Would you buy the next TW game if there is no patch for Kingdoms?

[Cheetah]

As the question asks. Please only yes or no answers, as there is already a long discussion here: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=93351

[FactionHeir]

As the CA people said, they do not care about petitions and polls, only about discussion topics, so this topic seems rather .... pointless?

Also, asking for a patch for kingdoms only wouldn't really cut it. I'd prefer one that fixes M2TW (as this will fix Kingdoms too).

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
:rtwno:

Oh, I don't care if they care, btw. If they don't care, I won't be their customer, that simple.

Medieval's half finished features (GA points) were standable.
Rome's memory leak can be remedied by adding more RAM and reinforcements bug has a workaround.
But third time pays all. :no:
.

[Zenicetus]

That poll isn't fine-grained enough to cover all users' concerns about CA and their games. For example, I'm very interested in Empire, but I won't buy it if it includes invasive copy protection like Kingdoms does.

I really don't care if they patch Kingdoms or not, except for that issue. Actually I'd rather see the devs spending 100% of their time on polishing up Empire.

[Slug For A Butt]

That poll isn't fine-grained enough to cover all users' concerns about CA and their games. For example, I'm very interested in Empire, but I won't buy it if it includes invasive copy protection like Kingdoms does.

I really don't care if they patch Kingdoms or not, except for that issue. Actually I'd rather see the devs spending 100% of their time on polishing up Empire.

Good for you. I don't care about what they do with Empire because I won't be buying it just as I haven't bought Kingdoms. I care more about what I have already spent my cash on, that should be fixed first shouldn't it? ~:idea:
So that poll covers it enough for me. Until they tidy up the existing rubbish they have sold us, I won't touch another TW title until it's second hand.

[Primative1]

I won't touch another TW title until it's second hand.

I'm with Sally, CA dont get another penny from me.

I've been with the series since Shogan, but theyve got rich and decided to screw us all with shoddy crap and intrusive, hidden malware that doesn't uninstall with the game.

Screw them, theyve screwed us. IMHO of course.

[Meldarion]

I won't be pre-ordering it like I have with other TW games. I guess I'll just hang back see how it goes before making a decision on ETW. I'll go by player opinion this time around rather than reviewer ratings like I did with MTW2.

[Galain_Ironhide]

Finally, someone doing something proactive!

This is the kind of thing I wanted to see. Good on ya Cheeta. :2thumbsup:

:focus:

Anyway, No I will not be buying any further titles including Kingdoms until the game is patched.

[DVX BELLORVM]

No.

[Odin]

I won't be pre-ordering it like I have with other TW games. I guess I'll just hang back see how it goes before making a decision on ETW. I'll go by player opinion this time around rather than reviewer ratings like I did with MTW2.

:thumbsup: This is the prudent course for any and all PC gamers, no matter the title.

[Hellenic_Hoplite]

Everyone says they won't be buying it but in a year when there's nothing else good out I guarntee that at least some of you will be buying it. I mean at the end of the day You're not playing some boring FPS or just another RTS You're playing Total War Game because no one else has come out with a concept like it. (except for imperial glory and thats considered a total war clone)

[crpcarrot]

i voted no but its not only because of patching.

it includes securom and i'm also extrememly unhappy that the "expansion" left the original purchasers hanging with unbalanced units. so whats the message CA is trying to convey to the purchasers of vanilla?

its absolutley unacceptable to me that i have to get a mod to make my game uptodate with CA's latest balancing. its makes me wonder what they will do next time

as others have mentioned this poll will probably not get much notice except if maybe everyone who voted leaves feedback as well.

[econ21]

I'll keep buying TW games until they make one I don't like. RTW might have been that game, but RTR and EB rescued it spectacularly. BI and especially M2TW have started to pull the tactical battles back towards those we enjoyed in STW and MTW.

A patch for Kingdoms would be nice, but from what I hear of the bugs - some minor features not working - it won't be a deal breaker for me.

If the passive AI and shield bugs of M2TW had not been patched, that would have been a deal breaker, as they were game killers for me. But now M2TW is in a pretty decent shape now. The Kingdoms rebalancing would have been nice, but even then I am not wholly convinced (the rebalancing seems to be based more on RPS and game balance principles than historical accuracy).

IMO, the big issues for ETW are (a) improving the strategic AI, which is still weak; (b) coping with the added tactical complexities of Napoleonic battles. To be honest, I doubt CA - or any games designer - will succeed fully on both scores, but it is a pretty safe bet they will do better than the competition (Imperial Glory, :no:).

[Ethelred Unread]

Like econ, I'll probably keep buying titles until they make one I don't like, and like
Hellenic_Hoplite it's because there's nothing like it out there at the moment.

[R'as al Ghul]

BI and especially M2TW have started to pull the tactical battles back towards those we enjoyed in STW and MTW.

~:confused: Erm, I think that a lot of players disagree.
I know that you mostly see it from an SP perspective but RTW and everything that came after are not the tactical games that you get with MTW and STW. Everything is dumbed down, too fast or not included. We've been over the details many times.
I for one won't buy a new TW game until convinced that TW returns to real-time tactical battles at least on the basis of MTW/VI 2.01. We've had 2 full games and 3 expansions since then and the MP players or those that focus on the tactical side have gained nothing but only lost features.

HistWar: Les Grognards will probably take over some disgruntled former TW fans. CA can still have them back if they do it right this time.

R'as

[Puzz3D]

The very fact that Creative Assembly wanted to cut and run demonstrates a decline in their commitment to quality. If they patch Kingdoms now, it will just be for the purpose of damage control, and I would expect only a minimal effort will be put into it. Of more concern to me, since I don't have M2TW, is the decline over the last few years in the commintment to quality of the finished product and how that will affect the quality of ETW.

[Viking]

I enjoy to play M2TW. It does not fulfill it's potential, but that does not prevent me from enjoying it. It is not cool that they will not patch the game, but as long as I enjoy TW games, I'll keep on buying them.

[lancelot]

Wont buy next TW nor Kingdoms until fixed and invasive software removed. Period.

[Ferret]

looks like CA will be losing a lot of sales, and if they don't listen to polls why is there one about this subject in the launch menu?

[Jack Lusted]

As the CA people said, they do not care about petitions and polls, only about discussion topics, so this topic seems rather .... pointless?

We've just said we don't listen to petition, we've said nothing about polls.

[foop]

I've voted "no", but what I actually mean is that I'll say I'm not buying it. Then I'll be slightly interested, despite the huge buglists on the org ("French ships of the line cannot fire grapeshot, as the animation is missing"). Then I'll give in and buy it and feel dirty for the next couple of months.

[Kobal2fr]

I voted "gah".

I most probably won't buy Empires, but it has nothing to do with lack of patches for Kingdoms - as is the game is good 'nuff for me, and I'm sure EB2 will blow my mind away anyway. I wouldn't count M2TW as a total failure.

But thing is, Napoleonic battles don't do it for me. The historical period just doesn't suit my tastes in bloodshed :sweatdrop:. If people around here can't shut up about how grrrrreat it is, then maybe, just maybe. But signs point to no.

[econ21]

BI and especially M2TW have started to pull the tactical battles back towards those we enjoyed in STW and MTW. ~:confused: Erm, I think that a lot of players disagree.

I chose my language carefully - "started to pull the tactical battles back". People may disagree with how far they have started to pull back, but I have not read anyone mount a convincing case that M2TW battles are not better than RTW ones.


I know that you mostly see it from an SP perspective but RTW and everything that came after are not the tactical games that you get with MTW and STW. Everything is dumbed down, too fast or not included. We've been over the details many times.

Yes, indeed, well travelled territory. But as the realism mods for RTW showed, the "too fast" issue is eminently moddable and my impression is that vanilla M2TW is closer to MTW than vanilla RTW in both walk speeds and kill rates. Even if I am wrong on that, M2TW battles are slower paced than RTW.


