CA and BI Decision Making

The purpose of this thread is to alleviate some of the clutter and consolidate some discussion on BI, CA, business decision making, etc. I hope that CA will grace us with a post or two here should they have the time.

If you will so join me in this adventure...

In recent threads (for example- https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=48503), there has been much talk on who will buy, who will wait, etc, etc.


This whole site is dedicated to the TW series, as are numerous other sites, and that alone stands as a testament to what CA has accomplished. I think we all agree that the TW concept is revolutionary and extraordinarily unique.

So, here is the object of my constipation, err...consternation:

As a fan of shogun, you purchased MI for love of the original.

When MTW came out, did you wait for word from the world or dive right in, trusting in the history of the series?

Same with RTW, what fan of MTW and STW not drool at least a little?

AND THE POINT OF THIS:

Overall, CA has done a tremendous job of producing a series of extraordinary titles. Sure, they have their quirks and hiccups. But overall, CA has accomplished an incredible feat with a successful series of astonishing games. And for what errors there might be, there is something to make up for it for most everyone: Unhappy with historical accuracy or the single player campaign? Mod the game. Unhappy with AI battles? Online multiplayer. Etc, Etc, Etc.

I think that we can give a little credit and faith to CA that they will produce a solid expansion. And following that, should BI be a decent compliment to RTW, I believe that we can count on CA to produce another excellent TW game after that. There is still plenty of material in history to work with and the opportunities are growing with the march of technology.

The MAIN CONCERN that ALL OF SHOULD HAVE in the community is ONE thing:

DOES THE CORPORATE CULTURE OF CREATIVE ASSEMBLY MATCH THE CORPORATE CULTURE OF SEGA?

This is the leading cause of failure in mergers and acquisitions, period. I will be happy to support this with documentation if anyone asks. So, CA: please give an indication on your progress in this area, either officially or incognito.

CA will continue to make great games if the two Corp Cults match. We are all screwed if they don't play nice.


Alot of stuff herre, I know. But what say you?

DA

ALEX, a rep from SEGA at the .COM forum has already said pretty much a hands-off policy when it comes to the TW Games. Meaning, they leave it up to CA do they what they do.

Unfortunately, the sticky is now gone over there. ~:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quietus

ALEX, a rep from SEGA at the .COM forum has already said pretty much a hands-off policy when it comes to the TW Games. Meaning, they leave it up to CA do they what they do.

Unfortunately, the sticky is now gone over there. ~:)

---

Hmmm. Interesting. But is hands off enough? I wonder if CA generates enough internal capital to finance its own projects? Otherwise, the reliance on parent company financing may limit access to capital needs.

For example, when CA produces and markets a project, does the capital gained from sales go back into CA? And does CA have the capital for them selves? Otherwise, a reliance on financing from Sega will mean that a large portion of recievables go back to Sega, rather then back into CA.

A hands off policy is good news from a project development standpoint. I would love to know the financing relationship, as this can hinder or aid the ambitions of future projects. If CA is beholden to Sega, is CA able to justify the Net Present Value (Net Present Value being the cash value of projected future cash inflows from an investment in today's dollars, thus accounting for the time value of money) of capital investments in its products with ease or difficulty? I would imagine that the annuities generated from the TW series thus far would be justification for pro forma cash flow estimations on future TW projects.

In other words: The financing relationship affects the operations decision making which subsequently affects project development. So Sega could have a "no project micromanagment" policy with TW, but the financing arrangements would indirectly and seriously impact project decision making.

And this is where corporate culture comes into play. CA may be willing to take risks with capital that Sega may not be. CA will have to justify increases in capital expeditures to Sega. If the risk is perceived to be too great, Sega will not allow the extra financing.

An example of this is in the patches following a game release. Patches use resources in capital and assets that could otherwise be used on other projects. If the Net Present Value of the patch is less than the Net Present Value of a competing project, than the patch will not be undertaken.

Damn, I would love to hear a CA or Sega Rep comment on this. But this is probably top secret internal executive intelligence that stays away from the public.


Yarrgh.

Divinus Arma

Very well said DA.

I will not cover the Sega+CA part, but just state my opinion for RTW with a few words.

Although it is better in some aspects than STW and MTW, it made me feel it was poorly made (overall estimation). In MTW we had 3 periods and that wasn't just a theoretical part of the game, as the available units were divided in these periods while there were significant changes in the lands each realm had, thus altering your strategy in every era.

In STW, not only we had the throne room with the ambassadors/portugese/dutch etc. but also the cool little videos with the assasins, geishas and others. Of course, lets not forget that the game was a challenge to the end, since if you played in the east, by the time you had reached the west (Oda) you found there was someone who had prevailed against the others at that part, so you still had to fight challenging battles.

However, RTW has some overpowered factions, like the 3 romans+egyptians, some rather underpowered like the Numidians(and the spanish to a lesser extent). I never understood why we had to unlock half of the factions in the gaem, manually ~:confused: .

