions and both the strategic and the tactical AI are just as weak as before; but the campaigns are well designed and the factions are more unique in their strength and weaknesses than in MTW2. All in all IMHO a good expansion and if someone likes MTW2 then he/she will like Kingdoms too.
The bugs could be annoying (broken features, zero loyalty heirs, etc.) but not game breakers. Still I would expect CA to fix them.
Primative1
10-28-2007, 21:53
The bugs could be annoying (broken features, zero loyalty heirs, etc.)
And the battles not working, which is as good a game-breaker as any.
I beta tested many many patches which had totally different numbers than the public releases so I'm not sure which patch 1.52 actually refers to. To some extent its irrelevant though, since I have no idea what "memory leaks" you're refering to either. The only reference to memory leaks that I could find was a comment from a linux user that he had a memory leak and had fixed it. IIRC there were some problems with the initial roll out with bad quality discs etc (2K games responsibility) and some people had conflicts with ATI cards. After the massive problems with CIV3 and the bad attitude from Firaxis in the early days after its release, I was more than willing to go into "attack mode" over "shoddy workmanship", and did so. As it turned out though, Firaxis "jumped through hoops" to fix problems, most of which were none of their responsibility (including the ATI "bug" - which I never had despite an ATI card that was problematic for others). Looking at it in hindsight, my conclusion was that most of the incompatibility issues were actually user problems.
Were there bugs with CIV4's release? Of course there were (and are) bugs in the game and some solutions have been posted by users (most of whom work for Firaxis or are beta testers). No game as complicated as CIV4 or TW will be bug free at release and the game developers know that (as do we). What is important, is their support for the game after release. Others have mentioned to Blizzard and Stardock as examples of good support and I pointed out Firaxis' "about face" after their disaster with CIV3. SEGA's lack of support for M2TW is not the industry norm and I would suggest that it can be changed. All it takes is a desire by SEGA to produce a finished product.
I wont go on about Civ IV, I will say that the memory leaks were a linux issue as a I read it. I will say that you have pointed out through your reply the same problems with Civ IV as with any games, it had problems, and thats my point. If you dont want to hold the dev repsonsible for bugs/issues, okay.
Where you have a point is Fraxis continued to support the game.
You seem to suggest that we should not buy any games unless they are guaranteed perfect, and that isnt gonna happen.
I am no suggesting that, perhaps you need to re read my posts because you got the wrong impression. I am suggesting that end users, the ones complaining about support should envoke thier power in the process by not purchasing games until they are at the point they deem the suitable.
There is no excuse otherwise, the web is ripe with message boards, patches, mods, no one should have bought kingdoms until much later into the release so issues could be revealed and a educated decsion made if it was a good product for them.
Instead you have people whinning about patches, support bugs etc, not one of them has come forth and said "yeah, I bought it to early, you know all games are released kind of buggy now"
As one poster said:
SpencerH No game as complicated as CIV4 or TW will be bug free at release and the game developers know that (as do we). Then if this is true and we all know it then its partly the end users fault for making the purchase with that knowledge.
Do you understand what I am suggesting now SpencerH? Or do I have to repeat it a 6th time ? :surrender2:
Fisherking
10-29-2007, 11:24
I am not sure that we can have an effect here, alone.
It seems to me that if some of the Magazines picked it up and got it to a wider audience that they would put someone on it. But with a few exceptions of bad reviews the Mags seem to say almost everything is the best there ever was rather than saying that most games are released too early with shoddy play testing etc. When you can think of a way to make it hot for the bean counters then you have a chance to make something happen rather than just wasting time writing gripes.
It seems to me that if some of the Magazines picked it up and got it to a wider audience that they would put someone on it. But with a few exceptions of bad reviews the Mags seem to say almost everything is the best there ever was rather than saying that most games are released too early with shoddy play testing etc. When you can think of a way to make it hot for the bean counters then you have a chance to make something happen rather than just wasting time writing gripes.
An excellent idea to be sure, but it'll never, ever happen. The gaming sites and mags aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them, and they make the lion's share of their income from the gaming industry advertising. Look at big name titles like Half-life 2, Bioshock, Oblivion, Fallout 3, Hellgate, etc etc, and all the hype and advertising that's thrown in behind them. Now look at the average review score for each. The amount of money a publisher throws behind a game's hype and advertising on the sites and mags has a direct correlation to it's review score and "airtime", thus in effect buying a good score. Fallout 3 is going to get a 9.0 or above score when it's released, probably a 9.5 or above, no matter what shape it's really in or how good it is, you can quote me on this. The only thing that ever causes a big name title to sub-optimal scores (as in down to an 8.0, which is the glass floor) is some severe, and I mean severe as in crashing frequently no matter what, game-breaking bugs that are impossible to overlook. Also, reviews often tend to be "revised" several times before they are published by supervisors, often removing quite a bit of the less-than-stellar talking points and knocking the score up several times. Look at what happened to the IGN review of Super Mario Sunshine several years back.
It's still going to boil down to grassroots operations like us, and don't underestimate your ability to make a difference. As Odin said, it's really becoming a rite of passage for PC gaming these days to find the biggest unofficial sites and official patches to get a game working. Thus I have good reason to believe that more than just a few of the total amount of people who own the games read these forums and sites occasionally. Forums, word of mouth, any personal interaction, etc, are all doable and will make a difference in the long run, it's just up to us.
lancelot
10-29-2007, 16:44
Well, after all is said and done, it seems very likely that CA is not going to support their games properly, which is a grand shame considering the promise with which the company started and I dont think they will really take our concerns seriously so I'll leave CA with this...
At present I tell everybody who has a vague interest in strategy games to avoid the Total War series these days due to securerom and the general patching attitude on display (plus I study military history at uni so I get around to a lot of interested folks)
Im not going to bankrupt CA to be sure but word can speard very quickly and I doubt Im the only one doing the same. My wallet is now closed to CA for the immediate future...do as you wish...
I've been playing TW games since I was 10 (shogun total war, 2000) and played every single title incl M2TW kingdoms.