....those that focus on the tactical side have gained nothing but only lost features.

But you are overstating the case by stating everything is dumbed down and nothing is gained. Just off the top of my head, we have gained:

- Better controls (IIRC, some of the STW/MTW controls for reshaping your line or controlling the camera were painful).
- Decent siege battles: those in STW/MTW were soulless
- Better AI controlled and more lethal horse archers, including Cantabrian circle and Parthian shot. Those in MTW were dogfood in the AI hands; in RTW and M2TW they take their rightful place as amongst the best units in the game.
- More varied missile weapon modelling (in MTW, there were horse archer bows, normal bows and long bows only - in RTW, M2TW differences in missile troop effectiveness can be better modelled)
- More historical units (e.g. Scots Guard) and less generic army composition (no "Catholic army" with one or two unique units)
- More moddable units (one reason that playing battles in EB or other RTW mods is a joy)
- No more agonising multi-hour SP battles waiting for various waves of enemy reinforcements to appear and then run away
- Less suicidal generals
- Night battles
- A general that you can identify and identify with on the battle. (Together with the better trait system, it is a big plus to fighting battles)
- Potentially better modelling of cavalry charges and their receipt: I may be wrong but I don't think the earlier engines modelling the need for cavalry to get a decent run up to a charge, nor the need for infantry to be braced to negate their charge. Getting off a good cavalry charge is quite an art in mods such as RTR:PE.
- Elephants! (Dogs! Flaming pigs!.. sorry, I am starting to be provocative.)

Now, I know you can link to a post by Puzz3D or yourself listing 101 egregious errors of the RTW battle engine. But again, I choose my words carefully - I am not saying M2TW is a better engine (ie that the net gains are positive), just that it is blatantly false to claim nothing whatsoever has been gained.

Likewise, ETW will doubtless give us lots of new features (required by the new weapons technology).

[Mouzafphaerre]

We've just said we don't listen to petition, we've said nothing about polls.
.
Thanks for this clarification. I may not be content with your support but I definitely am with your civil manner (except one person's one particular act but no need to open that can of worms) and keeping your contact with the fans up.

:bow:
.

[Lorenzo_H]

As the question asks. Please only yes or no answers, as there is already a long discussion here: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=93351

If you only want yes and no answers then why did you make the gah option?
I voted "gah".

I most probably won't buy Empires, but it has nothing to do with lack of patches for Kingdoms - as is the game is good 'nuff for me, and I'm sure EB2 will blow my mind away anyway. I wouldn't count M2TW as a total failure.

But thing is, Napoleonic battles don't do it for me. The historical period just doesn't suit my tastes in bloodshed . If people around here can't shut up about how grrrrreat it is, then maybe, just maybe. But signs point to no.

It's funny. The Napoleonic Period at the mere mentioning of the name has me salivating uncontrolably. It has been my favorite period of History for a long while, and I think it always will be.

[Hellenic_Hoplite]

Hellenic_Hoplite it's because there's nothing like it out there at the moment.

Exactly and I doubt there will be anytime soon but who knows and if that does happen maybe a little competition would be good for CA than maybe they would get their butts into gear and make some better TW games.

[Gaius Terentius Varro]

won't buy it anyways since i am not interested in naval combat but the lack of support for the product is an epic FAIL from CA

[nafod]

No.

Perhaps if the reception of the game is warm 1-3 months out.

I needn't explain why, nor will I discredit CA. As they have produced two titles I enjoy.

I do not consider MTW2 unplayable or broken. I consider it unfinished and the stance they have taken doesn't push me to anger, it merely makes me hesitant to do business with them in the future.

It could be worse; at least they aren't offering cheap console ports on the PC like another one of my ex-favorite development houses.

[RoadKill]

You guys are a bunch of bandwagoners (no offence). One guy complains about the problem in Kingdom cuz some guy got it for free, while he had to pay 60 bucks for it, then he starts a riot about something that hardly effects gamers.

Sorry to say, but I will be getting the next one. E:TW is going to be awsome and all of you know it, so sorry if you guys are gonna miss out over a stupid problem.

EDIt: (Wait you guys are complaining that Kingdoms won't have a patch for the Securom right?)

[Zenicetus]

EDIt: (Wait you guys are complaining that Kingdoms won't have a patch for the Securom right?)

Well, some of us are complaining about that. It's not a homogenous user group here. We all have our own gripes, 'ya know.

I've enjoyed RTW, RTW/BI and M2TW for what they are. I've had fun with those games, even though they're not perfect. No games are perfect. I would have bought Kingdoms if they hadn't put that stupid, invasive DRM on it.

I buy several PC games each year. I know that means living with copy protection. It doesn't have to mean living with invasive, arrogant, hassle-inducing copy protection. We all have to draw the line somewhere, and we're not all going to draw it in the same place.

[Forward Observer]

I voted yes because I have always been, and still am, a fan of the Total war game style of game play. MT2W isn't perfect, but damn if I still don't just enjoy the hell out of it. I play a couple of hours almost every night and will probably still be playing it until Empires comes out. I just can't get caught up in worrying about what are minor imperfections (minor to me anyway)

I was also still playing the original Medieval right up to time that version 2 hit the market. I bought Rome and the Barbarian expansion, but the period doesn't interest men in the least----consequently I have hardly played them. I bought them just as much to have all the games in the franchise as to support the work of the guys at Creative.

And even though I already have every game in the series, I just ordered and received the Eras set off of E-Bay----mainly as a collectible, but also for the extra content, and as a back up for all my original disks.

Yes, I am a Creative Assembly Fan boy and I make no bones about it. I truly believe that these guys are hard working developers who try to make games that they would want to play themselves, and therefore would want their customers to enjoy playing.


Of course they are also forced to be businessmen too and sometimes that aspect of the game industry seems cold and calculating to some customers. I work in manufacturing of a major consumer products line, and even though we want to bend over backward to please our customers-----at the end of the day we have to realize that we are still a business and not a charity.

I will also bet you dollars to donuts that the players like me who like the curent TW games far outnumber the naysayers. It's just that most of those people rarely come on line a post about it. It kind of boils down to the old hackneyed saying about whether the glass is half full or half empty.

Unfortunately too many of you guys seem to think someone also pissed in the glass.

When all is said and done, it's still just a game. You either enjoy it or you don't.
If you do--great, if you don't---fine. There are just too many other things in life that irritate me at my stage of life to make me also waste time worrying and complaining about a computer game.

Personally, I'm more pissed about what heath care is going to cost me when I retire in in just thirty-fecking-two days.

Cheers

[Mouzafphaerre]

.

I know that means living with copy protection. It doesn't have to mean living with invasive, arrogant, hassle-inducing copy protection.
Well said.
.

[Fisherking]

Well, some of us are complaining about that. It's not a homogenous user group here. We all have our own gripes, 'ya know.

I've enjoyed RTW, RTW/BI and M2TW for what they are. I've had fun with those games, even though they're not perfect. No games are perfect. I would have bought Kingdoms if they hadn't put that stupid, invasive DRM on it.

I buy several PC games each year. I know that means living with copy protection. It doesn't have to mean living with invasive, arrogant, hassle-inducing copy protection. We all have to draw the line somewhere, and we're not all going to draw it in the same place.

The same here!

As much as I would like to play Kingdoms and ETW later, I am also drawing the line in the sand at this point over the Securom issue.

I am not paying money to someone to put crap like that on my pc; end of story!

Less invasive copy protection is fine if it gives them peace of mind…which is about all it dose. I have enough trouble with malware as it is and I am not putting it on because of a game.

There are lots of other companies that sell good games without it and if I can learn to adjust to the problems with this suite of games then I can adjust to others…

Besides there are always the mods.