There are a lot other stuff, but all these have been pointed out in other threads. I'll close this, by saying that after STW, ppl have been waiting for MTW and when it came out it made a far bigger impression than RTW. There were also far less complaints. Wehn VI was about to come out, there were far less ppl saying they would wait to see what others think of it, to decide if it would be worth buying. And when RTW was about to hit the stores, i can't remember any1 (maybe i have a weak memory? ~D ) who said i'll wait to see what it'll be like.

However, now that we've seen RTW, there are a lot of ppl, at least saying they'll wait for others opinions for BI, before they buy it. I think this alone is a mark that CA (and the TW series) start to loose the faith of their fans. Sth like what happened to the CM series: when cm4 came out, most of the community were dissapointed, now cm5 and fm5 are almost identical, while the TCM series is gaining fans, because they listened to what the ppl had been asking. The latter may not be exactly on a par with cm/fm, but a couple of years given, i suppose it will catch up to them and surpass them.

I am pretty certain ppl will buy BI, but if it turns to be sth like RTW, we may begin to see a change in their attitude, especially if someother tittle like TW comes out.

I'd love to see Shogun : Total War Part 2 !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amazon77

There are a lot other stuff, but all these have been pointed out in other threads. I'll close this, by saying that after STW, ppl have been waiting for MTW and when it came out it made a far bigger impression than RTW. There were also far less complaints. Wehn VI was about to come out, there were far less ppl saying they would wait to see what others think of it, to decide if it would be worth buying. And when RTW was about to hit the stores, i can't remember any1 (maybe i have a weak memory? ~D ) who said i'll wait to see what it'll be like.

---

So in general, you are of the opinion that the series is degenerating? And that RTW is the beginning of the decline?

Your point may be valid from your perspective, but I have to agree on only some perspectives. I was more addicted to MTW than I was to RTW. I got burnt out on RTW far faster, but this may be in part due the fact I had been playing MTW for so long prior. I think the replayability of RTW is solid, and we must give credit to CA for making so much of RTW softcoded for modding.

DA

actually, the game is full of hard coded limits that are making the mod teams work around them...like using the same unitmodel for 3-4 units...

M**el is censored?!

I consider RTW the best of the series, but didn't make the progress from MTW that mtw made from shogun.

yes, perhaps it starts to degenerate, tho i really hope i'm wrong on this one ~:) :embarassed:

Quote "So in general, you are of the opinion that the series is degenerating? And that RTW is the beginning of the decline? "End Quote

I really am starting to believe that RTW is merely the beginning of a new chapter.If we had never heard of STW and MTW or indeed they had never existed we would be enthralled by RTW.STW was absolutely amazing in that it was a ground-breaking new style of game.In MTW they already knew the engine and knew what they could and could not do with it so we had another good gaming experience.NOW along comes RTW.........a new engine and new design.They aren't exactly sure of everything they can or can't do with this new system yet but they gotta get it out there before someone else does.I firmly believe that the series will go from strenght to strenght but i also am quite frustrated like everyone else with the bugs and crappy AI.
I was reading an article recently by the Head-Honcho behind the Half-Life 2 game.He stated that it was the continueing story of game design that as soon as you knew how to use the tools at your disposal(i.e Half-Life 1) you had to move on and try new things with tools you didn't fully know how to use yet, risking bugs you didn't know were in the game until after release.The reasons for this are always your competitors gaining ground on you(Imperial Glory challenging STW and MTW maybe).
Anyway i've rambled on enough. :book:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spartiate

you had to move on and try new things with tools you didn't fully know how to use yet, risking bugs you didn't know were in the game until after release.The reasons for this are always your competitors gaining ground on you

---

True. But, fortunately we now have a terrific new sandbox from which to operate.


Everyone agrees that the visual elements of the game are solid. Fantastic even. Where most disagree is on gameplay. I think no one here would say, "gee, I want MTW graphics with RTW gameplay".

My point, in reply to your comment, is this: CA has a terrific foundation from which to expand from. They have the engine. They have the 'pretty things'. Now, they can work on stunning gameplay and make only minor improvement to visuals and the engine.

I suspect that BI will not reveal this, just as MI did not show the improvements that MTW showed and just as VI did not show the improvements that RTW showed. We will see the big leap, using the same engine, in the next TW title.

And my expectations, based on my limited understanding of the financial motivators behind their project development (as was clearly outlined in the opening postings to this thread) is this:

The TW title after BI will be a total blockbuster. It will sweep awards and everyone here will rant and rave and cry "oh thank you lord for thine sweet merciful justice". Why? I suspect that it was slated before RTW. RTW is the big test for the next TW game.

What does RTW give us over MTW and STW? Among many other things, these are some of the most drastic:

(1) Individually impressively detailed troops with huge improvements in individual interactions and character detail. (remeber stw and mtw animation? blah.)

(2) Excellent display of lighting effects, what with shadows (and soon to be night battles, etc.) and all.

(3) Drastic improvement in application of illusory physics and gravity: arrows, catapults, smoke trails, falling guys, breaking walls, etc. Use of height and mutiple levels where combat may take place (up on the wall, seige towers, etc).

(4) An operational based campaign map. geographical changes actual matter on the campaing map. Plan army and fleet movements in much greater detail, with far more effect.


So what does these mean for the future?

