-
How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Over the last many months since the Demo was released CA has changed their stance public relations significantly. Previous to the demo being released I recall proclaiming CA as a great set of developers because they were so active and open about their projects and things which were being worked on and so forth. Of course no one ever is asking for secrets which other game developers may profit from, simply secondary information which isn't included in press-releases. You know, like the reason why you have a core gaming community so you can inform them of tidbits which will garner their respect and procure their support for your products.
Is it too expensive to cultivate relationships with the public? Is a protectionist method of dealing with your fans the most profitable way to do business? Is this just a money thing? Are their egos bruised from the flood of negative fan reviews and the subsequent depopulation of active core community members?
I'm confused as to the negative impacts of being proactive in your own fan community. If this is something done to allow them to fix the problems all that much faster then I wish them all the best; but does it really take that much time to include your fans in some of your dealings? Yes, I've read Shogun's posts - they're the epitome of a company coming out, saying something and shutting the door until the next need to converse with the public rears its ugly head. Don't be afraid, just include us. ~:cheers:
Can someone let me know a logical explaination for this?
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
There isn't a logical explanation for everything. Or perhaps it as simple as a senior programmer being corrected by a fan who isn't on the payroll... who are the professionals?! :wink:
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Well I don't mean logical as in it'll satisfy me - logical as in "this is what happened - this is why it happened and this is how it's going to happen" instead of "this is what happened.... .... .draw your own conclusions. ... .. ??@)$*Y@(&T@("
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
That is an interesting way of defining logic; it satisfies me so it's logical! :wink:
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colovion
Over the last many months since the Demo was released CA has changed their stance public relations significantly. Previous to the demo being released I recall proclaiming CA as a great set of developers because they were so active and open about their projects and things which were being worked on and so forth. Of course no one ever is asking for secrets which other game developers may profit from, simply secondary information which isn't included in press-releases. You know, like the reason why you have a core gaming community so you can inform them of tidbits which will garner their respect and procure their support for your products.
First; well over 95% of CA´s "market" in non-hard-core-gamers who are sitting at home droolin´over all the "80 new cool unit". We are outnumbered, outclassed and shut out. Somewhere along the line they took a policy-decision to make money first (sell a lot of copies) and secondly concentrate on maintaining their position as the no.1 war game which really doesn´t include an all to good war-engine, right?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colovion
Is it too expensive to cultivate relationships with the public? Is a protectionist method of dealing with your fans the most profitable way to do business? Is this just a money thing? Are their egos bruised from the flood of negative fan reviews and the subsequent depopulation of active core community members?.
Yes, since we are a minority and everytime they have given us something we rant and complain. Everytime a new game is released we are not happy and can find zillions of flaws - extisant and non-existant. So why share, why give info or tidbits to an ungrateful community, would you? Try and see things out of their perspective. I´m not saying you´re wrong, I actually agree with you.
From 1985-1999 I was a CEO and from 1994-1999 I owned one of Swedens most successive media-companies. From that perspective CA´s policy makes perfect sense, trust me!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colovion
I'm confused as to the negative impacts of being proactive in your own fan community. If this is something done to allow them to fix the problems all that much faster then I wish them all the best; but does it really take that much time to include your fans in some of your dealings? Yes, I've read Shogun's posts - they're the epitome of a company coming out, saying something and shutting the door until the next need to converse with the public rears its ugly head. Don't be afraid, just include us. ~:cheers:
Can someone let me know a logical explaination for this?
Exactly my feeling too. Now, I´ve always maintained a high standard of relations with my customers, fans, friends etc weather they are new, old, highly profitable or even marginally profitable and that´s the way things should be done IMHO. But who am I to tell CA their business policy is wrong? From their perspective it´s right!
I do feel, however, that they should release an all moddable game to us hard-core TW-fans and I´ll even be willing to pay a lot for that, 500$?, maybee a 1000, if I´m getting an all open and completely moddable edition. Now, I know I´m a bit extrem. I´ve been playing wargames since 1977 (with tin-soldiers) through the roleplaying 80´s. I totally hacked CIV I and CIV II making very good mods out of it etc etc.