[R'as al Ghul]

I chose my language carefully - "started to pull the tactical battles back". People may disagree with how far they have started to pull back, but I have not read anyone mount a convincing case that M2TW battles are not better than RTW ones.
Yes, I overread your modifier. Fair enough. You know how easily one gets carried away. I would however argue that M2 battles are not better than M1 and they should be.


Yes, indeed, well travelled territory. But as the realism mods for RTW showed, the "too fast" issue is eminently moddable and my impression is that vanilla M2TW is closer to MTW than vanilla RTW in both walk speeds and kill rates. Even if I am wrong on that, M2TW battles are slower paced than RTW.
For MP it is essential that the vanilla game is adequate because for some reason the MP community is reluctant to play mods. Sad but true.



But you are overstating the case by stating everything is dumbed down and nothing is gained. Just off the top of my head, we have gained:
[..]
- Elephants! (Dogs! Flaming pigs!.. sorry, I am starting to be provocative.)
NP. I 've humour, too. :clown:
These points are all more or less irrelevant to MP. These points:

- Better controls (IIRC, some of the STW/MTW controls for reshaping your line or controlling the camera were painful).
- more lethal horse archers
- More varied missile weapon modelling
- Potentially better modelling of cavalry charges
I partially agree with, but there are so many other problems that they can't shine. In the last days Wolf_Kyolic has posted new probs: can't reliably choose weather without mod, too much emphasis on the General.


Now, I know you can link to a post by Puzz3D or yourself listing 101 egregious errors of the RTW battle engine. But again, I choose my words carefully - I am not saying M2TW is a better engine (ie that the net gains are positive), just that it is blatantly false to claim nothing whatsoever has been gained.

Let's not go there, I know that you know etc. :beam:
This is not the place to list all the shortcomings and these kind of discussions don't really lead anywhere.
I acknowledge that you chose your words carefully but I still disagree.
SP and MP are different animals. SP players may have gained a lot but MP players didn't. Since MTW/VI 2.01 the tactical game has declined where it should have improved, imho. (just check the effect for terrain and weather between M2 and M1)
To me it's quite obvious that it's a design decision to reach a bigger marketshare.

R'as

P.S: I don't have Kingdoms and I gave away my M2 copy a few months ago.

[Cheetah]

You guys are a bunch of bandwagoners (no offence). One guy complains about the problem in Kingdom cuz some guy got it for free, while he had to pay 60 bucks for it, then he starts a riot about something that hardly effects gamers.

Sorry, but I really dont know what are you talking about.

[fallen851]

I remember before M2TW came out, people were like "this game will be supported better than RTW you should buy it!"

Now people are pissed it isn't supported.

So I don't know how I can say this any better:

CA DOES NOT SUPPORT THEIR GAMES. IF YOU WANT HALF BAKED GAMES CONTINUE TO BUY THEIR GAMES.

The proof is in the pudding my friends. The pila bug, the siege tower bug, the blue Iberian general, the memory leak, the need for a "bug fixer" that has more fixes than you can count on your and your best friend's fingers. RTW is full of bugs.

Seems like M2TW is the same. How many times do we need to touch the hot stove before we figure it out it really hurts?

[Hellenic_Hoplite]

I voted yes because I have always been, and still am, a fan of the Total war game style of game play. MT2W isn't perfect, but damn if I still don't just enjoy the hell out of it. I play a couple of hours almost every night and will probably still be playing it until Empires comes out. I just can't get caught up in worrying about what are minor imperfections (minor to me anyway)

I was also still playing the original Medieval right up to time that version 2 hit the market. I bought Rome and the Barbarian expansion, but the period doesn't interest men in the least----consequently I have hardly played them. I bought them just as much to have all the games in the franchise as to support the work of the guys at Creative.

And even though I already have every game in the series, I just ordered and received the Eras set off of E-Bay----mainly as a collectible, but also for the extra content, and as a back up for all my original disks.

Yes, I am a Creative Assembly Fan boy and I make no bones about it. I truly believe that these guys are hard working developers who try to make games that they would want to play themselves, and therefore would want their customers to enjoy playing.


Of course they are also forced to be businessmen too and sometimes that aspect of the game industry seems cold and calculating to some customers. I work in manufacturing of a major consumer products line, and even though we want to bend over backward to please our customers-----at the end of the day we have to realize that we are still a business and not a charity.

I will also bet you dollars to donuts that the players like me who like the curent TW games far outnumber the naysayers. It's just that most of those people rarely come on line a post about it. It kind of boils down to the old hackneyed saying about whether the glass is half full or half empty.

Unfortunately too many of you guys seem to think someone also pissed in the glass.

When all is said and done, it's still just a game. You either enjoy it or you don't.
If you do--great, if you don't---fine. There are just too many other things in life that irritate me at my stage of life to make me also waste time worrying and complaining about a computer game.

Personally, I'm more pissed about what heath care is going to cost me when I retire in in just thirty-fecking-two days.

Cheers

I agree with everything you just said. Stop bitching people this is a good game.

[Mori Gabriel Syme]

I voted "gah" since I have refused to buy Kingdoms due to the SecuRom issue.

[econ21]

The pila bug, the siege tower bug, the blue Iberian general, the memory leak, the need for a "bug fixer" that has more fixes than you can count on your and your best friend's fingers. RTW is full of bugs.


Last time I looked, I had the impression that CA had fixed most of the things in the Player1's RTW bugfixer. There was new stuff introduced with BI, and there was stuff he could not fix, but they did eventually incorporate his RTW fixes. At least, that was my vague understanding when I was considering whether to re-install his fixes - apologies if I am wrong.

But the more important point is that the "full of bugs" stuff you list is almost entirely trivial. A blue Iberian general? Well, heck, I will never buy another TW product because of that!

Come on - get real. Total War provides fantastic battles linked to a great campaign. No other product does that. Some may provide fantastic battles - personally, I am unconvinced of that, but people do say so. Some do provide great campaigns - again, not convinced, but I'll play along. But TW is unique in putting the two together.

No number of trait bugs, blue generals, siege tower bugs, memory leaks etc is going to detract from that. CA has no competition.

And without RTW, there would be no EB, no RTR etc. Boycotting CA is just cutting your nose off to spite your face.

Unless you really prefer some RTS MP or Paradox game, then by all means, purchase the games you like.

[TinCow]

I voted Yes. I will buy the next game even if Kingdoms isn't patched because I have already made my financial statement to CA by not buying Kingdoms in the first place. Besides, I simply can't miss out on an entirely new TW engine.

[Vapour]

I wont be buying the next game because i have no interest in that era other than that i still love the tw games flaws and all.

[fallen851]

Last time I looked, I had the impression that CA had fixed most of the things in the Player1's RTW bugfixer. There was new stuff introduced with BI, and there was stuff he could not fix, but they did eventually incorporate his RTW fixes. At least, that was my vague understanding when I was considering whether to re-install his fixes - apologies if I am wrong.

But the more important point is that the "full of bugs" stuff you list is almost entirely trivial. A blue Iberian general? Well, heck, I will never buy another TW product because of that!

Come on - get real. Total War provides fantastic battles linked to a great campaign. No other product does that. Some may provide fantastic battles - personally, I am unconvinced of that, but people do say so. Some do provide great campaigns - again, not convinced, but I'll play along. But TW is unique in putting the two together.

No number of trait bugs, blue generals, siege tower bugs, memory leaks etc is going to detract from that. CA has no competition.

And without RTW, there would be no EB, no RTR etc. Boycotting CA is just cutting your nose off to spite your face.

Unless you really prefer some RTS MP or Paradox game, then by all means, purchase the games you like.