The newer verisions of the TW games (especially M2TW) are full of bugs, and needs to be fixed! You will loose another customer here, who have used roughly 40% of my living years dedicated to your games...
/signed
Fisherking
10-29-2007, 17:56
Patches to me are a double edged sword. If they just fixed the known problems it would be great. But I think most of the time and expense goes into the wish lists and things that work but not everyone cares for.
If they would just fix the problems I would be happy, but they seldom do because of the other crap and yes I mean crap that they wind up changing.
They should just set up a small shop in India to fix problems and it would hardly make a dent in budgets and leave the nice to have stuff to the moding community. After all it is mostly just nice to have stuff, or even unwanted stuff that they add in most of the patches.
Working 2 hand weapons, pike, spear wall, and being able to fight elephant artillery is more important than much of the other junk.
Jacob Debroedere
10-29-2007, 18:17
I haven't bought M2TW or Kingdoms yet, and this tread seems to give some good reasons why I shouldn't buy them in the future. By the way what is that SecuRom thing everyone talks about?
At present I tell everybody who has a vague interest in strategy games to avoid the Total War series these days due to securerom and the general patching attitude on display (plus I study military history at uni so I get around to a lot of interested folks)
You see that's the real issue. You as a military history student are not really the target audience for these games, and as such I doubt your boycott is really of much concern. It's about time people started to wake up and realise that TW games are not being marketed as historically accurate warfare simulations. Yes they started to look like they might move in that direction after MTW was released, and people did assume that CA would take this direction. That clearly hasn't happened, and because of this patching is not such an issue. Also as one of those boycotting due to Securom you are also in a tiny minority as most of the target audience for these games probably haven't heard of it.
Privateerkev
10-29-2007, 18:53
I am dissapointed in the direction that TW games have gone. I am, at heart, an old school strategy fan. I cut my teeth on the old dos games like HQ and Patton Strikes Back. Graduated to Panzer General and Military Madness (or Nectaris as it's been re-released as). Spent countless hours playing the Axis & Allies board games. STW's campaign map is pretty much an exact copy of Shogun (now renamed Samurai Swords) which was made by the same people that made the original A&A.
The point of all of this, I enjoy a good strategic challenge far more than flashy graphics. I played Civilizations for years despite how it looked. I got into the TW series because of STW due to the similarity of it's campaign map when compared to the GameMaster series games I have previously mentioned. I didn't care how STW looked. It was fun. I liked how you could see every individual guy and I liked how the game left the dead bodies on the field. While STW was not the first game to do these things with their tactical component, I would argue that they were the first to meld it well to a campaign component that was fun and challenging.
MTW came out and it was STW on a grander scale. They improved the campaign component, kept the tactical component fun, and seemed to sacrifice little. I was hooked and played it for years. I skipped RTW due to not having a computer that could handle it at the time when it came out.
Last Christmas, I bought myself a new computer so I decided I would try the newly released M2TW. So, I jumped from STW/MTW right into M2TW. It was quite a difference. While the graphics are stunning, gameplay was sacrificed. Like Econ21 stated earlier, the strategic AI is a total joke. While the tactical component is fun, it slogs my computer down so much on high graphic settings that it hold little apeal to me. I can only establish my army in a line, fire arrows, and then flank with cavalry so many times before I get bored. I basically play for the campaign component and autoresolve most battles. I have more fun building things in the cities. Since the AI is so sleepy, I can slowly tech up and get cool looking provinces and armies.
But that will only take me so far. If the new TW title keeps sacrificing substance for flash, they will lose me. They already dissapointed me with the whole Securom debacle. Their lack of patches also dissapoints me. On one hand, I don't know if it would be productive to complain about a business behaving like a business. On the other, I'm a customer and don't mind making my opinion heard.
This isn't a total "CA bashing" post. My feelings on the matter are more complicated than that. I have the feeling that CA (and/or SEGA) have gambled that they can make flashy graphic intensive games while placating/ignoring a small subculture that mods those games. While somewhat understandable from a economic point of view (people in this forum hardly represent the bulk of CA's target audience or revenue stream), it is dissapointing to see a company take the approach that they are taking. Sure they have developers come in here and say a few words. I appreciate that and it's far more than what some companies do. But, if it isn't backed up with patches and/or game changes, then it doesn't amount to much.
So, I still think TW games are fun but I have noticed a disturbing trend from my own biased strategy gamer point of view that shows that the developers seem to be valuing flashy graphics over gameplay. If this trend continues, then it will be doubtful that I will ever purchase Kingdoms, ETW, or anything else new from CA. I actually popped STW back into my computer and enjoyed being able to play a simple, yet fun, strategy game again. So I will enjoy CA's previous TW games but whether I will continue to remain a consumer of future products remains uncertain.
Mouzafphaerre
10-29-2007, 19:28
.
By the way what is that SecuRom thing everyone talks about?
SecuRom is supposedly a copy protection software. (It supposedly prevents copies of game disks from being used instead of the legitimate ones.) However, it acts as malware in which it places itself into your system and remains there. It cannot be removed/uninstalled in normal ways. Even if you uninstall Kingdoms, it remains in your system and causes malfunction. Details are discussed in this thread.
.
lancelot
10-30-2007, 00:50
You see that's the real issue. You as a military history student are not really the target audience for these games, and as such I doubt your boycott is really of much concern.
....
It's about time people started to wake up and realise that TW games are not being marketed as historically accurate warfare simulations.
I wasnt always a military history student I started TW games when I was quite young.
Id like to think Im a reasonably bright chap...and I did intimate in my previous post that my decision (and advice to others) not to buy is going to make any difference to CA but as I also said, there are no doubt plenty more of poeple like me the world over...
And seriously dude, dont insult me...you think I play TW games for historical accuracy!? :laugh4:
Jacob Debroedere
10-30-2007, 11:22
.
