Printable View
Only going over a few posts, not breaking my original rule.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
GAWAIN!!! Good to see you're still okay man. Still play orig MTW? If its still going, maybe I'll come back to that. That at least, was somewhat thought out. WTF happened to LittleJohn, GilJay, and all the others that made the CA brand worth following?
Hi Aelwyn
I believe both LongJohn and Gil has left CA.
CBR
If all mentioned bugs regarding MTW 2 are fixed in next patch we could have very good game.Quote:
Personally I no longer have any faith that CA is capable of producing a quality MP tactical "wargame".
Any other game on the horizonth? Since RTW came out I've had been browsing around internet and the only game I've spotted was XIII century: death and glory - I doubt that it will ever be released.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KukriKhan
Im not sure if these topics were covered as Im arriving at this discussion via link, and simply dont feel like sifting through the entire thread. Yes, Im lazy.
The reason that Multi-player features will not improve is because people don't want to play Mp as it currently stands. If they REALLY wanted to gain players, any company mind you, they'd create the ability FIRST, not try to drum up a community THEN put it into development. The reason Starcraft and Warcraft 3 are the most MP played RTS's is for 1 simple, defining fact:
Battle.net. A FREE service.
If they (CA) was to create a BattleNet hybrid or similar version of this, you'd see a surge in the Multiplayer community pure and simple. But the fact that they do not, is what seperates the "men from the boys." THQ/Relic are trying to do it with the Warhammer series, and its been working. Their communities, while smaller then Blizzard's are far larger then any other RTS company out there. This is not a problem unique to CA. Lucas did the same thing with Star Wars:Empire at War. A HUGE star wars following, and the game fizzled after 3 weeks because the MP options weren't there. Relic has had a series of games as well fall victim to the "Gayspy" reliance. Homeworld 1 and 2 come to mind. Even the C&C series has had this issue.
If Creative Assembly wants to bring in MORE players, and recover the one's it lost (like me and my clanmates) this is what they need to do. Ditch Gamespy, develop their own online system that doesnt suck, lag, has a stable ladder that doesnt require players to CREATE them or JOIN them, put in some clan options etc. Do this, and they will come.
But its never going to happen. Which is why me and mine abandoned Creative Assembly. Me personaly, Im still waiting for a good Napoleonic RTS. Here's to hoping the Lordz can pull it off.
And for such a game and setup... what would they, or you, pay?Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor[1G
Not a dime. Nor should I. If Blizzard can make Battle.net free (even at its conception) and Relic, a much smaller company/design by nature make one for Warhammer free, that sets the precedent. Funny thing is, Relic runs their own version OFF Gamespy servers and its far superior to everything save Bnet.
Here's where the money comes in: If they were to make a multiplayer system that met the above qualifications, they would gain me back as a paying customer. After the debacle that was the Barb Invasion, as I alluded to above, myself and my clanmates gave up on the franchise. Balance issues not withstanding and the lack of real/timely patch support. Why would I pay $50+ for a TW game that offers crummy balance, little real continued support and minimal multiplayer gameplay, when I can spend $50 to buy Warcraft and its expansion, or $40 for Warhammer and any of its THREE expansions and get all the above free for countless hours of entertainment? I STILL play these games, hell I still play Warcraft II on occasion. Don't get me wrong, I hate Blizzard for a number of reasons, but their MP setup is second to none and the replay value alone is well worth it.
But I wouldn't pay a dime more for a game, or a monthly service for TW. The way I see it, CA already OWES me for giving the most inane and minimal support for MP as is. I did not buy Medeival II, nor will I. I will not buy its expansion, or any future game from this company for the same reasons. Nevermind that MTW II shouldn't have been made when there are other era's out there to explore, they were trying to recapture revenue by trotting out their best title repackaged since Rome didn't bring it what it was projected. First CA needs to pony up, show me the consumer that they are serious about the games and product they create, THEN and only THEN will they get my money again.
I see. To sum up: you demand some free product by way of an apology for previously-bought product that you found unsatisfactory - and refuse to purchase any future product, whether it be a "full" tw game, or cheaper, niche-aimed MP-only game.
Got it. Thanks for your feedback.
By use of the word "product" it sounds more like you are talking about dealing in illegal drugs than a PC game. Let me know when you get the next shipment in. :laugh4:
Too late, I think CA smoked it all. ~:smoking:
LoL. Ya gotta admit, the druggie paradigm works as marketing: give it away free 'til they're hooked, then charge, charge, charge. Worked pretty well in software in the 70's, 80's & 90's, too.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElmarkOFear
Then some hired Mba's discovered the money to be made overall, and decided to roll back the 'charge point' to way earlier than when the addiction point kicked in, betting that new 'marks'/customers would always be generated as computer usage spread throughout the land(s).
Bingo. More profit today, with little thought to the repercussions in some distant tomorrow, when computer adoption would (might?) hit the saturation point.
Emphasis switched from product quality (to encourage addiction) to product volume and speed. More product, quicker.
The gaming industry followed the same model. More developers, artists, coders & programmers got rushed to deliver product quickly, regardless of the requirements for solid coding, intelligent programming, and researched art.
More Flash, less Bang. Fix trouble in a patch... maybe.
The other factor is labor: how the industry workers and bosses get compensated. Look at the attrition into and out of CA over the past 4 years, for example. Those guys are mostly independent contractors, signed on for a single job of work (or probably, 3 or 4, with different companies) with few ties to the company or community. They have to produce (quickly) chunks of work, on a project controlled mostly be marketing guys - those same Mba's charged with moving profit realization to an earlier date.
The programmers, artists and coders are just cogs in the wheel.