The Blue Iberian general was not a game killer, but come on, did anyone beta-test the game? It was just such a balantly obvious bug which is why I brought it up, and it should have been fixed. In fact it should never have been a problem. If it was the only bug, I'd say nothing, but it isn't and it is very balant, and very easy to fix. How much do they really care if they can't fix something as trivial as that? I'd like an answer to that question. I also play WC3 and I never saw footmen running around with grunt skins. I wonder why.

And as for the cutting off my nose in spite my face, RTW for me is a sunk cost, I can't return it so might as well enjoy it the best I can. It is like when you order some food at a restaruant, no need to try and kill yourself finishing it, you spent money on it, you got enjoyment out of it, trying to eat every last piece is just going to reduce the enjoyment. Sunk cost. Basic economics. So I will get the enjoyment I can from RTW, in the form of EB. But spending more for other CA games, foolish, I made one mistake, why would I repeat it?

Anyways, the bug fixer fixes alot of junk. Take a peek at it. I don't know if CA incorporated any of it, but there never should have been a need for it.

I forgot to mention the archer bug too...

We are two different people. You and CA settle for mediocrity. For you it's ok if the world isn't perfect. Wouldn't CA be more happy, if they made games people could enjoy more? Why waste your life settle for the mediocore, when things could be better? We know those bugs can be fixed, they choose not to fix them. This isn't rocket science. It is just about not caring. At what point do you draw the line in your life to demand better? I'd like an answer to that too. I sure hope people don't have to start dying for you to stand up to people who can save them, but just don't care.

[Odin]

I voted Yes. I will buy the next game even if Kingdoms isn't patched because I have already made my financial statement to CA by not buying Kingdoms in the first place. Besides, I simply can't miss out on an entirely new TW engine.

a Follow up question if I may TinCow?

Let me preface it with an observation. You have slogged through plenty of conversations of whats good and bad with the TW series, i've read a lot of them too.

That said, at what point will you make that purchase? Preorder? At release? after a patch?

Personal curiosity, which may or may not pertain to the thread but certainly qualifies as an addendum to my previous points made in thread.

Thanks in advance.

:medievalcheers:

[Odin]

We are two different people. You and CA settle for mediocrity. For you it's ok if the world isn't perfect. Wouldn't CA be more happy, if they made games people could enjoy more? Why waste your life settle for the mediocore, when things could be better? We know those bugs can be fixed, they choose not to fix them. This isn't rocket science. It is just about not caring. At what point do you draw the line in your life to demand better? I'd like an answer to that too. I sure hope people don't have to start dying for you to stand up to people who can save them, but just don't care.

While Econ dosent need me to defend him I found your post to be somewhat extreme in its analogies. While in spirit you seem to have a point, lets not loose sight of the fact that the total war games are 49.99 at release.

Certainly the level of caring you seem to be pontificating with your analogies is a bit much. I wont discredit money spent, I know 50 is a lot for some people but once we go down the road of emotion and calling out mods we eliminate the thread credability and its potential impact.

I for one find these threads throughly entertaining when in context to the issue.

:medievalcheers:

[fallen851]

That is exactly the problem, we are arguing about the wrong thing! You see the problem isn't arguing whether or not CA does a good job or not patching their games. I think the consensus here is they do not, RTW, M2TW have a lot of bugs that keep these titles from reaching their potential.

The problem is why they don't patch it. And the answer is they don't care, because we don't care, that they don't care. Thus CA has no problems, because we settle for mediocrity.

So we need to stop settling, stop making excuses for CA, and stop buying their games, encourage others to stop buying their games, and then CA will care, because we will care.

It isn't really that hard. I use the anaologies because rhetoric that is wrong on issues that affect peoples lives, is also wrong on issues much less important. Econ is giving me rhetoric about why I shouldn't care, and to overlook these "minor" issues. That is a slippery slope. Right is right and wrong is wrong, no matter who says or does it, and no matter how big or small the issue. I challenge him to answer those questions because I can lead him down the slippery slope to a point where he will contradict himself. The fact is that rhetoric is wrong, has always been wrong, and will always be wrong.

If humans could start settling these small issues with ease, we could settle the big ones with ease too. It is a darn shame, that the same stupid arguements hold people back on the issues.

[TinCow]

a Follow up question if I may TinCow?

Let me preface it with an observation. You have slogged through plenty of conversations of whats good and bad with the TW series, i've read a lot of them too.

That said, at what point will you make that purchase? Preorder? At release? after a patch?

Personal curiosity, which may or may not pertain to the thread but certainly qualifies as an addendum to my previous points made in thread.

Thanks in advance.

:medievalcheers:

I never preorder, so it will be on the day of release. TW games never seem to be sold out near me, so I am positive I can drive to my local store and pick it up without a problem.

I understand it may be buggy and I would love it to be perfect, but even buggy TW games are more fun than most of the other stuff out there IMO. I'm always desperate for new games to play and $50-$60 doesn't mean a whole lot to me, so buying it is a no-brainer. I pay $10 (not including popcorn) just to watch a movie that lasts 2 hours. Even the buggiest TW release has far more than 10 hours of entertainment in it, so it pays off IMO.

I know I'll enjoy it even if it's buggy and that is the deciding factor. At least, it will be until I no longer enjoy a game that I get out of the box. If I play ETW and don't like it, CA's next TW game might not be an insta-buy for me. That has happened for other companies that used to be insta-buyers for me, specifically Bullfrog/Lionhead, Westwood, 3DO/New World Computing, Origin, and DICE. Trust me, the moment that I no longer get $50 worth of entertainment out of a game, the probability of me buying sequels drops drastically and it will take large numbers of positive reviews to convince me otherwise.

[Odin]

I never preorder, so it will be on the day of release. TW games never seem to be sold out near me, so I am positive I can drive to my local store and pick it up without a problem.

I understand it may be buggy and I would love it to be perfect, but even buggy TW games are more fun than most of the other stuff out there IMO. I'm always desperate for new games to play and $50-$60 doesn't mean a whole lot to me, so buying it is a no-brainer. I pay $10 (not including popcorn) just to watch a movie that lasts 2 hours. Even the buggiest TW release has far more than 10 hours of entertainment in it, so it pays off IMO.

I know I'll enjoy it even if it's buggy and that is the deciding factor. At least, it will be until I no longer enjoy a game that I get out of the box. If I play ETW and don't like it, CA's next TW game might not be an insta-buy for me. That has happened for other companies that used to be insta-buyers for me, specifically Bullfrog/Lionhead, Westwood, 3DO/New World Computing, Origin, and DICE. Trust me, the moment that I no longer get $50 worth of entertainment out of a game, the probability of me buying sequels drops drastically and it will take large numbers of positive reviews to convince me otherwise.

thank you for the reply. Oddly we have a very similar view in terms of entertainment value for dollar (I still fire up STW, and combined with MTW VI the TW series has covered the cost of future purchases to be honest). I wont restate my views on how we affect the process, I was genuinely curious as to your approach.

[Privateerkev]

That is exactly the problem, we are arguing about the wrong thing! You see the problem isn't arguing whether or not CA does a good job or not patching their games. I think the consensus here is they do not, RTW, M2TW have a lot of bugs that keep these titles from reaching their potential.

The problem is why they don't patch it. And the answer is they don't care, because we don't care, that they don't care. Thus CA has no problems, because we settle for mediocrity.

So we need to stop settling, stop making excuses for CA, and stop buying their games, encourage others to stop buying their games, and then CA will care, because we will care.

It isn't really that hard. I use the anaologies because rhetoric that is wrong on issues that affect peoples lives, is also wrong on issues much less important. Econ is giving me rhetoric about why I shouldn't care, and to overlook these "minor" issues. That is a slippery slope. Right is right and wrong is wrong, no matter who says or does it, and no matter how big or small the issue. I challenge him to answer those questions because I can lead him down the slippery slope to a point where he will contradict himself. The fact is that rhetoric is wrong, has always been wrong, and will always be wrong.

