No Joke: GOLD Thursday, 9/9 P.D.T

I hope this does not raise the ire of the moderators. I made an honest effort to peruse the FAQ looking for information concerning Speculation on Gold and Release. I pride myself on being a law-abiding and constructive member of any online community I'm a part of, so let me know if this is inappropriate...

Assuming it's OK...

For those who do not frequent the .Com forums, I'll direct you to the following link which leads to the last couple of pages of our "Official Release Date Speculation Thread".

I'm more sure than I've ever been that Gold will come tomorrow (Thursday PDT). You'll have to judge for yourself. Specifically look for the posts by "tommh" in the thread linked below.

tommh is the "real deal", and exactly what he says he is, but again, that's just my opinion. I've watched his posts over time.

Feel free to disagree with this, but the question will be all settled by this time tomorrow, so type fast.

Here's the thread (look to the very bottom of that first page):


http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotal...t=441&stop=460

In addition, for those who don't know, they'll be a chat by the devs on Gamespy on Friday 2:30PM, PDT.

Here's proof of that from their GameSpy Insider newsletter screenshot, which one of our posters got a screen shot of:

img34.exs.cx/img34/9787/devchat.jpg

I'm not planning to join their little Insider deal, but someone will be sure to post a transcript as soon as possible after it concludes.

im in no hurry but if its so thats great heh

Thats fast, u think they had any time to make some modifications to the full game? I think not..... ~:(

I believe it. One week to manufacture and box the game, another week to ship it to retailers for the 9/22 release date.

Jeanne, I doubt they would have fixed it any way. It's up to the modders to make it the best game it can and should be.
And this is excellent news if true!

here's where the patch come in

If you read between the lines on some of tommh's posts (linked above) you get the distinct impression that CA wasn't necessarily pleased with the demo as it was released, either.

I can't remember where I saw it, but it was someone I considered to fairly reliable, either an actual dev or someone like tommh, but the development on the game and the demo was on seperate tracks for about the last 2-3 months of development.

I'm a dev myself, although not in the game field, but the principle is the same: here is what was probably the approximate sequence of events:

1. A beta build is selected to be the basis for the demo.

2. That code is basically butchered to create a scripted subset of the actual game. It becomes its own development effort, usually with a much smaller staff, and usually not the most advanced developers, either: it's a demo.

3 The two pieces of software become progressively more different as time goes on. Which means....

There is no realistic way, without a lot of hassle, to just magically incorporate the changes made as the actual game progresses into the demo.

This would mean that there is 2-3 months of refinement plus additional refinement since the demo release that is not showing up in the demo.

The 2-3 months may be a total WAG, but there is no doubt that the above sequence had to occur that way. Maybe it was 4-6 months, I doubt any less than 2 months.

Why is this important? It totally blows away the argument that "the demo is what's going to be in the game". It simply cannot be true. From a development perspective it's, practically speaking, impossible.

Look to be very pleasantly surprised by the actual game since it's 2 - 6 months ahead of the demo.

I hope that 9/9 is the gold date. We shall find out fairly soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sdrga

If you read between the lines on some of tommh's posts (linked above) you get the distinct impression that CA wasn't necessarily pleased with the demo, either.

---

by which I am very excited about.,.. particularly this quote in which he says:

Quote:

---

They told me that many people didn't want to release the Demo at all, but marketing pressed for it to get the cover of CGW.

---

which makes me hope (perhaps foolheartedly) that the demo was really crappy compared to how the full game will be

*crosses fingers*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tommh

...all about marketing. Those folks don't associate with devs much. I really don't know how they come up with it...probably something to do with reading entrails.

---

Haha! I KNEW it!

He's close on the "entrails" comment. Problem is that they are reading their own entrails...think about it for a second...OK, hint: where is a typical marketing person's head typically to be found?

Oh, crap. I just realized my wife is in marketing now.

Hmmm, possibly this is good news. Then again, they seem to be in a hurry, so they might release a sub-par product.

Quote:

---

On the console side it has to do with localization for different TV scan rates (or at least thats part of it).

---

What? RTW on consoles?

in a hurry? the game looked finished 12 month ago, they've been working on it for 4 years. I'm expecting a grade "A" product. (and i better get it, or..)