I understand your frustration. Here´s a really good war game, maybee the best (STW) and then its getting worse and worse. I too wonder how evolution can go backwards. ~:cheers:
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Quote:
From 1985-1999 I was a CEO and from 1994-1999 I owned one of Swedens most successive media-companies.
Are you a millionaire? ~:)
Quote:
Are their egos bruised from the flood of negative fan reviews and the subsequent depopulation of active core community members?
I think that is probably what it is. We have moaned too much and driven them away. :embarassed:
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
I think its unfortunate whats happened here. There are at least as many people who love this game as hate it, unfortunately its allways the naysayers who are alot more vocal.
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
The obvious evidence of who CA are trying to sell games to and that its money first quality second is the fact they released RTW with so many bugs, glitches, idiocies and general mistakes that would make any hardcore fan whince but non hardcore fans would be so fascinated by all the purdy colours that theyd say it was the best game ever.
The fact we were forced to wait so long for a decent patch shows they just shoved RTW out at the first possible opportunity, its disgusting that games are allowed to be released when so blatently inadequate, its not only disgusting in general its also an insult to the fans who buy the games expecting it to be worth their money but find they have to wait months for a patch just to make the game tolerable. Even then the elementary mistakes are left unchecked.
CA got my loyalty with MTW which is miles ahead of RTW in longevity and fun, they have totally lost my loyalty by releasing RTW in such a state that even I somebody who knows nothing about game development etc can spot the glaring errors.
I really hope somebody got fired for the total mess that is RTW.
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
One thing is for sure the bean counters killed total war.
At least the true spirit of creating games with passion has not died.
at the moment this game interests me more than BI or any future TW games.
http://www.mindlinkstudio.com/engine.htm
The King is dead.
Long live the King.
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Aetius_
The obvious evidence of who CA are trying to sell games to and that its money first quality second is the fact they released RTW with so many bugs, glitches, idiocies and general mistakes that would make any hardcore fan whince but non hardcore fans would be so fascinated by all the purdy colours that theyd say it was the best game ever.
The fact we were forced to wait so long for a decent patch shows they just shoved RTW out at the first possible opportunity, its disgusting that games are allowed to be released when so blatently inadequate, its not only disgusting in general its also an insult to the fans who buy the games expecting it to be worth their money but find they have to wait months for a patch just to make the game tolerable. Even then the elementary mistakes are left unchecked.
CA got my loyalty with MTW which is miles ahead of RTW in longevity and fun, they have totally lost my loyalty by releasing RTW in such a state that even I somebody who knows nothing about game development etc can spot the glaring errors.
I really hope somebody got fired for the total mess that is RTW.
Yeah Yeah Yeah :book:
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Quote:
Originally Posted by IceTorque
One thing is for sure the bean counters killed total war.
At least the true spirit of creating games with passion has not died.
at the moment this game interests me more than BI or any future TW games.
http://www.mindlinkstudio.com/engine.htm
The King is dead.
Long live the King.
The game engine looks very pretty, but so does RTW's engine. I don't think we have heard anyone complain about the graphics of RTW. That is one thing CA did get right I believe. Its the gameplay which is the real issue. If any new game, such as the one you mentioned, is able to give us great and fulfilling gameplay, preferably with nice graphics, that would most definetely gather a lot of support from a community such as this.
On paper things always look better then they are in reality... just look at RTW on paper (at the TW site).
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
@ IceTorque
If this is true then they will get my money
"The built-in AI is a multilevel system capable of imitating behavioral models of a human player as well as modeling behavioral stereotypes of known military leaders. Its implementation is based on organic synthesis of modified fuzzy logic systems, a wide range of optimization methods and criterion functions, based on the foundation of centuries of military history. "
Sounds like the AI that RTW is missing.
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartiate
@ IceTorque
If this is true then they will get my money
"The built-in AI is a multilevel system capable of imitating behavioral models of a human player as well as modeling behavioral stereotypes of known military leaders. Its implementation is based on organic synthesis of modified fuzzy logic systems, a wide range of optimization methods and criterion functions, based on the foundation of centuries of military history. "
Sounds like the AI that RTW is missing.