I suspect that we will see minor improvements in character detail on the battle map. The engine will remain unchanged because it is leaps and bounds above most everything available (especially the "real time" stragety types).

Visual effects and physics will improve substantially to get the "oooooh ahhhhh" effect. Houses will no longer blow up into giant mounds of dust, for example.

We will see battles in more complex environments, with greater use of cover. Fighting in the woods in RTW is a bitch, but cool as can be. Imagine the use of steps, rooftops, etc. Imagine having SHIP BASED COMBAT WITH MARINES FIGHTING OTHER MARINES ON TWO LOCKED UP SHIPS AS CANNONS FIRE INTO EACH OTHER!!! COOL!


The next game will be way better becasue the "heavy lifting" has already been done. The engine is ready. Now we move onto the next phase.

My suspicion will be Imperial Europe with colonisation of the new world, ending in the revolutionary war or american civil war. The campaign map will be the entire world.

Why?
First: Battles will look amazing when the physics are done right. Cannons, individual bullets whizzing through the ranks, dragoon charges, massed infantry attacking giant Napoleon style fortified positions.
Second: It is an epic period of global conflict. Colonisation, pirates, empire building, YAARRRGGHH! The world is a giant sandbox with HUGE areas of new land to conquer. The possibilities are endless and the replayability is unquestionabale.
Third: Well that is about it for now. I am too excited to type any more.


The groundwork has been laid. It will be Imperialism: Total War. or something like that. I can smelll it. I can't wait. I want it already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divinus Arma

Damn, I would love to hear a CA or Sega Rep comment on this. But this is probably top secret internal executive intelligence that stays away from the public.


Yarrgh.

Divinus Arma

---

I've invited ALEXSEGA (I think was the screenname), in that thread, to register here and maybe answer some TW fan questions. So I guess not. ~:)

Thanks Q. I would love to get some answers. Of course, I am sure everyone does.

I really expected this thread to stimulate a little more business debate...

What, no MBAs in our ranks?

Sorry, no economics degree here, but i am an environmental engineer with a M.Sc. and currently doing a Ph.D, so if you have any question on environmental issues... ~:)

It's obvious CA went hard for the eye candy and not for AI or gameplay on RTW.

This is a big trend in gaming now - see David Wong at Pointless Waste of Time for an amusing essay about this problem.

They also left so many bugs and problems in the shipped game, that you can either think CA's owner was too busy selling to Sega or they have project management issues. Let's face it, the Vice & Virtue system is innovative and interesting...if only they had a college intern scan it for logical errors instead of relying on the players themselves. The same could be said for their QA of patches, etc. - i.e. Scarface generals.

The expansion won't fix the main issue of bad AI - that will be addressed in the next TW game - unless we continue with eye candy - "look at the sweat rolling down each individual soldiers face!" But I think the game companies will hit a wall with that and it will come back to AI and playability.

I am very worried abut the future of TW games.
My understanding is that the IP still belongs to Activision, but CA is sold off to Sega.
I agree with the those who thinks that RTW is or could be a beginning of a new chapter for TW games.
For Rome I think CA did great, considering they had to concentrate a lot of effort in the development of the engine, and still create a highly complex gameplay. I just hope CA can realise that look isnt everything. But in today's gaming market, keeping up with the technology is almost like a key to success, look at Doom3. And sadly a developer would never make a game aiming at the small hardcore fan market. I guess getting a good balance between technology and gameplay is something developers strive for. In my mind a strategy game should concentrate on gameplay more.
~:cheers:

Another thing about RTW.

In the TW series, there were 2 AI. One for the map, one for the battles.

We all know the AI is a bit slow to make decisions, so that's why we beat, cos no human can possibly calculate as fast as a pc can, let alone the intricasies of the game that the ai knows and we don't (it runs them).

Now, in STW and MTW you had a strategic map with regions. So when the ai did eventually attack you, u had to fight the battle at that exact turn. Also, when u send an army to attack a region, there was no calling back from the battle (u could withdraw from battle, but that's not what i'm talking about).

However, in RTW the world map is more linear. I mean, when i send an army from Julii aretium to attack mediolanum, i may run into a gaulish invading force thus fighting them before they have a chance to invade me. Also, when the ai sends an invading army, you can spot them on several occasions and fight them back. Another thing is that even if they manage to siege your town, they have to actually take it (which requires a turn for building siege equipment), thus you have another chance to bring an army and save the city, whereas in MTW (& STW) when they invaded your region, you would loose it, and with it some buildings which cost money and time.

This difference brought by the change of the strategic map means that a human player can go on the offencive much faster in RTW than in MTW or STW, thus crippling the pc factions much faster and easier. Oh and of course, in the previous games, an army in a region no matter how big it was could attack in 1 turn all surrounding regions, thus u had to not only built an invading army, but also defensive armies. For example, when playing as teh Byz in first era, your georgia army couldn't leave the region to help u against the Turks, or the Khazar rebel army would attack and take georgia. Now, this isn't possible for these 2 regions (georgia= atropatene or colchis and khazar= tribus alanni). The result of this is that the more determined human player has an advantage over the AI, in that he does use his troops, while the AI doesn't.