Activision is in California. That's PDT and that'll be the source of the announcement.

PDT is 7 hours behind GMT. 19 hours behind New Zealand time. Sorry, those are the only international time zones I know. I may be off an hour or so.

I think the announcement will occur between 10AM - 1PM (just a guess) PDT which would be 5 - 8PM GMT or 5AM - 8AM Friday, New Zealand time.

Here's a good link to figure what time it is now in California: www.worldtimeserver.com/ use the list on the left and pick California.

One thing's for sure: whenever the announcement is made on Thursday PDT it'll be the same time everywhere: NOW http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/happy.gif

Somebody monkeyed with the run speeds in the demo, and the result of that is I won't be buying the game when it's released. I'll wait and see what people who do buy the game have to say about the tactical battles because spending $50 (usd) to have the frustration of trying to co-ordinate 20 units that move too fast is not for me.

Quote:

---

Somebody monkeyed with the run speeds in the demo, and the result of that is I won't be buying the game when it's released. I'll wait and see what people who do buy the game have to say about the tactical battles because spending $50 (usd) to have the frustration of trying to co-ordinate 20 units that move too fast is not for me

---

Abso-bloomin-lutely. I find MTW slightly fast, but bearable. If RTW is any faster I won't bother: it'll just be another clickfest.

As I've said before, we'll see.



~Wiz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

Somebody monkeyed with the run speeds in the demo, and the result of that is I won't be buying the game when it's released. I'll wait and see what people who do buy the game have to say about the tactical battles because spending $50 (usd) to have the frustration of trying to co-ordinate 20 units that move too fast is not for me.

---

Out of interest Yukki, do you kno the run/walking speeds of STW/MI compared to MTW and RTW? MI felt a LOT faster than MTW to me, MTW feeling to slow when i first played it but i did eventually get used to the pace. RTW is a definitely a lot faster than MTW for sure, but im not sure how much faster it is than MI?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RTKLamorak

Out of interest Yukki, do you kno the run/walking speeds of STW/MI compared to MTW and RTW? MI felt a LOT faster than MTW to me, MTW feeling to slow when i first played it but i did eventually get used to the pace. RTW is a definitely a lot faster than MTW for sure, but im not sure how much faster it is than MI?

---

Infantry run and charge speed is faster than MI ... but Yuuki will know the numbers

.........Orda

It is certainly not going gold today. Unsubstantiated claims about the game going gold or the release date are beyond annoying at this stage.

Oh Ye Of Little Faith!!

Judging by the demo, the game isn't ready by a long shot... ~:handball:

Well, I'd like to apologize in advance to this whole thread for starting this up. I really felt sure about what I was relaying over here on the Org. We've speculated over this (for fun) over at the .Com forums for the last month, mainly on the release date. Not going on "I heard from a friend of an uncle of a sister of a dev" but mainly on what previews, retailers, etc were saying. It's been a "preponderance of evidence" approach. I've never wavered from my prediction of a September 22ed US release and I still believe the Gold announcement will occur at least by close of business tomorrow.

"Tommh" has made posts, especially pre-demo posts that no one could know if they didn't have a reliable information conduit to the devs or testers. Until he began to post yesterday about the masters being done and the Gold announcement being imminent, I did not think of coming over here and posting anything. Tommh did tell us yesterday, and some of you above quoted, that the marketing people were kind of in their own little world concerning the Gold. I should have read that more carefully before I jumped the gun, and probably Tommh should have nuanced what he said as well.

That being said, he has posted today, about an hour ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tommh

When they announce Gold is a marketing decision but the masters are done. The game is going to ship on time. The rest is just hoopla.

---

I don't blame you for being skeptical, but I still consider him to be a reliable source. Also, the dev chat that I was sure we had nailed, has been postponed until the 15th. I take full responsibility for conveying what has turned out to be inaccurate information to this Forum.