It still, even now, amazes me when I see a 'purple' (CA) member here, trolling through threads. The only incentive I can see is: personal pride in a piece of work they've done.
To be honest, what I'd hoped for in this thread, was not to change CA's mind viz-avis their business model. That's a done deal. I hoped to plant a seed in some purple guy's mind, should he accidentally stumble into this thread, that another option (a multi-player-only game or sub-game) might be feasible.
Sadly, I failed at that, I guess. What I brought out instead was vindictive vitriol, mostly, by buyers who've been disappointed in their purchased product, who swear they'd pay nothing for such a product.
I fear totalwar multiplayer has died, and cannot be ressurected. The interest isn't there, the commitment of the fanbase no longer exists, and the incentive to invest (by CA) has evaporated quicker than a fart in a Kansas tornado. Why would they bother?
Unless they wanted to take a financial shot-in-the-dark on a probably losing proposition... that might surprise them (and us), and be successful.
OK :/rant:
Sorry for the tedium. :bow:
Just thought I'd properly lament the end of twMP.
The sad part is, the MP component could be the most profitable by far if it were done right. I doubt it'll ever happen though, simply because CA hasn't shown they will budge off of their "protecting intellectual property" stance, hence a closed game (which gets old real fast). Maybe the Lordz will come up with something that can fill in this void, who knows.
Oh well. It was fun playing with you guys back in the Shogun and Medieval 1 days...
:bow:
Amen, brother. :bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by Whacker
You know all is lost once the bean-counters get involved in the everyday decision-making for ANY product line. Innovation, risk-taking, customer satisfaction #1, all take a back seat to ever-increasing cost control, micro-managing and the ever-elusive increasing profit margins for the Wall Street types. Less emphasis is put on the seemingly less profitable areas (MP is seen not as an opportunity but as a costly-yet-necessary liability) are given less and less resources.
Everyone in charge seems surprised when the bottom drops out and the higher-ups blame everything on the lower-wage labor force (too high salaries/too little productivity) instead of where the blame really belongs: In the stupid decisions they made and/or supported during previous years.
To remedy this, executives (ignoring their own shortcomings) focus on the talented (but higher cost) employees, by removing and replacing them with cheaper (less experienced) employees who are unrealistically expected to pick up right where the previous employees had stopped. Then the product begins a steady decline in quality.
Currently, executives (in all industries) are universally ignorant in the best ways to recover from a downward sales trend. They only focus on cost issues (since these are the easiest to address) by downsizing, cutting costs, and other quick-results-but-temporary fixes, rather than sticking to what made their companies successful in the past: innovation and addressing customer wants/needs. The reason being, there is no finite way of measuring how much innovation/customer wants add to the bottom line. If it can't be measured, then it is overlooked by marketing, finance, accounting, etc . . and all costs associated with such are considered liabilities instead of vital parts of the success of the product.
You see this in every industry. You will notice the beginning of such a decline when executives begin making public their strategy of opening up new markets by copying features of products in the larger market segments instead of trying to increase their segment to compete in size with them. They try to emulate the top products in cost structure, profit margins, etc . . instead of sticking to the business structure which made them successful in the first place.
Of course, this isn't a problem to the highly-paid decisionmakers, since they will just move on to another company if their current one goes belly up. Executives are never held accountable for the failure of the companies which they lead. Though they are the first to accept kudos when their company is successful. Nice work if you can get it.
The only ones who pay for this are the companies non-executive workforce and customers.
hehe This turned into a rant about the state of the corporate world instead of TW and CA/SEGA. Sorry. :sweatdrop:
Why don't you come play <whispers name> on Sundays at 19:00 GMT? We usually play for 2 or 3 hours. The game is just as much fun, if not more, than original STW.Quote:
Originally Posted by Whacker
I'm waiting for 2nd patch and I'm wondering if we will ever see that 2nd patch. More likely we will see expansion pack as 2nd patch.
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...rgames;title;2
I know it is not sword vs sword but Company of Heroes is great RTS.
Well, I have to say I do like MP, but since the days of Shogun I have never been a frequent MP player, I do come to play once the mood strikes me, but I also do not play for extended periods of time. This is to say that I, personally, object to paying any monthly fee for a TW MP game, it's simply not worth it for me, given my gaming habits (and financial resources as well).Quote:
Originally Posted by KukriKhan
On the other hand, I do like SP also, but if a TW game came out that was strictly for MP but offered dedicated servers, moddability and a reasonable patching/updating policy that incorporates sensible suggestions given by the players, then I'd even pay the full standard price for standalone games today.. i.e. ~$50.
That said, I think it doesn't take so much additional effort to design a "normal" TW game (with SP and MP combined, just with better MP than now). All that is needed would be, as has been said here before, a strict splitting of unit choice and unit stats for SP and MP which allows for a balanced, competitive MP match as well as for a casual, fun match. And that is more an issue of careful design and thorough testing and trial&error than a big financial hurdle, especially if beta testers would be given more importance.
On a related note, I've owned M2TW since Christmas and just recently ventured in the MP lobby and played a couple of games. I have to say that I was disappointed. The lag was bearable, my system is slightly above average and still I turned all settings to the lowest just to be on the safe side, so any lag I had was probably caused by the connection or the settings on other people's PCs, there was a general slowdown compared to SP battles but still acceptable IMHO. What disappointed me were the narrow range of maps to choose from, the kind of games being hosted and the army compositions I was encountering. I just didn't get involved the way I did when I was playing VI. Sure, the lobby looks better, some functionality has been added, but overall the matches seemed "lifeless" to me, I don't know how to put it in another way.
I suppose I will check MP again after the patch is out, but I don't think I will see myself there very often.