SecuRom is supposedly a copy protection software. (It supposedly prevents copies of game disks from being used instead of the legitimate ones.) However, it acts as malware in which it places itself into your system and remains there. It cannot be removed/uninstalled in normal ways. Even if you uninstall Kingdoms, it remains in your system and causes malfunction. Details are discussed in this thread.
.
Not patching a game is one thing, but including malware on purpose in a disk is a bridge to far. We should hire some lawyers and see what they think about this...
Mouzafphaerre
10-30-2007, 12:17
.
Now, I don't think that CA intently and purposedly included it to harm the customers' computers. It was, apparently, another case of under-research. But it has to be remedied anyway.
.
Mori Gabriel Syme
10-30-2007, 16:38
Perhaps because I am the only "long-timer" who has Kingdoms ... ~;p
Bit more seriously my impression is that most people who actually played Kingdoms are happy about it.
I really believe I would enjoy it. If they remove SecuRom, I will buy it. If SecuRom remains, I will not buy it. I realize this makes me sound far less smart than arguing about unit walking speeds, but this issue really is this simple for me.
fallen851
10-30-2007, 18:16
All we can really do with any possible degree of success is to politely suggest that Creative Assembly sort out its' priorities for the next Total War release (Empire: Total War) and hope they grasp the fact that a strong fanbase is imperative for a continued fan community.
Or we could just not buy Empires, encourage magazines such as PC Gamer to recognized our problems with CA, and tell others not to buy the game. Then maybe they will listen, when they actually take a hit where they can feel it.
encourage magazines such as PC Gamer to recognized our problems with CA,
Hate to be the barer of bad news, but PC gaming mags are in on the business model mate. Bad reviews = less ads and less games sold which = less games being played which = less readers.
Incestual inst it? :rolleyes:
Mori Gabriel Syme
10-31-2007, 00:15
It is slightly encouraging that, while extolling BioShock elsewhere in PC Gamer, they do include a bit about the activation and copy-protection woes in the letters section of the most recent issue. Besides, there isn't much to lose by letting the magazine know our opinion. They won't sell much advertising if they stop serving their readers.
hellenes
10-31-2007, 01:56
I still cant understand why people call SEGA corporation CA...
I mean after the sellout there isnt a CA as independed entity there are just bunch of SEGA emploees...So people take out your rose glasses SecuRom isnt nothing but the fruit of SEGA's imaginary decision to supposedly protect their investment...
Ive informed a CA emploee 3 years ago about a site that hosts cracks for ALL TW games included Kingdoms...I was told that the matter would be forwarded to a responsible person...as its obvious nothing happened...
Securom only "protects" games that are frequently patched and still doesnt protect the popular titles cause every patched exe is cracked within hours...
The only thing that SEGA managed is to lose more customers while earning none from the pirate population...
Hell even Starforce is easily cracked on hardware level...
It seems that corporations like SEGA arent that bright being bullied by their fear of piracy into using invasive software and paying HUGE amounts of money for that software...Only if they could open their eyes and see what companies like Blizzard do...I can bet anything that StarCraft2 wont have ANY invasive copy protection but ONLY the strongest protection available: ONLINE MP FOCUS...
Jack Lusted
10-31-2007, 10:10
I still cant understand why people call SEGA corporation CA...
I mean after the sellout there isnt a CA as independed entity there are just bunch of SEGA emploees..
Whilst we may be owned by SEGA, we are still our own Studio and are pretty much left alone.
Prodigal
10-31-2007, 11:07
Well, I only really had one major issue with the game & that was the alliance units in teuton, however I downloaded a mod someone made & its fixed.
Since then I've been playing crusades & the whole deal with the forts has really, really got me down.
Its not moddable, infact it is out of the game altogether based on the statements made by Caliban.
Since my initial enthusiasm for Kingdoms, I'm left feeling that an almighty balls up was made in the final release.
Whoever made the decision to ship, when an amazingly obvious new feature is missing really deserves a round of applause. The forts are even in the crusader intro movies.
I appreciate CA having the cojones to come on the boards & post, which is more than you get from many companies, but the forts is a complete game breaker for me, & I don't say that lightly.
Like many others here I've been playing since STW & have bought every release since then, during that time, & through all those games, (5 years on these boards ffs), my only real issue, (excluding the occasional incoherent rant), was that there weren't assassination movies, which was more of a joke than anything.
Presently it feels like I've purchased something which is not broken but which is simply not finished, I can't think of anything that makes it acceptable, (on any level), to sell a product that is missing one of its key new features.
I have a very strong suspicion that the fixed placement forts in the Britannia campaign were put there simply to "cover" the stone forts so that they could be checked off as included.
Anyway this is getting a bit long, & depressing the hell out of me
hellenes
10-31-2007, 12:08
Whilst we may be owned by SEGA, we are still our own Studio and are pretty much left alone.
Cmon Jack lets get real...Would you condone the inclusion of such invasive and useless malware as Securerom? Even if you say no to the above question its not up to you or up to any SEGA emploee...
So lets get real its a capitalist world for christs sake...
Cmon Jack lets get real...Would you condone the inclusion of such invasive and useless malware as Securerom? Even if you say no to the above question its not up to you or up to any SEGA emploee...
So lets get real its a capitalist world for christs sake...
Whether or not to include any copyright protection is indeed SEGA's decision because CA doesn't have anything to do with organising how the game is shipped.
However "largely left alone" is a pretty flexible statement. It includes anything from no interference in the design process at all to "push this game out, this minute."
My guess is that SEGA will make the main decisions while leaving the details to CA. And of course the options the SEGA management decides on are probably presented by CA.
Zenicetus
10-31-2007, 18:32
Whilst we may be owned by SEGA, we are still our own Studio and are pretty much left alone.
SEGA made a decision (SecureRom) that's keeping at least some of us from buying Kingdoms. Apparently, they've also made the decision to refuse to even address this issue publicly, or promise a removal utility that can be used when uninstalling the game. That alone would sell more copies of Kingdoms, and make a bunch of people less wary about what's coming along for the ride with Empire.