Check out the last page of our speculation here:

http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotal...t=501&stop=510

Gamespy updated announcement of the chat here:

http://www.gamespyarcade.com/events/...4.shtml?newtab

nah, don't worry about it, sdrga.
I'm also optimistic about the release date, and it's no big deal even if the rumours prove to be only that: rumours.
We're all kinda excited and jumpy and anxious and what not anyway, so it's cool.
I'd rather have unconfirmed news than no news at all, so thanks for sharing ;)
Meanwhile, the waiting resumes :jumping: :jumping:

The game speed arguement is interesting. I don't play MTW online, nor do I intend to play RTW online. I do play other games online, however. I always found the speed a bit slow, and since the vast, vast majority of folks who buy this game will only play single player campaign, it might make it more interesting. I still adjust the battle speed to about 40% with the slider, and 100% when just relocating troops. I don't believe the developers base their wallets on the wishes, however viable, of multiplayer buyers. They go were the money is. They have to. ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sdrga

It's been a "preponderance of evidence" approach. I've never wavered from my prediction of a September 22ed US release and I still believe the Gold announcement will occur at least by close of business tomorrow.

---

Unfortunately end-of-play on Friday has come and gone -- it should be abundantly clear to everyone with some sense that Activision's marketing department is not easily moved to announcements (I'm beginning to believe they like to sneak up on competitors). And in fact, there may not ever be a "gold" announcement as such now, so I wouldn't hold my breath.

But: if you go to GameSpot and you see those big opening-page ads, well, that doesn't come cheap. And there do seem to be an awful lot of mentions of the same dates around. And I'm sitting at home with a cold beer. So there's got to be something right with the world ~;)

So it might never go gold in terms of a specific announcement, yet we would still be able to buy and play on 22nd September, 30 September, 1st October, whenever?

I still think that developers chats might be an occasion for a gold announcement or release date or even both.

That beer is well earned. ~:cheers:

That Tommh returned after his prediction was proven wrong does iseem to ndicate that he is not a hoaxer. I hope the next two or three weeks go very quickly. :jumping:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeromeGrasdyke

And in fact, there may not ever be a "gold" announcement as such now, so I wouldn't hold my breath.

---

~:joker: ~:joker: ~:joker: ~:joker:

Considering all the speculation over at .com, that's pretty funny.

thanks for the info jerome :)

enjoy that beer mate, it is well deserved ~:cheers:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord Ovaat

The game speed arguement is interesting. I don't play MTW online, nor do I intend to play RTW online. I do play other games online, however. I always found the speed a bit slow, and since the vast, vast majority of folks who buy this game will only play single player campaign, it might make it more interesting. I still adjust the battle speed to about 40% with the slider, and 100% when just relocating troops. I don't believe the developers base their wallets on the wishes, however viable, of multiplayer buyers. They go were the money is. They have to. ~;)

---

I played MTW only Single Player and I think that RTW is way too fast. THere are other primarily SP playing people who think the same thing as me, but we'll see how that works out...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeromeGrasdyke

I'm sitting at home with a cold beer.

---

Cheers m8!
~:cheers:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colovion

I played MTW only Single Player and I think that RTW is way too fast. THere are other primarily SP playing people who think the same thing as me, but we'll see how that works out...

---

I'm with you. The walk is too fast, but the running and charging is just ridiculous!!!! ~:angry:

Ah Aymar, the walking speed is the same or reduced...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeromeGrasdyke

But: if you go to GameSpot and you see those big opening-page ads, well, that doesn't come cheap. And there do seem to be an awful lot of mentions of the same dates around. And I'm sitting at home with a cold beer. So there's got to be something right with the world ~;)

---

beer? grr go work on the patch dammit ~:pat: heh jk, enjoy it ~:cheers:

See, I never noticed a speed increase except with the cav - and that was welcome - but the killing speed is my prime dispute right now - I could live with the increased charge speed (although begrudgingly) as long as the soldiers don't fall down like dolls if the other unit is superior to them on paper

I agree - it is the killing speed that bothers me too. I wonder, is it anything to do with the scale of the attack and defence factors? Before, they tended to be small, in the region of + or -5 (you might get a +8 for a knights charge bonus to giving a little more initial killing power). Now we have numbers as far apart as 3 and 22. If the old formula for kills still applies, it is no wonder inferior soldiers drop like flies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeromeGrasdyke

And I'm sitting at home with a cold beer. So there's got to be something right with the world ~;)

---

Goodness, I hope it's not just a beer. When I'm done with a major project it has got to be at least a couple of "Wee Heavies" or Chimay or something else suitably tasty, intoxicating, and expensive (usually accompanied by some king crab, etc.) Puts a nice cap on things. Chaps, barley wine all 'round on me. ~:cheers: Nothing like that feeling of release when you finally say, "Enough, that's it, let's ship it."