I repeat what i said above:
"On paper things always look better then they are in reality... just look at RTW on paper (at the TW site)."
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Hey..........i did say IF it is true.Mind you i bought Imperial Glory without waiting for reviews and uninstalled it a couple of hours later.
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartiate
@ IceTorque
If this is true then they will get my money
"The built-in AI is a multilevel system capable of imitating behavioral models of a human player as well as modeling behavioral stereotypes of known military leaders. Its implementation is based on organic synthesis of modified fuzzy logic systems, a wide range of optimization methods and criterion functions, based on the foundation of centuries of military history. "
Sounds like the AI that RTW is missing.
CA has left the door open for a competitor to come in and grab their former core market. Before STW was released, CA claimed that they would have a "learning" AI in the game, and that the turn based part of the game had simultaneous turns. Neither of these things turned out to be true, and as players eventually discovered. Now it's 5 years later and the game still doesn't have these features. In addition, problems such as suicide generals, which was eventually corrected in the first engine, are back in RTW. Both realism and historical accuracy have also declined, and the game no longer saves the full game state in a savegame file. How can a strategy game not save the entire gamestate and claim to be a serious game? This savegame issue is something else that players had to uncover for themselves. Total war gameplay has gone backwards while competitors gain ground on making a similar game. Of course, a competitor is going to have to be really skilled to develop such a complex game and have it all work correctly in the timeframe that games are usually developed these days. Even CA missed the original release date of STW by something like 18 months.
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
come buy our game
"Total War: Lowest Common Denominator"
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Ignore your core customers at your own risk.
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
until CA addresses the loadgame/seige bug I do not consider their public relations "improving"...
sorry, i simply will not be manipulated into forgetting about this gamebreaking issue.
until this is fixed, the game is not working as intended....
this is not something that can just be looked over...
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrutalDictatorship
until CA addresses the loadgame/seige bug I do not consider their public relations "improving"...
sorry, i simply will not be manipulated into forgetting about this gamebreaking issue.
until this is fixed, the game is not working as intended....
this is not something that can just be looked over...
Ho ho! But it CAN be overlooked! I'm thinking that it WILL be overlooked because fixing it will be an admission that the problem exists, and AFAIK, no official CA staff member has even acknowledged save / load as an actual bug! I don't think you were around for the whole controversy when it was most heated, but things got so bad there were bannings and thread locking and deletions on certain sites just for the mere mention of the "issue". Eventually, most of the complainants (who were always labeled as whiners) were driven off by the fanboys and big stick mods. Talk of save / load was pretty much halted here too. Mark my words that it will be halted again if you talk about it too much because it upsets the devs and then they tell whatever site management they won't post there anymore unless they quell the dissent. Faced with that choice, the "whining" forum members are expendable.
If there really was any concern over the strategy element of the game, a hot patch would have been an easy decision: DO IT!!! But the needs/wants of the few were never enough to change a thing. The only thing that will change it, is the amount of sales made.
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
well...I was around months ago for the big controversy and the problem has still not been addressed.
Point is, until this problem is fixed, big stick mods everywhere can expect to continue dealing with massive amounts of "whiners".
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
this thread isn't about the save/load bug
but if you want - you can discuss the reason for CA being harshly anal retentive about discussing it in an open manner with those who notice such problems
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
well...I'd like that.
I have to be honest, I've never seen a company in this industry act like CA has over the past few months.
Why do they absolutely REFUSE to ackowledge and address it?
this is trolling or trying to stir things up...I'm genuinely curious as to what the problem is...
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrutalDictatorship
well...I'd like that.
I have to be honest, I've never seen a company in this industry act like CA has over the past few months.
Why do they absolutely REFUSE to ackowledge and address it?
this is trolling or trying to stir things up...I'm genuinely curious as to what the problem is...