So far, we've seen zero interest from either CA or Sega in addressing this issue publicly. You've responded to plenty of other comments in this thread, and that's the one issue that you've been totally silent about. Why?
The bottom line is that I can't enjoy and respect the creativity of the developer's studio, if the publisher is trashing the product with invasive DRM, and the studio is being silent about the issue. At the point, the two merge into the same problem from the customer's perspective. So there is really no distinction there between the two companies, as far as I'm concerned.
SEGA made a decision (SecureRom) that's keeping at least some of us from buying Kingdoms. Apparently, they've also made the decision to refuse to even address this issue publicly, or promise a removal utility that can be used when uninstalling the game. That alone would sell more copies of Kingdoms, and make a bunch of people less wary about what's coming along for the ride with Empire.
So far, we've seen zero interest from either CA or Sega in addressing this issue publicly. You've responded to plenty of other comments in this thread, and that's the one issue that you've been totally silent about. Why?I can imagine the reaction if Lusted commented on that without permission.
It wouldn't be pretty, and everyone would be disappointed - the SEGA PR guys for not phrasing things correctly; and us, because we'll always find something to moan about on an issue as contentious as that :grin2:
Zenicetus
11-01-2007, 21:47
I can imagine the reaction if Lusted commented on that without permission.
Well, I wasn't expecting an off-the-cuff reply without permission. And it's not like they haven't had plenty of time to think this over and respond by now. How long has it been since we identified the SecureRom issues? Anyway, I thought it was worth a shot, since (AFAIK) there hasn't been any comment over on the .com forums either. Where else can we ask about this, after all?
Of course, refusing to comment is also an answer. CA/Sega wouldn't hurt their current position any by saying "Yes, we know about how you feel, but this is the method we've chosen. We don't care that we're leaving behind hidden and potentially harmful files after a game uninstall, and we've decided to write off any lost sales due to people shying away from invasive DRM. That's our decision and we're sticking to it."
CA/Sega's silence about this is saying exactly the same thing. It would just be nice to have it explicit, rather than implicit if that's the bad news. And I'd still welcome good news... like hearing that they've negotiated for a full uninstall utility with Sony. Either way, I could finally quit wondering whether I'll be able to buy and enjoy Kingdoms one day, or not.
I'm just amazed that people really believe that things will ever change. Activision curtailed the patching process and CA under SEGA are no different. In fact, if anything we've had less patches under this new partnership. (But then that's also because RTW, in my opinion, needed more patching in the first place!)
I'll be really honest in saying that I won't miss this engine that has been used to create Rome and Med 2. Rome was chronically poor, was completely bug-ridden and the AI was fallable in every area I can think of. Med 2 is marginally better, but still suffers from the lingering failings of the same engine. In fact, much the progress that had been made with patching process in Rome wasn't even present in vanilla Med 2, possibly becuase there was some overlapping in development...? Anyway, it's essentially due to the way both games were designed, i.e. the engine behind the graphics, and couple that with an archaic, un-user friendly UI, and this all conspires to the frustrate the gamer.
And now, here's something controversial...
I actually believe that both RTW and Med 2 are comparatively poor strategy games, in that there's not really much strategy in them! I don't feel I have to be particularly bright nor strategically minded to play either Rome or Med 2. In fact, barring maybe the initial 20 turns or so, both games become an exercise in automation. Build troops, conquer city, build troops, conquer city. There's no critical decision making processes and without these, there is no strategy.
There is a small amount of tactical nous required, but believe me when I say it's 'small'. Once you've learned the simple formula of 'engage infantry, flank with cav, chain rout defenders', that's essentially it for field battles. The formula is known. Then it's just a matter of repeating this in each battle. The difference in ability of spears, swords and axes isn't great enough to warrant major tactical decisions on unit match-ups. Swords, axes and spears can all be used to hold the line long enough until the cav can flank. Therefore, thinking about proper unit match-ups isn't important. It's just a matter of infantry line vs infantry line and then whoever uses their cavalry the most effectively wins. Sieges are worse because the design is more complicated than the AI's ability to successfully cope with it.
As soon as TotalWar games become a little bit more than just 'Total War' then we might have a strategy game on our hands. For instance, one which comes with a working economic side and an interesting and working diplomatic system which isn't based around the simple premise of 'Total War'.
Regards
I actually believe that both RTW and Med 2 are comparatively poor strategy games, in that there's not really much strategy in them! I don't feel I have to be particularly bright nor strategically minded to play either Rome or Med 2. In fact, barring maybe the initial 20 turns or so, both games become an exercise in automation. Build troops, conquer city, build troops, conquer city. There's no critical decision making processes and without these, there is no strategy.
There is a small amount of tactical nous required, but believe me when I say it's 'small'. Once you've learned the simple formula of 'engage infantry, flank with cav, chain rout defenders', that's essentially it. The formula is known. Then it's just a matter of repeating this in each battle. I lose 1 battle every 20 or so.
As soon as TotalWar games become a little bit more than just 'Total War' then we might have a strategy game on our hands. For instance, one which comes with a working economic side and an interesting and working diplomatic system which isn't based around the simple premise of 'Total War'.
Regards
Aaahhh, please go to the head of the class. STW while still "total war" required a fair amount of planning on the strategic level well into the game (at least for me on higher levels). Perhaps your point might be part of the cause for all the anguish over a weak AI? when really its not the AI at all but the tactical game at the campaign level?
Excellent post.
:medievalcheers:
Indeed Odin. The campaign AI certainly doesn't lend itself to helping the tactical AI. Alliances are not meaningful since the AI of allied factions won't combine their forces - this did happen in Med 1. The more simple 'Risk' style of campaign map ironically offered more strategy.
On the tactical side, Shogun's limited, but specific, unit roster offered the best tactical challenge on the battlemap of them all.... and it was simple in comparison.
The older TW titles are a good example of how greater complexity doesn't necessarily = greater strategy. In my opinion the later TW titles have suffered from over-complicated new features and the resulting dilution of existing concepts. It's clear to me that the rate the AI is progressing (debatable anyway) isn't in line with the progression being made elsewhere.