Seriously, looking forward to see what you have done in the full game. I get the distinct impression that the demo was not really aimed at the hardcore. Hope you guys have hit a homerun on this (or that the changes needed are easy and already known.) ~:cheers:

do we actually kno if CA plan a worldwide release? or whether us europeans get it later?

or can jerome himself comment on this? ~;)

man if its staggered that would suck. As well as the enourmous increase in piracy it will bring, it just isnt fair ~:( ~;p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ellesthyan

Ah Aymar, the walking speed is the same or reduced...

---

Sorry. It doesn't feel so. The speed at which both armies reach each other is much greater (or the time is much smaller). I feel it takes much less time to reach contact with the other army. Not like in MTW or STW. So, something is amiss.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colovion

See, I never noticed a speed increase except with the cav - and that was welcome - but the killing speed is my prime dispute right now - I could live with the increased charge speed (although begrudgingly) as long as the soldiers don't fall down like dolls if the other unit is superior to them on paper

---

I've noticed the speed increase with the infantry too. It's plainly obvious for me. But I agree that the killing speed is an even more important factor. These suposedly enormous and long battles fell like a Buster Keaton movie!!! :confused: Ridiculous!!! :wall:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Simon Appleton

I agree - it is the killing speed that bothers me too. I wonder, is it anything to do with the scale of the attack and defence factors? Before, they tended to be small, in the region of + or -5 (you might get a +8 for a knights charge bonus to giving a little more initial killing power). Now we have numbers as far apart as 3 and 22. If the old formula for kills still applies, it is no wonder inferior soldiers drop like flies.

---

Good point. It might just be that. But could CA make such a blunder? :sad: Just for the sake of shorter battles? That destroys the feeling of previous games, as well as making it monotonous to play the game. Just rush with your best troops and that's it... :wall:

Well, after watching several episodes of Time Commanders, I think the demo is really poor. Those battles seem to be ok in speed and length, as well as time to manouvre. So I'm a bit comforted by that.

Interesting point, Soulflame - I agree the Time Commanders battles looked really good; not too fast at all; very tactical and surprisingly authentic. Makes me really puzzled about Trebia in the demo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Simon Appleton

Interesting point, Soulflame - I agree the Time Commanders battles looked really good; not too fast at all; very tactical and surprisingly authentic. Makes me really puzzled about Trebia in the demo.

---

I think (hope) that the answer is the demo is a dumbed down/speeded up version of the code designed to suck in the Console Crowd.

Playing around as the Romans w/ the 1.1 Mod you can see how hamstrung they are vis the Carthaginians.

I expect to be pleasantly surprised by the release code.

Barkhorn.

While the speed is annoying(very) it is the rate at which "inferior" units die that really bothers me.Using some gentlemans(Tamur i think) mod utility i created a scenario for the demo on a huge mountainside.I placed the carthaginians at the bottom and the Romans at the top.I played as Carthage and yes i did use Sacred Band cav and infantry.We marched up the damn mountain which took TEN GODS-DAMNED MINUTES.The troops were uniformally exhausted when they got there and what happened.We still slaughtered the Romans in less than a minute.I really hope this is NOT reflected in the game when it comes out.

Regarding Time Commanders i always felt things happened quite a bit faster than i was used in MTW. I believe what we have in the demo is a result of a in fact increased speed in conjunction with armies proximity and troop quality disparity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Simon Appleton

I agree - it is the killing speed that bothers me too. I wonder, is it anything to do with the scale of the attack and defence factors? Before, they tended to be small, in the region of + or -5 (you might get a +8 for a knights charge bonus to giving a little more initial killing power). Now we have numbers as far apart as 3 and 22. If the old formula for kills still applies, it is no wonder inferior soldiers drop like flies.