If humans could start settling these small issues with ease, we could settle the big ones with ease too. It is a darn shame, that the same stupid arguements hold people back on the issues.

Ironically I share your opinion to a certain extent regarding CA and their products. However, bludgeoning people over the head with your opinion will do little to actually change anyone's minds.

Present your argument in the best, well written, reasoned, researched way that you can, and then let other's decide for themselves.

To keep this on topic, I voted GAH as I am still undecided on whether to give CA anymore of my money. While I am quite happy with their past products, I am on the fence regarding their current/future ones.

[Cleon of Sparta]

Well im am a bit disapointed about no more patches but i will buy empire.

[Brighdaasa]

I won't buy the next tw game. Period.

Unless they can convince me the tactical battles are a simulation again instead of the arcade game it is now, and the strategic ai gets a serious buff. I already skipped Kingdoms. That was the 1st TW release i didn't buy on release date and i still believe it was a good decision. I will skip ETW too, unless they manage to really amaze me.

[Slaists]

~:confused: Erm, I think that a lot of players disagree.
I know that you mostly see it from an SP perspective but RTW and everything that came after are not the tactical games that you get with MTW and STW. Everything is dumbed down, too fast or not included. We've been over the details many times.
I for one won't buy a new TW game until convinced that TW returns to real-time tactical battles at least on the basis of MTW/VI 2.01. We've had 2 full games and 3 expansions since then and the MP players or those that focus on the tactical side have gained nothing but only lost features.

HistWar: Les Grognards will probably take over some disgruntled former TW fans. CA can still have them back if they do it right this time.

R'as


well, for one, everything that came out after MTW was developed by a completely different developer team.

[HoreTore]

Nope.

But that's because my computer can hardly run M2TW, and the next one will probably get even better graphics, so my computer will probably write a suicide note if I try to install it.

[Lusted]

Nope, CA UK made STW, MTW and RTW, M2TW was made by CA Oz.

[Puzz3D]

The problem is why they don't patch it. And the answer is they don't care, because we don't care, that they don't care. Thus CA has no problems, because we settle for mediocrity.
This trend has been there for a long time now. I think it's directly caused by not allocating enough time for developing the game which, in turn, may be indirectly caused by CA realizing that most players don't require the high standard of gameplay exhibited in the early Total War games. On the other hand, I don't see how maintianing a high standard in the gameplay hurts the casual gamer which is CA's current target market. CA may have no competitors in this gendre, but they do compete with themselves. Substituting finishing moves for tactical depth in the battle engine isn't my idea of improving the game. Throwing a few crumbs at the old fans by slowing down the battles in M2TW falls short, and this is proven by the fact that it didn't bring back those old fans. They didn't even impliment that correctly since they forgot to slow down the charging speeds. Their debugging procedure doesn't even catch a reversed minus sign (shield bug) in an algorithm. They had the same kind of simple error with the phalanx charge reversal in RTW.

When the MTW/VI v2.01 patch only got done because the programmers did it on their own time despite v2.0 having a campaign killing bug, I could see bigger problems looming down the road. When RTW v1.0 came out with a huge number of bugs (the RTW v1.2 readme doesn't list all the stuff that got fixed in that 3 month patching effort), I was stunned. I contrasted that with the video interviews of CA managers smiling and patting themselves on the back when v1.0 was released. I guess they were happy to get it out the door, but I was physically sick for 2 weeks after playing it. A fairly large online community of 30+ clans that had played for years was smashed within a few weeks. Even after two more patches, the tactical game is left with the phalanx butt spike bug which is a significant problem and the AI pila bug. As a matter of fact, it was early during the RTW v1.2 beta testing that I decided to pursue playbalancing the STWmod for MTW/VI v2.01 since it became apparent that the RTW engine would never equal the MTW/VI engine. It's apparent that the M2TW engine cannot equal it either. The issue is simple for me. I'm not going to play a game that has poorer gameplay than something I already have.

[econ21]

You and CA settle for mediocrity.

Well, that's where we differ. I don't think CA games are mediocre - I think they are outstanding. There are no other strategy games I enjoy more. I remember a CA staffer here responding to the criticism of RTW by saying they thought they had created something of beauty. I can see their point of view and am more sympathetic to it than I am to the view of people who say the game made them physically sick for two weeks.

This evening, I've just played a fantastic battle in a PBM against an elite Byzantine army. No other strategy game, apart from a CA game, can give me that rush I just got from that battle.

As for demanding perfection, I don't presume to demand and I happen to believe the best is the enemy of the good. Nonetheless, I do post constructive criticism on a fairly regular basis, e.g.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=93552

My suggestions probably won't come to anything, but I judge them less pointless than my staging a personal boycott of the next CA game.

Have fun playing WC3. (Now there's a game that could make me physically sick for two weeks...) It takes all sorts to make a world.

[PseRamesses]

Voted Yes.

Empires is an entirely new game and has nothing to do with Kingdoms. What annoys me though is CA´s unability to iron out all bugs before releasing the next title.
I hate guns but will still buy Empires. I don´t like the Medieval period, especially the religion, crusade/ jihad feature but have enjoyed M2/ Kingdoms immensely.
It saddens me that CA doesn´t keep and carry over cool/ good features from one game to another like the mini-videos in STW (reactivated in M2), glorious achievements in MTW, the "watch settlement" from RTW (however it can be modded in M2), swimming units etc.

However, Total War is a unique and outstanding game IMHO. Sure many things can improve and be ironed out but most can be modded or changed to an acceptable level.

[icek]

nope, m2tw definitelly lose this awesome fell that rtw has, the felling that allowing you to have fun with the game even when you pwned ai. m2tw dont have it and kingdoms have this ctd while saving issue so.... ca sorry one customer less in your score...

[sapi]

Of course I'll buy the next TW game, that's a no-brainer :laugh4:

No, I don't play M2TW any more, and no, I didn't buy kingdoms.

But did I get my money's worth from the game?

Hell yes :yes:

CA's games have their faults. But there's still only one company that makes TW games ~;)

[pevergreen]

I can always trust sapi to say it right.

I spent $105 AU on M2TW and Kingdoms, but it was worth it. I still have a load of fun when i have the time to play them. But with the lady friend and Dungeons and Dragons Online. :shrug: Not enough hours in the weekend.

[fallen851]

Well, that's where we differ. I don't think CA games are mediocre - I think they are outstanding. There are no other strategy games I enjoy more. I remember a CA staffer here responding to the criticism of RTW by saying they thought they had created something of beauty. I can see their point of view and am more sympathetic to it than I am to the view of people who say the game made them physically sick for two weeks.

This evening, I've just played a fantastic battle in a PBM against an elite Byzantine army. No other strategy game, apart from a CA game, can give me that rush I just got from that battle.

As for demanding perfection, I don't presume to demand and I happen to believe the best is the enemy of the good. Nonetheless, I do post constructive criticism on a fairly regular basis, e.g.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=93552

My suggestions probably won't come to anything, but I judge them less pointless than my staging a personal boycott of the next CA game.

Have fun playing WC3. (Now there's a game that could make me physically sick for two weeks...) It takes all sorts to make a world.

I knew you would avoid my questions. Oh well.

So what is medicore? You can't have high without something low, can't have beauty without something ugly... so if these games are outstanding, would they not be more outstanding if they fixed the bugs? And if they become more outstanding, does the current state of the game become medicore? Imagine the possibilities. RTW had the potential to be such an incredible game, but it never lived up.