Indeed Odin. The campaign AI certainly doesn't lend itself to helping the tactical AI. Alliances are not meaningful since the AI of allied factions won't combine their forces - this did happen in Med 1. The more simple 'Risk' style of campaign map ironically offered more strategy.
On the tactical side, Shogun's limited, but specific, unit roster offered the best tactical challenge on the battlemap of them all.... and it was simple in comparison.
The older TW titles are a good example of how greater complexity doesn't necessarily = greater strategy. In my opinion the later TW titles have suffered from over-complicated new features and the resulting dilution of existing concepts. It's clear to me that the rate the AI is progressing (debatable anyway) isn't in line with the progression being made elsewhere.
I agree, and in reflection the unit rosters in Shogun were a blessing due to thier simplicity. understanding of course that it was a game exclusive to one culture and that might make it an exception to the rule (being the only TW game in that vein). You simply couldnt buy yourself a better army, you might buy more, but not better quality.
The diversity of the faction and campaign map of later titles led to the unit diversity that leaves a somewhat unchallenging feel. All one has to do is spend 20 turns building an economic base and one can buy a volumous army with quality troops. Take the English in MTW2, longbows that can deploy spears, there really isnt an equivical unit in other rosters so unless the AI is able to 1. predetermine the composition of your army and adjust its army roster to counter your strengths, and 2. is able to actually field the requsite unit type (in the example of the english, a ponny unit that can outflank before it is whittled down to obscurity).
Again your bringing forth good arguments for the reasons why any patch wouldnt necessarily make the game harder, in CA's brilliance for offering us diversity it has removed the tactical elements required to deal with an AI that has the same resource base, troop roster and agent structure as you.
Bravo
Other than maybe tweaking aspects of the faltering AI some more, I admit it's hard to see how another patch will really solve many of these deep rooted problems. Ok, CA could fix the Kingdoms features that weren't implemented properly or completely, and given that these were promised it might be nice to see them fixed. It probably won't make me play Kingdoms or Med 2 again, since these type of features aren't what keep me interested in playing.
It's the continuous requirement for thought, strategy and an overall challenge that keeps me interested and prolongs a game's longevity. The kind of patch CA would release, if they did one, won't solve these. I can only look to Empire for hope. It will use a brand new engine so things will definitely be different. No doubt that in itself will bring an altogether new set of 'issues'.
You know one of the things that griped me most? The strategic UI of all things! The scroll list for agents and finding your pieces in the mid to late-game when you had a large empire. I found it so infuriating as I'd often lose agents and forget to move pieces from turn to turn.... Why o why couldn't they at the very least have updated the UI in Med 2 and made it more user friendly and intuitive....
Other than maybe tweaking aspects of the faltering AI some more, I admit it's hard to see how another patch will really solve many of these deep rooted problems. Ok, CA could fix the Kingdoms features that weren't implemented properly or completely, and given that these were promised it might be nice to see them fixed. It probably won't make me play Kingdoms or Med 2 anymore, since features aren't what keeps me interested in playing.
I think its there duty to fix features that were advertised with the release of the game, and this garnishes the most sympathy from me of users who are complaining about patches, however its not unexpected.
I can only look to Empire for hope. It will use a brand new engine, so things will definitely be different. However, no doubt that will bring with it an altogether new set of 'issues'.
Empire has piqued my intrest for the simple fact that the time period lends to a more equitable distribution in force structure. Brining us back somewhat to the equities discussed in STW, Line infantry for the major combatants of the napleonic era werent vastly different as opposed to the mediveal period. The formal professional armies of Empires should provide more balance, and then by default more strategic planning longer into the game.
You know one of the things that griped me most? The strategic UI of all things! The scroll list for agents and finding your pieces in the mid to late-game when you had a large empire. I found it so infuriating as I'd often lose agents and forget to move pieces from turn to turn....
Yes its a pain in the butt, there is a seperate scroll but it dosent feel right. What kills me about MTW2 is my assasins cant kill my generals or princesses. Given that a faction heir can be adopted on a whim this makes prunning the family line a greviance for me.
Indeed Odin. The campaign AI certainly doesn't lend itself to helping the tactical AI. Alliances are not meaningful since the AI of allied factions won't combine their forces - this did happen in Med 1. The more simple 'Risk' style of campaign map ironically offered more strategy.
On the tactical side, Shogun's limited, but specific, unit roster offered the best tactical challenge on the battlemap of them all.... and it was simple in comparison.
The older TW titles are a good example of how greater complexity doesn't necessarily = greater strategy. In my opinion the later TW titles have suffered from over-complicated new features and the resulting dilution of existing concepts. It's clear to me that the rate the AI is progressing (debatable anyway) isn't in line with the progression being made elsewhere.
I completely agree. I think the main failing of the game is the exceptionally poor strategic AI. A great deal of this is probably due to the switch from the Risk-style territory map to the wide-open RTW/M2TW map. I personally love the RTW/M2TW campaign map system, but I just don't think the AI can handle it because it is far, far more complex. I would prefer for CA to revert to the STW/MTW territory based map if it will result in a significant improvement in the strategic AI.
The M2TW tactical AI can still use improvement, but it's not horrible. It can still beat you given the right armies in the right situations. It's the strategic AI that constantly fails to produce these armies and situations. Fixing the strategic AI should thus be the #1 priority of the developers IMO. Everything else would fall into line after that.
Fixing the strategic AI should thus be the #1 priority of the developers IMO. Everything else would fall into line after that.
The battle engine model is not up to the standard it once was, and neither is the network code. The areas that need improvement are:
1. Strategic AI
2. Tactical AI
3. Economic/Diplomatic model
4. Battle Engine model
5. Network performance
6. Playbalance
All of these areas suffered because limited resources were applied to graphics improvements which increased the system requirements needed to run the game. There is apparently a large market that embraces system resource hogging visuals over these other six areas.