---

If that's the case, then it should be fixed easily by adding a +10 defense bonus across the board.

Still doesn't fix the walking and running speed, which I still think is a huge problem. Even with a custom battle, with the armies on totally opposite sides of the map, the units are so fast, I keep on losing my cavalry wing, since I have no idea where they are. Pausing helps, but I can't seem to orcastrate flanking attacks since they've already moved to far away by the time I've given the orders.

this was posted by a moderator on .com forums called dutch:

Quote:

---

You've got it mostly right. "Fall" is usually shorthand for the third financial quarter, which goes from 1st July to 31st September, and so has very little to do with the seasons, although sometimes it's stretched a bit further. It's intentionally left a little vague. But the final version of Rome left the CA offices a fair while ago, and the rest is entirely in the hands of Activision.

And since Activision do the marketing as well as doing the duplication and shipping, all official announcements run via them, which is why it took some time to get an announcement up on the website. And this is also the reason why we don't (and won't) give dates on the total war site - we don't know when the boxed copies will reach stores, or when exactly the foreign language versions will be ready either. Release in Oz & NZ on the 23rd or 24th certainly sounds possible if the US editions are out on the 22nd, since thei're all english-language versions.

But we do know: the game is finished, and it will be with you shortly. And you know what? After four years developing it, we still enjoy playing it, which is a minor miracle ;)

---

well, it seems we have a bit more proof that the game has already gone gold but activision have kept things under wraps ~:eek:

looks like we could be playing the game in as little as 10 days ~:smoking:

you can read the post here

~:eek: Thats good enough for me - time to pre-order ~:)

Edit: nm, contents of my post are being discussed elsewhere.

The content of the link seems to have been deleted or moved. Anyway your post here is sufficient ~;p . I reckon I did well to pre-order it a week ago ~:)

P.S : will the UK editions will be out on the 22nd too?

For what its worth, there are a bunch of shops here in NZ that have been solidly saying 23rd for some time ie at least 2 weeks.

My local Game shop and the latest PC Gamer UK are saying 24th September for the UK release.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordHugh

My local Game shop and the latest PC Gamer UK are saying 24th September for the UK release.

---

2 days later ~:( I may survive though.

Amazon still have Oct 1st, might cancel my pre order and get it from the shops.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RTKLamorak

do we actually kno if CA plan a worldwide release? or whether us europeans get it later?

or can jerome himself comment on this? ~;)

man if its staggered that would suck. As well as the enourmous increase in piracy it will bring, it just isnt fair ~:( ~;p

---

I've always been amused by this argument. If someone wants the game, but can't wait a few days after its American release to buy it in England, and instead downloads it... I find it hard to believe they were planning on buying it in the first place.

Given how long it would probably take to download it, I would have thought it would be quicker to wait the extra few days for the UK release if it turns out to be a few days later for us.

What annoys me about people who download a pirate copy of a new game is when they start complaining about the game on the forums - I mean, what did they expect for free?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SouthwaterPanda

I've always been amused by this argument. If someone wants the game, but can't wait a few days after its American release to buy it in England, and instead downloads it... I find it hard to believe they were planning on buying it in the first place.

---

I think as a developer you dont understand the world piracy to well (neither did ID, or any other).... if you were on the "frontline" so to speak, you would understand that your argument is flawed. £30 is nothing to your average part/full time worker, and if the first place you could get it was retail for £30 thats where people would go, £30 means almost nothing to people for a good game.

However, if the release date is 2 weeks later in your country (e.g Doom3).. and the first place it is available is through download, then people WILL download it!!! If people are looking forward to a game that much and are very impatient the urge to download it is massive (due to there being NO legal consequences to doing so as of yet), and so they do, that is a fact!!

Of course, it is still only a minority that will do so, but it is enough to lose companies a LOT of money. I will most certainly be buying a retail copy as i play multiplayer, and also because i wouldnt like to cheat my best developer ever! However, your average person isnt like the TW devotees at these boards.... and if they can d/l it BEFORE they can buy it, they will!! :S

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by King Edward

Amazon still have Oct 1st, might cancel my pre order and get it from the shops.