Will you answer those? No you won't, because you know it will end up in a battle of semantics, and you don't want admit you'll prefer a buggy game to less buggy game, don't want to admit that the same game with fewer bugs is superior to one with more bugs, because you really do prefer less bugs, so your only choice is to change the topic. Just like before. Don't worry, your not the only one who does this, you're in good company with the President of the United States.

The most basic arguements defeat yours. Tao Te Ching is a good book, you should read it. I don't sugarcoat, if people don't like my arguements, it has never mattered to me. People believe what they want, and no matter how good your arguements are, you'll never win an arguement with someone irrational, unless you do what I do, and that is arguing not to try to get others to know, but to defend those who already know. Right is right, and wrong is wrong. The first step to becoming right, is admitting when you are wrong. Take what you will.

[TinCow]

People believe what they want, and no matter how good your arguements are, you'll never win an arguement with someone irrational, unless you do what I do, and that is arguing not to try to get others to know, but to defend those who already know. Right is right, and wrong is wrong.

If you believe there is always a right and a wrong answer, I am surprised you win any arguments at all. Absolutes are the domain of science, and even there they are few and far between. Drop the attitude and you'll find your statements better received, even amongst the "irrational."

[Privateerkev]

I knew you would avoid my questions. Oh well.

So what is medicore? You can't have high without something low, can't have beauty without something ugly... so if these games are outstanding, would they not be more outstanding if they fixed the bugs? And if they become more outstanding, does the current state of the game become medicore? Imagine the possibilities. RTW had the potential to be such an incredible game, but it never lived up.

Will you answer those? No you won't, because you know it will end up in a battle of semantics, and you don't want admit you'll prefer a buggy game to less buggy game, don't want to admit that the same game with fewer bugs is superior to one with more bugs, because you really do prefer less bugs, so your only choice is to change the topic. Just like before. Don't worry, your not the only one who does this, you're in good company with the President of the United States.

The most basic arguements defeat yours. Tao Te Ching is a good book, you should read it. I don't sugarcoat, if people don't like my arguements, it has never mattered to me. People believe what they want, and no matter how good your arguements are, you'll never win an arguement with someone irrational, unless you do what I do, and that is arguing not to try to get others to know, but to defend those who already know. Right is right, and wrong is wrong. The first step to becoming right, is admitting when you are wrong. Take what you will.

One of the weaknesses of this argument is that your defining your terms and then demanding that all of us accept them. The problem is, some of your definitions are opinions.

We can all agree that CA games have "bugs". These are things in the software that do not work as intended.

But, not everyone will agree that CA games are "buggy". People have different ideas on how many "bugs" it takes until the software is "buggy". I think a lot of people base it on whether the "bugs" are detracting from their own enjoyment. There are many bugs in software that we will never even be aware of. So, if were having fun, we might not consider the game "buggy". You clearly do and you demand that we all see this your way.

You also claim that "buggy" = "mediocre". First off, whether a game is "mediocre" or "outstanding" are opinions. Second, even if someone might agree with you that the game is "buggy", does not necessarily mean that they believe that the game is "mediocre". If they are still enjoying the game, despite the bugs, then they might not consider the game to be "mediocre".

So, while you may see someone as avoiding your argument, what may actually be happening is that they are not accepting your definitions as their own. They might accept that you define things these ways, but they might define them differently. You seem to keep getting frustrated at the fact that others do not automatically accept your definitions and you are coming close to making ad hominum attacks.

And this won't help your argument.

[alpaca]

No, I won't buy it. Or at least, I won't buy it until some time after the release, when most of the more annoying bugs have been discovered and fixed.

Seriously, I don't say M2TW is a bad game. It has some enjoyment in it, and it's fun for a while. It just fails to meet its potential by far, and of course the MP mode is practically non-existing because of the blatant shortcomings in the unit combat system.
The reason why I won't buy Empires is that it's the only way I have a chance to fight against the industry trend of releasing half-finished products and letting the customers pay for fixing them in an expansion or with a monthly fee.

[Third spearman from the left]

For me that is it now. No more TW games come my way no matter what reviews they get. I bought MTW2 on monday and thought I'd check out the patch list, having read all I have about Kingdoms, patch 1.3 and the many other problems I just believe that sega, CA or whoever has let this sorry state of affairs happen.

I believe the only power left to customers in this situation is to stop buying the product and advise everyone else to not buy it and recommend something else.

The most powerful sales tool is word of mouth (even via the internet) use this and sooner or later sales will fall and profits will dip and Sega, CA and whoever will ask why?

Maybe then they will listen and can help make things right, if it is not already too late by then.

[anders]

sure I would, you can complain all you want about m2tw but far as i can see, theres nothing outside the TW franchise that offers anything lik it.

[Rhedd]

sure I would, you can complain all you want about m2tw but far as i can see, theres nothing outside the TW franchise that offers anything lik it.So what you're saying is they have your business due purely to an utter lack of competition?

Whee.

[Ignoramus]

Yes.

I remember the time I was looking through my local electrics store(they also sell PC games), and I spotted Medieval: Total War for $10. Having only previously played Age of Empires and Rise of Nations, I was interested in how they described the campaign map and the battles. As it was only $10, I bought it and installed it that afternoon. As soon as I loaded up the battle tutorial I was stunned! What had I been doing all this time?

The Total War engine, despite its flaws, is the only game where I can fight out my history in such a realistic manner. MTW's campaign is still the best in my opinion, and I was a bit disappointed with the next two campaigns. But that doesn't detract from the brilliance of the battles.

Well done CA!

[hrvojej]

So what you're saying is they have your business due purely to an utter lack of competition?
This seems to be prevalent argument for buying TW games now. I find that to be a sad state of the affairs. Hopefully the competition will show up eventually, however.

Also, I really don't understand what is achieved by ignoring or even negating the issue that these games need better support and more patches. Pushing things under the carpet is not really helping anyone. Even those who don't think M2TW/Kingdoms has any gamebreaking bugs, wouldn't they also be better off if everything was ironed out? In my opinion, asking for a patch is actually a good thing for everybody, while putting down those who ask for a patch has no benefits to anybody.

Now, please don't give me that "they'll have more time to work on the next release" argument - we've been down that road several times now, and IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY. The future release is not better off, in fact if anything it's hurt by not having patches for the previous release, as this kind of policy is pushing the threshold of bugs that can be tolerated in future new releases. Therefore, by letting this present game get away with having issues that are never resolved, regardless of how small those issues are, you are actually priming future games to have MORE bugs, not less.

Even if somebody isn't playing M2TW/Kingdoms any more, or can live with the issues still remaining in the game, I don't see how it is a good thing for anybody to be apologetic for the current state of affairs or even dismissive of those who demand support. Also, even if you think that there is not enough of us to make any changes, closing ranks stands a much better chance of achieving something, however feeble that chance may be in the end.

I am certain that we would all like to play polished games. I am not sure that there is a definite answer how we can achieve this, but I am pretty sure that saying "there is no need for more patches right now" is only taking all of us further away from that goal.

[TinCow]

Also, I really don't understand what is achieved by ignoring or even negating the issue that these games need better support and more patches. Pushing things under the carpet is not really helping anyone. Even those who don't think M2TW/Kingdoms has any gamebreaking bugs, wouldn't they also be better off if everything was ironed out? In my opinion, asking for a patch is actually a good thing for everybody, while putting down those who ask for a patch has no benefits to anybody.

I don't see people doing that at all. Even those of us who will buy the next TW game still want a patch for M2TW. Simply because we want the next installment regardless, does not mean we do not want more improvements on the current installment. I would personally love more patches not only for M2TW but also for RTW as well. I want patching. I want a better M2TW game, especially the AI. I want to LOSE campaigns when I fight them on the highest difficulty level. However, I also want ETW and will buy it when it comes out, even if I don't get the rest of it.