I've given up any hope that they will improve the AI in a potential patch. I don't expect an AI overhaul from a patch (though it is kind of expected that an expansion pack should attempt this.... ). However, I still think that they should at least iron out obviously broken issues. If the game cannot be reinvented, it can nevertheless be finished.
My biggest gripes, horrible unit cohesion and pike behavior, fall into this category of unfinished game. They have already tinkered with these problems in previous patches, but they couldn't get it right. All that I am asking is that they finish the job they have started and got paid to do, if the capability is there.
Empress_Zoe
11-03-2007, 03:41
I prefered the 'risk' style map also. Especially for the AI's sake:laugh4:
(re-tryinng to post, the system seems to have logged me out, hope it doesn't double-post now)
Hi,
like everyone else, I'm disappointed by the no-more-patch strategy for M2TW. Due to the DRM issue, I have not (and will not) buy Kingdoms, but I was still holding out for a patch of the grand campaign. Since CA seems to be reading this thread, I though I'd add my voice to those unsatisfied with this. My view on the situation follows:
I can agree with people who say that the game really isn't challenging enough and there's too little stategic element, but OTOH I must admit that I've still had a lot of fun with the game. It's been a long time since I played a game for this many hours, but I still can't help feeling disappointed when the game is abandoned without really being finished. I realize CA/SEGA do not really have an economic incentive to patch the game, since they can make more money from making brand new games, and even if they lose a lot of "loyal fans", they will gain enough new buyers from the "younger generation" seeing flashy graphics to take that cost.
At this point, I'd actually be prepared to pay (probably the same amount I payed for the initial game) for a patch++ for this game if it fulfilled the followiong criteria which would prolong me playing this game for a long time:
(Not that I believe that this will happen....)
- No DRM (the game is anyway at end-of-life, so why not remove the restrictions, I don't want to have an optical drive plugged into my windows more than necessary)
- Fix the autocalc-for-siege-battles (i.e. castles/cities not being counted)
- Fix the flashflood bug
- Fix the passive battle AI when player is sallying
- Minor fixes to the diplomatic AI. Mainly, remove the random blockading. I'd be fine with removing the blockade option altogether if it meant the AI stop declaring really really stupid wars. Other improvements would be appreciated, but not necessary
- Improve army composition for the campaign AI (i.e. stop building militia-only or artillery-only etc). Balanced AI armies with more quality units would make this game soooo much more difficult, and implementation should not be very hard, IMO
- Make the battle AI protect its ranged units with spears&cav and so that they react when nearby units gets charged! With this not-so-large-fix, I guess the battles would be much harder, since you can't abuse away all ranged AI units with cavalry before engaging. Possibly more costly to implement, but not too much?
- More simple-to-set options when starting a campagin (e.g. set frequency of rebel spawn). I know can go into config files, but seriously, should I have to for features that people frequently want to change?
- Some UI improvements for ease of use (such as those suggesed slightly above in this thread)
None of the above feels like they would be that costly to implement (of course depending on how the code is done). And although it's not fair that we would have to pay for patching the game to what it should have been initially, I'd do so just to get things fixed. I think the game still has great potential for me to spend time on it.
What I will *not* pay for at this point is:
- Kingdoms (the DRM in question is a dealbreaker for me)
- Empires (more of the same treatment without having *this* game fixed? No thanks)
- Flashy graphic, more sound
- More units, maps/campaigns (if I want this, modders can provide it for me, and what's the point as long as the game is broken?)
DVX BELLORVM
11-03-2007, 16:41
What bothers me the most in M2 (beside the obvious bugs, ofc), is the complete lack of self-perseverance on the AI's part.
On the strategic level, a faction stubbornly refuses to accept ceasefire, even if reduced to one settlement, defended only by the king and few catapult units.
During the battle, the AI cavalry and general will happily pin them self onto my stakes, or pikes. And there are more similar examples.
This very much destroys the immersion, by not giving me a feeling that I wage a war against a "real" nation, but rather against some mindless computer-controled blobs.
If THAT can be fixed in the next patch, I promise to buy every future title coming from the CA ~D
KING RICHARD III Act 5. Scene IV
Slave, I have set my life upon a cast, (Total War addiction)
And I will stand the hazard of the die: (CA development method)
I think there be six Richmonds in the field; (game killing bugs)
Five have I slain to-day instead of him. (playing mods)
A patch! a patch! my Kingdoms for a patch!
Mouzafphaerre
11-03-2007, 22:08
.
A patch! a patch! my Kingdoms for a patch!
:laugh4: :medievalcheers:
.
I think it's ridiculous that the mods (that is, a free content created by users in their spare time) are getting patches, and the original game is not and the company which lives off of this product is not going to do anything about it. There is something absurd about this state of affairs.
SirGrotius
11-11-2007, 17:38
To be honest, I'm completely unsurprised. When I played the expansion I didn't notice any obvious bugs, and the only "weakness" is the AI. The AI being "fixed" in a patch is a laughable notion--it's a huge enterprise!
This game is fairly good overall. But the game mechanics and the number of bugs have me cussing at my computer monitor fairly often; a lot more often than I do with any other game. It's too bad they left it in such a frail state, even after a few patches.
The thing that gets me is unit pathing in cities and the way units fight. When a unit engages another, why do the guys in the middle and back of the unit creep backwards and space out so much, leaving only 10-12 guys fighting? Cavalry still only charge correctly 1 out of 50 times. Rome TW was a very fun game, beat it 3 times. Unfortunately it seems like M2TW took a big step backwards. I won't be purchasing their next game if it comes out full of bugs and flaws in the game mechanics like this one.
Slug For A Butt
11-11-2007, 23:22
I actually believe that both RTW and Med 2 are comparatively poor strategy games, in that there's not really much strategy in them! I don't feel I have to be particularly bright nor strategically minded to play either Rome or Med 2. In fact, barring maybe the initial 20 turns or so, both games become an exercise in automation. Build troops, conquer city, build troops, conquer city. There's no critical decision making processes and without these, there is no strategy.