---

Amazon said 1st October because they didn't have a clue when it would be out. I'm pretty sure they'll get as soon as it's available. I much prefer buying it at a lesser cost, even though I must wait 1 or 2 extra days, rather than paying £10 more or so. But after all, if you can afford it... ~;)

What was said earlier about people downloading due to later release dates is right on the money.

The best way to defeat casual piracy in hugely anticipated releases are simultainious world wide releases.

Your hardcore leecher is rarely going to pay for anything, however, most casual people simply give into the anticipation and will DL a game if it is not avaliable in their country for an extended period of time.

While a simultainious world wide release will delay things and tick off the Canadians and Americans who can't get their stuff as soon as it could be avaliable. Unless you've got some serious security issues at your company and a release group somehow steals a gold copy before its been sent to distro (has happened) you will cut back on piracy in a big way.

This brings up a few other points however, is the revenue lost by not releasing early in NA ASAP going to offset lost revenue due to pirating elsewhere?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Osbot

Your hardcore leecher is rarely going to pay for anything, however, most casual people simply give into the anticipation and will DL a game if it is not avaliable in their country for an extended period of time.

---

agreed.

I dont think there is anyone on these forums who wont buy the full game... BUT, there is definitely a segment of people that could be swayed into the "light" with siluntaneous release dates imho.

Well, here's my encouragement for anyone thinking of downloading it before it's released in their neighborhood: if you do this you're a thief. If you don't like the term 'thief', you're still a thief. If you promise yourself you're going to buy it once it's in the shops, you're still a thief. If you think you deserve a copy for but can't afford it or can't wait, you're a thief.

Just because there's no practically enforceable legal remedy for this kind of theft, it's still theft. How to stop people from doing this? Good question, but I would ask why we have to put in the work to stop people doing something wrong.

hold on. you're telling me that it's illegal to download a single song from a $20 CD and it's legal to download a $50 game?
is this in the UK, or is it in the US as well?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by USMCNJ

hold on. you're telling me that it's illegal to download a single song from a $20 CD and it's legal to download a $50 game?
is this in the UK, or is it in the US as well?

---

He said whoever downloads a $50 game is a thief.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GilJaysmith

Just because there's no practically enforceable legal remedy for this kind of theft, it's still theft.

---

does that mean that it is illegal but can't be inforced?
or that it is legal and is moraly wrong?

Maybe in the USA it's legal, but I doubt it. He meant that there were no way to prevent people from downloading whatever they wanted if they decided to, but didn't mean it was legal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by USMCNJ

does that mean that it is illegal but can't be inforced?
or that it is legal and is moraly wrong?

---

Gil was perfectly clear; the law is perfectly clear. Downloading something that you don't have the rights to use and/or own is theft. Any other phrase is merely disguising the unpleasant truth that the person that does this is a thief.

Enforcement is neither here nor there in whether or not it is theft. The act does not cease to be theft and remains in most people's eyes, immoral and wrong. Or to be even plainer: getting away with an act does not make the act in itself right.

well from this thread i get the idea that it is pretty easy to download games online.
In my original post i was asking if this was the case because it was legal.
In the last few years i've heard a lot of thing about lawsuits based on downloading songs. (which lead me to believe that it is hard to download music) However, i've not heard anything about game related lawsuits. Since a song from a CD ($18/18 = $1 a song) seems to me of less value then a $50 game, i would expect to see more game realted lawsuits. (this plus this thread made me question if downloading games was legal)

ok, hopes that clears it up. (if i don't make sense i'll try to explain again tomorrow, at this point it's 6 a.m. and i've been up since 11 a.m.)

It's illegal to download a game or a piece of music without the copyright holder's permission. Neither crime is particularly easy to police, but they are both crimes.

"Practically enforceable" means: is it worth taking someone to court over one case of downloading, which is all that you'd probably be able to claim? The answer is almost certainly no. It would take a concerted effort of monitoring file access over a long period of time to prove that someone was downloading lots of games, and who's going to pay for it? The developers can't, the publishers might well not (it's cheaper to try CD copy protection), and there are probably few or no precedents for it working.