[Tafferboy]

Even if CA does patch their rubbishy game eventually, the damage has already been done as far as I am concerned and they are on my list of developers to boycott. The inclusion of Securom v7 malware (and their deafening silence on the issue with Kingdoms) is reason enough for anybody to avoid their product like the plague. On top of treating customers like pirates, it is appalling how CA can promise and advertise broken features, and then refuse to fix them. Any half-decent developer would have released a patch of their own accord for advertised features that are not working, without the need for the fans to have to beg and plea for it. Issuing some ridiculous excuse like "we did not anticipate any issues" does not justify cutting off all support after you got our money. With Empire, I don't see why we should not expect CA to continue this same strategy of releasing half-baked, buggy products and refusing to provide adequate support. I bet those who voted yes, maybe giving themselves false hope by thinking that CA will somehow change for the better and get it right it with Empire, will be left venting their frustrations again.

[alpaca]

Even if CA does patch their rubbishy game eventually, the damage has already been done as far as I am concerned and they are on my list of developers to boycott. The inclusion of Securom v7 malware (and their deafening silence on the issue with Kingdoms) is reason enough for anybody to avoid their product like the plague. On top of treating customers like pirates, it is appalling how CA can promise and advertise broken features, and then refuse to fix them. Any half-decent developer would have released a patch of their own accord for advertised features that are not working, without the need for the fans to have to beg and plea for it. Issuing some ridiculous excuse like "we did not anticipate any issues" does not justify cutting off all support after you got our money. With Empire, I don't see why we should not expect CA to continue this same strategy of releasing half-baked, buggy products and refusing to provide adequate support. I bet those who voted yes, maybe giving themselves false hope by thinking that CA will somehow change for the better and get it right it with Empire, will be left venting their frustrations again.
I guess that those who voted yes think that they got their money's worth out of the game and that it's still a good game. That's true in my opinion; I voted no because of the consideration that I don't want to support a business model that relies on customers to fix the product themselves rather than supplying them with a properly functioning piece to begin with.
When all is said and done there are other things I can spend my free time on.

[crpcarrot]

TW is only an awesome/great/outstanding game because there is no substitute.

if there was a game with similar gameplay and game me good tacital battles i would denfinitely play it in preference to M2TW. with all its bugs i enjoyed MTW right through till the release of M2TW wihtout any mods cos most of the battle machanics were good, with M2 i have only really enjoyed after getting mods on. i spend a lot of time researching games trying to figure out if they are an alternative, unfortunately no ones come up with one yet.

if CA/SEGA was competing for our money in this genre they would efinitely pay more attention to detail.

[Puzz3D]

I guess that those who voted yes think that they got their money's worth out of the game and that it's still a good game.
I would say time's worth because that would include not only the time used to earn the money to buy the game, but also the time used to play the game. The org can help potential customers who visit this site make a more informed purchase decision by identifying deficiencies in the game. You aren't likely to get that kind of information from CA employees.

I doubt that org patrons can change the direction in which CA is moving because the game is primarily being marketed to a phantom majority of people who never visit fan sites. What I don't like to see is the org used as a PR tool to hype the latest game while glossing over the problems; because that prevents the people who do come here from making an informed purchase decision. The people who want to bathe in hype can go to the official site for that.

[Whacker]

Meh, I'm going to dissent here from an opinion that others have expressed.

It's been stated that (my paraphrasing) "we will continue to keep buying the TW games irregardless because the alternative is the series is canned".

I say let it go then. I'm not willing to buy games or support a series that started out original and great, yet even for some of the advances and improvements, there are countless things that pile up and while insignificant to annoying to game breaking, they add up. I'd rather let something go and have mostly good memories about it, going back to replay it every few years or so maybe, than support something that I don't really enjoy and a business model I don't agree with, the subpar patching process definitely at the top of that list.

The TW games really do stand alone, there really isn't anything exactly like them. M2TW could have been one of my favorites of all time, it's just that CA chose to take it in a direction that doesn't interest me, and in a manner that didn't give me my value's worth at all. This game wasn't worth the $50 I paid for it at all, in the current shape that it's in, I'd pay $20 for it right now.

/shrug

[Jason X]

For me that is it now. No more TW games come my way no matter what reviews they get. I bought MTW2 on monday and thought I'd check out the patch list, having read all I have about Kingdoms, patch 1.3 and the many other problems I just believe that sega, CA or whoever has let this sorry state of affairs happen.

Are you saying that in three days you've played the game enough to be frustrated by the bugs? I suppose that's still better than the people who criticise a game without having played it at all.

I don't get the time to play games very much (but I've been with the series since Shogun), I'm genuinely curious how people can get so irate about something they haven't played.

Howver, none of this excuses CA/SEGA from not patching a product that doesn't even implement advertised features.

[Shahed]

The big difference between now and STW is that back then CA had an eye for perfection. They had to since it was the first TW title, it had to work and it had to stand out.

They lost it at MTW:VI, and they are not getting it back, or so it seems. Success makes you fat & lazy. Just have a look at Kingdoms, such a FANTASTIC title, yet once again many glaring imperfections. Every campaign can easily get boring around turn 60. Atmosphere ? Better but falls short... yet again.

The only perfect game was STW, after that every title has been riddled with issues, with no intent to resolve them.

This is unlikely to change, based on the fact that it has NOT changed since MTW, so make your choice.

You know what you will pay for and you know exactly what you will get for your money.

[Puzz3D]

I'm genuinely curious how people can get so irate about something they haven't played.
Two words: tactical extravaganza, and Bob Smith's IGN interview for M2TW. Overhype creates a backlash, and I consider overhype to be unethical.
I wonder if the much ballyhooed naval battles of ETW are going to be tactically superior to those of Privateer's Bounty? Will CA get the details right so that the navel battles play properly? If they don't, will they fix it so that they do? Does the phantom majority care? If not, what is the incentive to fix it?

[alpaca]

Two words: tactical extravaganza, and Bob Smith's IGN interview for M2TW. Overhype creates a backlash, and I consider overhype to be unethical.
I wonder if the much ballyhooed naval battles of ETW are going to be tactically superior to those of Privateer's Bounty? Will CA get the details right so that the navel battles play properly? If they don't, will they fix it so that they do? Does the phantom majority care? If not, what is the incentive to fix it?
Hey Puzz you have 5000 posts :laugh4:

Yeah that's pretty much the question, isn't it? Judging from their current apparent company policy, SEGA and CA will neither spend enough time to really get the balancing right, nor will they fix it afterwards, so I'm not holding my breath here.

[Empress_Zoe]

No.

[Old Geezer]

Patch would be nice but I am an hopeless TW junkie. Kingdoms is so fun that I am considering retiring early so I can play 18 hours a day. Come to think of it, by the time I play every faction in Kingdoms just once (and Scotland at least twice) I shall no longer be merely a sexagenarian but most likely, LORD willing, will be an octagenarian. (Hint: octagenarian is not a race of being in the movie Galaxy Quest.)

[edyzmedieval]

Yes and no.

Yes because in my heart I have always been a Total War fan. I own every game in it's original package and I have M2TW Collectors plus Total War Eras. TW games are wonderful, but to a certain extent.

This is where the no kicks in. Some bugs in Kingdoms are annoying (the biggest ones are in Teutonic Campaign; no Kalmar Union, Hanseatic League - only Denmark gets it; NORWAY CANNOT RECRUIT ANYTHING...), and they will NOT fix this. This means that if I want to continue playing Kingdoms, I have to do it like that. No way I will do that.

Second, ETW is not in my time period. I will wait for some time (1-2-3 months), let some patches come out and see what's the trend.

[pike master]

to answer the question.

absolutely not. there are still some lose ends that need to be tied up.