There is a small amount of tactical nous required, but believe me when I say it's 'small'. Once you've learned the simple formula of 'engage infantry, flank with cav, chain rout defenders', that's essentially it for field battles. The formula is known. Then it's just a matter of repeating this in each battle. The difference in ability of spears, swords and axes isn't great enough to warrant major tactical decisions on unit match-ups. Swords, axes and spears can all be used to hold the line long enough until the cav can flank. Therefore, thinking about proper unit match-ups isn't important. It's just a matter of infantry line vs infantry line and then whoever uses their cavalry the most effectively wins. Sieges are worse because the design is more complicated than the AI's ability to successfully cope with it.
Regards
Very well said! My feelings exactly, but hell... the fancy graphics sell it to a generation that want nothing but arcade fun on a huge scale. The TW we all want is no more, it has turned into a graphically fueled arcade fest. And why would CA go back to their roots when they can make more money selling a shallow game to kids and graphics freaks?
Their approach is economically sound but morally bankrupt. TW is now just another arcade game, and like I've said before I just can't wait for someone to fill CA's vacant TW shoes.
@SirGrotius. You haven't noticed the horrible passive Ai when sallying against a siege? Surely that's a bug.
You haven't noticed tha Papal elections voting bug? Surely that's a bug.
Units being placed in a city/castle pre battle can't occupy the same places they can once the battle has started? Surely that's a bug. etc...etc...
Very well said! My feelings exactly, but hell... the fancy graphics sell it to a generation that want nothing but arcade fun on a huge scale. The TW we all want is no more, it has turned into a graphically fueled arcade fest. And why would CA go back to their roots when they can make more money selling a shallow game to kids and graphics freaks?
Their approach is economically sound but morally bankrupt. TW is now just another arcade game, and like I've said before I just can't wait for someone to fill CA's vacant TW shoes.
my feelings exact. i have actually stopped playing TW. single player tactical AI is horrendous. strategic AI is not much better. it's mostly about eye candy in TW games now.
invalidopcode
11-13-2007, 22:37
my feelings exact. i have actually stopped playing TW. single player tactical AI is horrendous. strategic AI is not much better. it's mostly about eye candy in TW games now.
My TotalWar discs were put on the shelf quite a while ago. I had hoped that the Kingdoms would inspired me to start playing again but that is not going to happen.
In fact, if it were not for Lusted's mod to make the original somewhat interesting to play, it would have happened a lot sooner.
This trend where graphics take center stage over everything else is just killing these games. This dumbing down will eventually blur the line between PC and console, thereby making console the better investment in development dollars for the game makers. All that horsepower on the PCs to do some really interesting things and it gets wasted on silly graphics... :wall:
Oh well...
Goaswerfraiejen
11-15-2007, 01:04
I was afraid of this, which is why I didn't want to buy Kingdoms--what's the point of buying M2TW if ultimately we can't get a patch to fix the remaining major bugs without having to buy a whole new game? I've been pretty disappointed with M2TW overall, and it really saddens me to hear that it won't get patched up properly to bring the game to the level at which it should be. Makes me glad that I didn't spring for Kingdoms, and it reaffirms my conviction not to spend money on Empires or any further games--at least not until many, many years have gone by and I need only spend ten to fifteen dollars for these hyper-graphical (I know, not a word) and underdeveloped products.
A sad, sad day.
phonicsmonkey
11-15-2007, 02:14
Kingdoms certainly needs a patch to restore the advertised features which are broken and missing from the game.
I'm not certain there are any remaining "game-breaking" bugs which would make me believe a further patch for M2TW is a necessity. Of course, further patches are always desirable as there is always improvement that can be made.
I haven't up to now considered the poor performance of the AI in battles and on the campaign map to be a "bug", and have felt as others have described here that it is unrealistic to expect this to be improved with a patch.
Having said that, Sinan's recent post in the "Losing at M2TW" thread has inspired me to try out GrandViz's Ultimate AI 1.06.
If that makes a marked improvement, perhaps there is a case for expecting CA to tweak the AI in a patch to improve the game difficulty.
Goaswerfraiejen
11-15-2007, 05:58
I'm not certain there are any remaining "game-breaking" bugs which would make me believe a further patch for M2TW is a necessity. Of course, further patches are always desirable as there is always improvement that can be made.
I haven't up to now considered the poor performance of the AI in battles and on the campaign map to be a "bug", and have felt as others have described here that it is unrealistic to expect this to be improved with a patch.
Oh, I wasn't referring to the AI. My own biggest problem with M2TW as it stands now is that it's nigh impossible to deploy troops properly inside a city, and unity cohesion and pathfinding is really wonky. But really, I can't stand not being able to deploy my troops as I want them. Part of the problem, perhaps, is that Rome was very flexible with deployment and maybe I'm too used to that--hell, you could get pikes poking out of closed gates--but this is really the other extreme. After about an hour of pre-battle deployment, I still can't get them to stand where the cursor says they can stand. If I had a clue how to fix it on my own, I'd have done it a year ago.
I was also disappointed about some missing features--like Russian War Wagons or that advertised castle that looked like Krak des Chevaliers or something. I've gotten over that, but man--not being able to deploy properly for siege battles--the most common battles--really, really, really sucks.
While I appreciate that the Kingdoms dilemma is perhaps more serious, my own concerns are for the product that I bought. It's really troubling to me to see a company giving up on its game as soon as a new project gets announced publicly. Equally troubling is the importance given to the quality of the graphics over the game and its own cohesion. But I'm just beating a dead horse; we're all concerned with the same things. I've just decided that it's not worth the disappointment any more. I can't spend my free time living on anticipation. I've learned my lesson, and I'll be waiting a long time before buying anything new--long enough to find out what's up. It really bugs me that a game like Diablo got a gigantic new patch years after its release (and during a wane in popularity), but a superior game that still isn't functioning properly gets given up on a year after its release. But again, that's beside the point. I don't want to rant, I just want to express my support of the other good people here, who are rightly outraged by this announcement.
phonicsmonkey
11-15-2007, 06:57
My own biggest problem with M2TW as it stands now is that it's nigh impossible to deploy troops properly inside a city, and unity cohesion and pathfinding is really wonky. But really, I can't stand not being able to deploy my troops as I want them.