I, along with many others, are just as upset about the save/load issue and the treatment it got at .com and the statements by Shogun and some of the Mods. But all our head banging, jumping up and down, proving over and over again with good data the existance of the bug, etc., had no impact on CA's stance to not extend further support after the 1.2 patch.
So what are we to do?... there really is no point holding our breath for a fix by CA anymore. Unfortunately the highly talented community was unable to find a fix (like many other in player1's bug fixer) for this issue. Recently Shogun made a few statements in the Official FAQ and at TWC that he will come out with a statement on the save/load issue. But its been more then a month since his first such statement, and more then 12 days since he last posted at TWC asking for another 10 days before he makes a statement.
Now what else is one to do. I for one gave up on RTW simply because of the save/load issue because I do not have enough time in one sitting to complete 5 turns, specially latter in the campaign. I got sick of baby-sitting the AI, and bending over backwards to get a challenge out of the AI. I finally decided to shelf the game and perhaps return to it once the save/load issue gets fixed. Its been 2 months, and with every passing day, the chances of getting a fix are diminishing, if not gone already.
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Celt
Talk of save / load was pretty much halted here too. Mark my words that it will be halted again if you talk about it too much because it upsets the devs and then they tell whatever site management they won't post there anymore unless they quell the dissent. Faced with that choice, the "whining" forum members are expendable.
Not quite. The decision was ours alone. The reason? Too many threads discussing the same issue with the same set of "whiners" repeatedly saying the same things over and over. It gets tiresome, it drowns out all other discussion, and creates a general foul mood in the forum due to this last point: many of those "whiner" posts were disrespectful rants that violated forum rules on multiple counts. Constructive discussion of the issue was never a problem.
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Join the dots by answering the questions.
10 points for the first person who explains what the acronym NDA stands for.
20 points for the first person who gives the legal meaning for it and the penalties that are standard for breaking it (slight clue here ~;) )
30 points for the first person who can explain an NDA in layman terms.
In this case the GOLDEN RULE of commerce applies:
He who holds the gold, makes the rules.
20 Bonus points: So guys who holds the gold? The developers or the publishers.
~:cheers: ~:cool:
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrutalDictatorship
well...I'd like that.
I have to be honest, I've never seen a company in this industry act like CA has over the past few months.
Why do they absolutely REFUSE to ackowledge and address it?
this is trolling or trying to stir things up...I'm genuinely curious as to what the problem is...
They've learned from GWB...
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Anyone who can tell me what CYA means gets a 1.3 Patch to RTW free of charge.
Now, sure, when we buy the products they have all those legal contracts we agree to, whereby LEGALLY they can have a "two patch policy."
But deep in their their hearts, they know their patching sucked this time around, they just can't admit to it.
Try this as an experiment. Go into a McDonald's and order a Bg Mac. Take one bite and say to them: this hamburger tastes bad. See what they do.
and by the way, the profit margins on hamburgers do not exceed software.
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Quote:
"two patch policy."
For crying out loud, how many times will people make up the same false statements. They have a 1 patch policy! Patch 1.1 was nothing but a quick fix to make MP playable by more than 30 people.
Shall we wait till someone says that CA abandons the Total War series for Total Warrior since it has been taken over by SEGA?
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
The quotation marks I included are meant to advise you that it's "sarcasm" or that it's their exact words, but necessarily the reality.
-
Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarunTaiwan
Anyone who can tell me what CYA means gets a 1.3 Patch to RTW free of charge.
Now, sure, when we buy the products they have all those legal contracts we agree to, whereby LEGALLY they can have a "two patch policy."
But deep in their their hearts, they know their patching sucked this time around, they just can't admit to it.
Try this as an experiment. Go into a McDonald's and order a Bg Mac. Take one bite and say to them: this hamburger tastes bad. See what they do.
and by the way, the profit margins on hamburgers do not exceed software.
IMDHO
Ah-ha and the developers are the owners of McDonalds or the Burger flippers... who decides policy the owners or the workers?
You can complain to CA as much as you want, Activision own the publishing rights to RTW so bark up that tree for patches.
IMDHO