[marrow]

Not a chance.
Someone noted earlier that SEGA, as any business, are not a charity - fine.
In a civilised world this means that they receive my money for a product I have decided to buy. If I buy a faulty car, I return it. If I happen to purchase a faulty mp3 player, or a phone, or trainers - I can return them all, because people in charge of those businesses rely on me to buy their products and want to keep me coming back. It seems as plain and obvious as ant & dec.

Why is it then, that I seem to get just as plain & obvious a hint from SEGA that they don't care about me paying for any more of their games?
It's not about whether I can play and enjoy the game with bugs, of course you can do that. It's a matter of principle though. I think it's ridiculous that no further patches are planned despite glaring bugs, and despite the fact that so many people who really love the series are begging for bugfixes.

SEGA are displaying disgusting arrogance and I hope they go bust. It's not about the product itself anymore, it's about their foolish attitude.
Forget it then - no more of my cash is coming your way.

[Jambo]

I think, finally, I will do something sensible with the next TW title, and that is to wait until when the main patch is released which fixes all the major bugs and gameplay issues that will inevitably become apparent with Empire.

TW games are just not good enough on release.

[Zajuts149]

Voted no here. Not to happy about the 'balancing' in kingdoms, and there are still to many issues with the game. I love playing it, but the focus on eye-candy over gameplay is discouraging.

[LadyAnn]

Meh, I'm going to dissent here from an opinion that others have expressed.

It's been stated that (my paraphrasing) "we will continue to keep buying the TW games irregardless because the alternative is the series is canned".

I say let it go then. I'm not willing to buy games or support a series that started out original and great, yet even for some of the advances and improvements, there are countless things that pile up and while insignificant to annoying to game breaking, they add up. I'd rather let something go and have mostly good memories about it, going back to replay it every few years or so maybe, than support something that I don't really enjoy and a business model I don't agree with, the subpar patching process definitely at the top of that list.

The TW games really do stand alone, there really isn't anything exactly like them. M2TW could have been one of my favorites of all time, it's just that CA chose to take it in a direction that doesn't interest me, and in a manner that didn't give me my value's worth at all. This game wasn't worth the $50 I paid for it at all, in the current shape that it's in, I'd pay $20 for it right now.

/shrug

Hear! Hear!
1. competition non-existent;
2. the genre itself must compete against other genre
3. I had too much fun with the S:TW and M:TW, I keep funding CA with the hope it eventually will come out with something great.

So, i'll stop buying the game as soon as a competitor shows up :) Until then, fond memories of TW remain.

Annie

[Koval]

I've just recently bought and been playing BI 1.6, and despite a lack of eye candy and little features that are present in M2TW, I must say its been fun, especially the battles.

Trying out M2TW again today I am simply astounded by how much of a downgrade the battle system has seen. How is this possible in a game that fundamentally uses the same engine? Sure BI has some issues, but battles felt more like battles rather than a whole lot of soldiers spread out in a huge mass, units indistinguishable from one another, charging only the unfortunate front rank at the enemy, and lacking any sort of cohesion. And frankly, the different factions seemed to be more varied with more interesting units.

I know i've deviated from the topic at hand here, but anyway... BI > M2TW, And I was never a big fan of RTW. A wise move, IMO, would be to return the battles back to how they were in BI. I don't care if a soldier can swing a sword 10 different ways instead of 2, the battles still look like a mess.
At first I had no doubt that i'd buy ETW, but I guess if they dont bother fixing M2TW i think i'll pass..

I know this has probably all been said hundreds of times before.. but.. meh...

[katar]

NO MORE.... i was a dedicated player of the TW series till Rome TW and it`s been down hill all the way from there, the lame Securom junk is just the icing on the cake for me. :furious3:

[Ferret]

I'd like to see how CA feel about loosing nearly 75% of their sales from just the .org. They really need to pull their socks up.

[redriver]

But as the realism mods for RTW showed, the "too fast" issue is eminently moddable and my impression is that vanilla M2TW is closer to MTW than vanilla RTW in both walk speeds and kill rates.

how's RTW speed/kill rates can even be compared to that of mtw as 2 are totally different eras. I never understood ppl complainin' while comparin' the 2 games in that regard. let's take a look at what type of units one can find in abandance in RTW: half nakid barbarians with a small shield and a short spear... how fast do ya think can they move on the battlefield or how lon' do ya think they will last against a tougher opponent?
I played m2tw gold demo and while the movent speed was overall slower it was amazin' to see how fully armored crossbowen with a huge shield attached to their backs can outrun aztec cheif bodyguards over rough terrain and woods.

maybe I'm missin' somethin' here but my vote was a simple Gah! I never bought m2tw because it's only ston' point is graphics(naturally) and it's not better than the orininal mtw in most other aspects overall...:smash:
nm the fact one have to buy a really decent rig to even enjoy the m2tw eye candy otherwise RTW isn't that much behind...

[Zim]

This is where the no kicks in. Some bugs in Kingdoms are annoying (the biggest ones are in Teutonic Campaign; no Kalmar Union, Hanseatic League - only Denmark gets it; NORWAY CANNOT RECRUIT ANYTHING...), and they will NOT fix this. This means that if I want to continue playing Kingdoms, I have to do it like that. No way I will do that.

Second, ETW is not in my time period. I will wait for some time (1-2-3 months), let some patches come out and see what's the trend.

Is the Hanseatic League bugged for some factions? I managed to get it as Lithuania.

[gardibolt]

It's not the patch (or lack thereof) that's stopping me. It's Securom and other malware. So I answered "Gah."

[Cheetah]

Huge City: The ORG

Settlement details:
population: 22,182
loyalty: 23,68%
population grotwh: +0.5

Warning!
Peasants of this settlement are revolting.

Citizens killed: 0
Soldiers killed: 0

Builing options:

Kingdoms patch: 30% increase in loyalty due to happines
Securom removing patch: 30% increase in loyalty due to law

:clown:

[Copperknickers]

Answer to title? Yes. I dont need a patch, i wouldnt have noticed the bugs if it was not fo the online community so it does not influence my decision in buying Empire(or, if you beleive the rumours, the secret total war that is coming out before empire) which is a resounding and definite yes.:yes:

[locked_thread]

edit

[phonicsmonkey]

Kingdoms patch: 30% increase in loyalty due to happines
Securom removing patch: 30% increase in loyalty due to law

LOL

[LestaT]

I will (probably) not buy Empires not because of whether there's patch or not for Kingdoms, but because the time period doesn't interest me.

I might buy if, provided I have a better pc than I currently have and there'sno other games that interesst me, but for now I guess I'll just stick to play RTW and M2TW (and all the mods) for a long long time. :laugh4:

[Goaswerfraiejen]

I was pleased to see the patch announcement today, but I'll still not be buying either Kingdoms or Empire--unless they wind up in the $5 bargain bin. I still very much enjoy R:TW, but I've been so disappointed with the M2TW experience overall that I'm really wary of spending any kind of money on future TW products until it's proven to my satisfaction that we won't have to deal with this crap any more. M2TW had some great stuff going on, but it was also all half-assed--hell, I couldn't even command any battles personally for the first week I had it because the shield bug screwed with them all, making battles take 6+ hours to complete. Furthermore, I expected some serious differences from R:TW beyond the time period, and the game just didn't feel different enough. Part of that was probably simply due to the similar engine, but I digress--the point is that I'll not be buying any TW games on faith any more. It simply can't be justified--you spend forty bucks on a game that your new computer can't run properly on the lowest settings, and it's so buggy that even I notice it. =/


So there it stands. I'm overjoyed to see the patch announcement, but I urge you all to proceed with caution when considering your next TW purchase. Don't get fooled by the same tricks again (Naval battles! Graphics! Yaaaaayy...harrumph.), because then we're back to square one and the complaints will never end. At this point, we're just as much to fault as the developers.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
:dancinglock: per Kingdoms Update?
.