They recently tried this with music, as someone mentioned. The public reaction to this was a massive outcry, leading to some of the more heavily-publicised cases being dropped. So that's alright: if you look cute and puppylike, and can make a virtue out of your supposed ignorance that you were breaking the law, then you can get away with theft.

:-(

Firstly I will give my stance on the subject that the download of software (or music) without the copywrite holder's permission is theft and wrong, and I agree with the developers statements above on this...

On the subject of staggered releases not encouraging the download of software I do disagree though... We live in a world with the internet, information superhighway instant communication and practically instant data transfer across the globe... People have friends around the world... If you release something cool in country A this week and in country B next week it is going to leak out and there is a temptation to download. Simply having a global release date removes all this in one easy stroke, why is it such a problem to not do it???

Quote:

---

It's illegal to download a game or a piece of music without the copyright holder's permission. Neither crime is particularly easy to police, but they are both crimes.

---

Just to be pedantic, thats not strictly true. In many cases it is legal to download a game so long as you already own a legal copy of the game. If you loose the disk, but you still have your serial number, you can download the game and re-install it legally. Of course many people abuse the system, and so you have to prove in court that you owned a legal copy before you downloaded if they come for u.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myrddraal

Just to be pedantic

---

Being equally pedantic I would say you have the copywrite holder's permission at that stage (ie. you have a valid software license...)..

Just pay your hard-earned cash for the game. By legally purchasing the games we support the industry, which in turn helps keep these talented programmers deservedly in a job! If the balance tips sufficiently, the industry ceases to continue to move forward and the quality of the product and support offered will dwindle.

Waiting 1 week in an entire lifetime is hardly a great hardship, now is it??! Go out and play in the park, visit a friend, or spend a little more time with your partner.

First off, let me clearly state that i have already pre-ordered RTW and will be paying for my copy. I AM NOT advocating pricay in any way .... now with that out of the way, here is what i think a very interesting insite into piracy:

Quote:

---

by Brad Wardell (strategy first)

I recently wrote about this topic here. But I wanted to write a more succinct version of it since some people thought I was advocating something akin to Internet Product Activation to thwart piracy.

Let me first Bottom line this: CD based copy protection does more harm than good.

Let me then add: There is no magic bullet that will stop piracy. Game developers need to quit trying to solve piracy via some sort of mechanism and instead design a policy that discourages piracy. Game developers/publishers need to approach piracy in a more realistic way. As a result, there are two basic groups of pirates.

Group A: The kiddies who warez everything. CD Copy protection means nothing to them. They have the game before it even hits the stores.

Group B: Potential buyers who are really more interested in convenience. The price of the game isn't as big a deal to them as convenience.

It's group B that our industry needs to focus more on rather than alienating and inconveniencing our customers by trying to thwart group A. Sure, it ticks me off that people steal stuff I've worked for years making. But we have to be realistic about this, it doesn't do anyone any good to inconvenience customers. In fact, anedotal evidence seems to imply that the more we inconvenience customers, the more we turn them into group B.

Let me explain:
Joe Gamer buys a game that requires the CD to be in the drive. But his 3 year old takes the CD and loses it. Joe Gamer ends up going onto Google or whatever and pretty soon finds not just a way to play that game without a CD but now finds out how to get the "latest games" not just for free but more convenient than ever through the world of peer networks and warez. As a result, as future games come out, Joe Gamer must now balance "doing the right thing" (which typically means driving up to the store, paying money to be inconvenienced by copy protection) and loading up a program and just getting the game, for free, quickly and painlessly.

That's why I think CD based copy protections are a bad idea. I think they create pirates and aren't terribly effective anyway. They're supposed to keep the honest "honest" but I propose a better way.

NOT Internet activation. Instead, game developers adopt a policy that has been very successful in the non-game software market -- after release updates.

PC games often come out buggy, get one patch, and then are largely abandoned. It's really hard to feel sympathy for game developers who treat their customers that way. Instead of doing that, release frequent updates to the game for users. For free. Have them go through a secure network so that only registered purchasing users can get the update but make it as convenient as you can.

By doing this, you create a bigger incentive to be a customer than to be a pirate. It becomes increasingly inconvenient to have the latest/greatest version of the game via the warez route than the legitimate route.