Fair enough. I just don't find it as annoying I guess - I concede it's more tricky than in RTW to get your guys standing where you want them, and there are some places where it seems they just won't stick, but I don't find it stops me from enjoying siege battles altogether.
I find guard mode helpful with cohesion, and clicking back and forth between loose and close formation can sometimes encourage the boys to stick together.
Pathfinding I get around with waypoints.
Goaswerfraiejen
11-15-2007, 07:18
Yeah, I use guard mode and waypoints extensively. It's just that bloody unit deployment that really sucks the life out of me because I spend so much time at the outset of a battle to try to get a unit standing somewhere only to realise it just won't work and I have to order it to go there during the battle--and then I discover that that doesn't work, and my beautiful traps are undone. :shame:
Anyway, I've gone too far into my personal gripes, I think. Suffice it to say that this is disappointing news indeed, and that as a long-time player and customer, I feel very much alienated.
Dead_Like_Me
11-15-2007, 16:29
Well guys ... can't say I was surprised by this either. CA actually disappointed me much more with 1.3 it was clear after that what we are dealing here with.
Patching takes time so basically its a its a pro-gamer move by a company to create patches for their games ... you can see on the market games that had a great patch support even EA games that got really good patching support but there are several bad examples like CoD 2 1.3 patch which killed the online community and patch 2.101 in CoH which actually drove me away from the game and many others. However in Medieval 2:Total war the case is diffrent because well I am not looking for a patch that fix balancing and so on... which as I said is a pro-gamer move ... I look for a patch that will fix the game I paid for and will bring up the feature that were promised, Try imagine what will costumers of Crysis will buy the game and will find out the power suit that were showed so many times in the trailers will not arrive with the game although it is even written in the manual ? I think the buyers will be pretty mad about that buying a half game with missing features ... well players pay for the game usually with support but online support so they can complain about overpowered units but the company doesn't have to fix it but the costumers that pay full price for a game that promise a feature like being able to buy forts and then it is not possible in the game or even buying a game that promise 150 diffrent units with it and then the game arrive with a a bug that makes a two handed soldiers to not attack is a serious problem that should be fix by the company.
one of the major things hat disappointed me was the so called "hot-seat" CA released with Kingdoms, at first it was suppose to be released with 1.3 which was a pro-gamer move but CA decided that they want money so why give something like that for free... so they published it with kingdoms... kingdoms one was as bad as the modded one in the Medieval 2. they didn't do anything but adding it to the Multiplayer section... now it was suppose to be in the grand campaign as well as published but then again CA was to tired and to lazy to actually put the feature in the Multiplayer section of Medieval 2. this is a perfect example what you should expect from CA. At first I though they will do their best implant features that maybe will allow to use battle multilayer to play the "hot-seat" campaign's battles. But instead I got a brocken "Hot-seat" with no defensive battles option ... and many more bugs that make it unplayable.
to summery - No Empire for me unless CA will fix this :daisy: they releasing to the market. And I hope you guys are a man of your word and you won't go to buy the new game letting yourselves get fooled again by CA to believe they will actually made something to improve the game they release. Can't wait to see the new sea battles in empire ( which means - if they will exist ) and to see if it will be with all the features CA publishing ... HHHH.
If you guys won't fight this ... no one will ... if CA don't want to be pro-gamers then ok ... but if CA release a broken game its a must for them to fix it and include all promised features.
hellenes
11-15-2007, 18:05
What makes me wonder the most is this whole tendency to ignore the fact that CA has a monopoly over this genre...name one game thats better than TW games...that combines both tactical and strategic interaction...and no AoE wont do...
Even though it has been said many times before I am still staggered that neither CA, nor SEGA have actually bothered to respond to this barrage of accusations! This points to shocking arrogance on behalf of the publisher and thus I also urge all players gathered here, at the org, to refrain from buying ETW hot off the shelf. This will let us make an informed decision about buying the game and also limit any whining from the disappointed who rushed to the shops first thing on the morning of the release. On top it will hit SEGA's initial sales and maybe get them to respect their customers a little more.
I cannot lie to you all saying I will definitely not buy ETW, I may, but only after I have read all reviews and comments and I know what I'm getting myself into!
After all, for many it's not just 40 quid they're spending on the game. It's money spent on the graphics card, possibly new proc or memory. I did an upgrade for M2TW (almost £200!!!) and wish I never had bothered.
Demand quality and don't remunerate mediocrity, SEGA laughs at your complaints and already counts the money they'll make on ETW, no doubt. Prove them wrong if you have any dignity, people!
Slug For A Butt
11-15-2007, 19:30
This points to shocking arrogance on behalf of the publisher
Agreed, couldn't have put it better myself.
I cannot lie to you all saying I will definitely not buy ETW, I may, but only after I have read all reviews and comments and I know what I'm getting myself into!
I will not lie either. I will not be touching another TW game (M2TW was my last) until it is available for £5 on Ebay... SecuRom permitting. Shame as I've bought everything CA had to offer before.
After all, for many it's not just 40 quid they're spending on the game. It's money spent on the graphics card, possibly new proc or memory. I did an upgrade for M2TW (almost £200!!!) and wish I never had bothered.!
Yup, I used to upgrade my PC for TW. Not a chance now! It's one thing to take money off me for a game that doesn't deliver, but to also to force me to spend £300 upgrading for a game that doesn't deliver makes me very angry.
Bye Bye CA. Unless you start treating me like a customer I will not buy from you.
Actually, the link between time being wasted on graphics and there being poor AI is unimportant. The people responsible for the eye-candy, e.g. artists and animators, are not the same as the code monkeys that are responsible for the AI.
Without being too condescending toward the graphics guys, I'd generally argue that it's easier to make competent graphics than it is to program effective AI. What I would like to see CA do, is bring strategy back to TW games. They've become a little too formulaic for my liking.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.