This is what we've been doing with Galactic Civilizations since it's release. You can buy it at the store or directly at galciv.com and either way be able to download the full game electronically along with regular free updates. It has no copy protection on the CD at all. You can install it on your laptop and main PC. We "fight" piracy by releasing regular, meaningful updates that are much easier to get legitimately than through warez channels. We've found a lot of people who initially pirated GalCiv end up buying it as a result. And sales of the game have been quite good. Sell-in at retail world wide is in the six digit range so it's not a matter of "small scale" solutions here.

So how do game developers do this? Just set aside a relatively small amount of the development budget to implement user suggested features. One or two developers, part time, for 8 to 12 month after release can make a big difference. Is GalCiv pirated? Sure. But it's not nearly as easily available via warez channels (we do monitor this stuff) as other games of similar retail sales levels.

There's no magic bullet to stop piracy. Game companies need to realize that. Instead, the goal should be to reduce piracy as much as possible and rather than relying on some mechanism, they should focus on a *policy* that focuses on making it more tempting to be a customer than to be a pirate.

---

Now for me, i am definately in group B. I am perfectly happy to pay £30-£40 for a game, as it is not a lot of money for me. But, as with RTW i have been waiting well over a year for the game and i'm absolutely desperate to play it. If the UK release was significantly delayed you can see how tempting it would be if you could get the game up to two weeks early .... a simultanous worldwide release provides another very compelling reason to be a customer instead of a pirate.

As I say, i have already pre-ordered and will be paying for the game, but it is unrealistic to think that everyone will make the same decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob the Insane

On the subject of staggered releases not encouraging the download of software I do disagree though... We live in a world with the internet, information superhighway instant communication and practically instant data transfer across the globe... People have friends around the world... If you release something cool in country A this week and in country B next week it is going to leak out and there is a temptation to download. Simply having a global release date removes all this in one easy stroke, why is it such a problem to not do it???

---

Costs money. Most games are manufactured in one country. Organising the distribution to all countries worldwide for simultaneous release would introduce an extra delay between mastering and release. This way at least one country (usually the US) gets it as soon as possible.

Problems with delaying it:
- no-one likes delays
- unless it went to *every* country there would still be people complaining that it wasn't available in, e.g., New Zealand, or somewhere else somewhat off the beaten track
- a lot of downloads happen before the street date anyway... games are generally pirated somewhere down the production line. (There was a crack available for Medieval before it had shipped.)

The R:TW demo was available somewhere around 24 hours (probably more) before official release time.

Anyway I already have R:TW on pre-order so I'll check my mail towards the last week of the month ~:) ...hassle free me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GilJaysmith

Costs money. Most games are manufactured in one country. Organising the distribution to all countries worldwide for simultaneous release would introduce an extra delay between mastering and release. This way at least one country (usually the US) gets it as soon as possible.

Problems with delaying it:
- no-one likes delays
- unless it went to *every* country there would still be people complaining that it wasn't available in, e.g., New Zealand, or somewhere else somewhat off the beaten track
- a lot of downloads happen before the street date anyway... games are generally pirated somewhere down the production line. (There was a crack available for Medieval before it had shipped.)

---

fair points there. While most games are available as warez before games are released, i imagine the only people who are aware of this is the 'warez kiddies' who are going to download it no matter what CA or Activision do :(

whereas, most regular customers wouldn't think to look for illegal copies of the game before its even released (or know where to look for that matter). But, if the game has been released in the US, 2 weeks before they can legally get hold of a copy, the average gamer will become aware that copies of the game a going to be 'out there'. It is likely they will spend the 2 weeks waiting time searching for ways to get hold of it early... this unfortunately could turn a customer into a pirate

GilJaysmith, while you are here, do you have any info on the UK release date? ~;p

he who asks is a fool for 5 minutes (thats me) he who never asks is a fool for life ;)

If you have been gaming since you were 6 and have any idea how the internet works, you will know where to find warez. Most gamers fall into this category IMO, and though they know where to find the game, they won't bother and just wait for it to ship. However of course a large minority will never buy R:TW and they will just pirate it, sadly.