Printable View
I just made this poll on what is the most important thing to fix now this is the LEAST IMPORTANT fix to do. For me, I am tired of updating my GFX card or computer. The graphics are fine to me, please CA, stop wasting time making it better but instead fix the other things we all would enjoy.
For me as well, the GFX are what does-NOT need to be improved. It sux having to upgrade a computer just for the graphics, when so many of those other things are really, really important for a TW game, and have been neglected a bit to make this game pretty.
The only other one that I would vote as least-important is the easier modding bit, but I'm not a modder for M2TW so others may think different. But I do think Graphics are fine, they just need to improve ALL those other things on the list.
graphics are good enough for now..
Yeah, graphics are fine. I updated my card last year from a half bad to a decent one, and it fixed the siege lag, plus i could tune the graphics up. With 1.02 incremental time, the battles look damn beautiful. 0.2-0.6 is a great speed to watch a cavalry charge at, not to mention close-up sword fights:duel:
Agreed. Graphics are awesome AS IS. Even my beefiest of the beefy laptops cannot handle this game at full graphics resolution, and it is a custom-built computer designed to handle graphics and speed. Cost me a pretty penny.
So if you made the graphics better, I couldn't even enjoy them, CA.
I don't have the money to buy the newest technology, I'm just a college student. So have mercy, CA, have mercy!
I am sure most of the complaints would go away if those little bugs were properly beta tested and eliminated. Those little fixes go a long way. Everything else you do is superb, and that is why I BUY your games!
well, if they upgraded the graphics system to make it still look as good, but eat your system resources less, then i'd be all for it. If its just to add more eye candy, then i say nay
askthepizzaguy, maybe they now hope laaaaaaaaagggg will slow your expansion down;)
moding, since i dont use it and dont use others works and think that its easy enough...
Maybe I should start a group of uber expansionists.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV
The expansionists guild!
Yes, yes... that's the ticket!
Same here, stop wasting time on the graphix and fix the damned game.
Dear CA, I rewrote this from the other poll but I feel that it needed to be added
Quote:
Now I will put this in bold so CA skimming through will read it.
NO ONE GIVES A DAMN ABOUT GRAPHICS - YOUR GRAPHICS ARE FINE - PLEASE SPEND FUTURE DEVELOPING TIME MAKING A GREAT GAME EVEN BETTER. WE DO NOT, ACCORDING TO EVERYONE IN THIS MESSAGEBOARD AS OF 4:05PM ON MONDAY THE 16th OF MAY CARE AT ALL ABOUT A GRAPHICAL UPDATE. IN FACT, SOME OF US ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT THE EXTRA HORSEPOWER NEEDED TO RUN A HIGHER GFX VERSION!!!
I really have to state this because the staple of people who play your games do it for the complex gameplay, not dumbed down but purdy looking. If you are trying to make a game thats better to look at than play, then I feel your building games for the wrong genre/target audience/system platform. Please, for your next series of TW games, leave the same GFX Engine and focus on the gameplay more. This will decrease developing time (hopefully) as well as increase your fanbase.
Thank you
Someone marked Diplomacy and another marked Campaign AI. I value your opinion and thats the reason why I made that poll but could you please let me know why you think that making them better is the least biggest priority that CA comes across. I am just curious, not to flame. Don't answer if you don't want to
The obvious answer would be that they are MP players and have no interest in either the diplomacy or the campaign.
Alternatively, perhaps they just misread the question.:)
Somewhat limited poll.
I did not vote, because my choice (multiplayer) is not included.
Is there something specific about the MP system that is broken but should be ignored, or is it just the fact that they use Gamespy?Quote:
Originally Posted by TinCow
Oh!...late thought...by Multiplayer did you mean Multiplayer Campaigns?
Crap, I am sorry but I forgot Multiplayer. I guess in hindsight I am glad I did because it would have took votes away from both polls about the Single Player aspect that I was targeting. But sorry anyways.
There's two reasons for my vote:Quote:
Originally Posted by Budwise
One was that i felt a bit redundant the options 'campaign AI' and 'Diplomacy', meaning that i felt diplomacy is included in campaign AI, and as such, less focus should be put in one specific symptom (or aspect), and more effort into improving the whole thing.
The other one, like Didz cleverly suspected, was that recently i have been more in the trend of custom battles and MP games.
Now, should this have been a multi-choice thing (BTW, if it was and i foolishly chose only one, sorry!), i may have gone for graphics as well, buth, then again, there's WhiskeyGhost's point, which i agree on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskeyGhost
No, I meant Multiplayer as it exists: battles. Though it applies equally to campaigns as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Didz
However, it appears I answered the question in the topic, not the question in the OP. Apologies for the confusion. I answered Multiplayer because it was the least important aspect of TW to me. I have no idea if it needs fixing, because I do not play it... hence the reason it is the least important to me.
So, now I have to answer the OP question, which is frankly confusing the hell out of me. It says what needs to be fixed... but lists graphics and the OP actually voted for that choice. That makes no sense to me. Are there graphical glitches that CA has been working on? AFAIK, all patching has dealt almost exclusively with gameplay, not graphics.
Is the OP asking what improvements do we think are the least important in FUTURE TW games? If so, my answer remains multiplayer.
I guess your talking to me, I don't know what OP stands for.
What I was mostly asking for is what everyone thought should be worked on more or least then anything else, depending on what version of the poll your writing on. When I asked about graphics, I meant does the uniforms need to be shinier or explosions need to leave cradermarks. Is a sunflare when the camera pointing in a certain direction a needed feature or arrows that are on fire leave a smoketrail. I haven't really seen anything wrong with the graphics, thats why I don't think its an important fix. Almost everyone agrees on that.
The poll is mostly for single player (although I wasn't thinking when I made it) aspect and what everyones improvement should be worked on. Thats all.
I read it as what would I least like to CA expend resources on in order to improve it.Quote:
Originally Posted by TinCow
So, for me Graphic's was the obvious choice as having a pretty game that doesn't work is far less important to me than having a game that works.
If Multi-player had appeared as an option it would have confused the issue for me....
I desperately want to see a PBEM or Hotseat campaign mode for multi-player, but any expenditure of effort on the existing MP system is completely irrelevant to me as I stopped wasting my time on that aspect of the TW games way back with STW and a rarely even think about it let alone play it.
As such improving the MP game is impossible as far as I am concerned as there is no MP game, merely a token and irrelevant sub-game that allows people to play pointless battles.
Then I agree as well. The graphics in M2TW are top-notch, work well and do not need any more work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Budwise
If the poll is about M2TW, then realistically, there won't be any more work on the graphics. We certainly don't need it.
I have a vague understanding that modders still need tools to help edit the graphics and that the lack of said tools currently rules out total conversion mods like EB or RTR. If that is true, then providing such tools would be my top priority as those total conversion mods have added immensely to RTWs life.
Otherwise, my priority - and what I think we can expect from the Kingdoms patch after reading some of Lusted's posts - is tweaking the stats and AI to get a more balanced and fine tuned game.
The more interesting question is not about M2TW but about TW in general. We are due a revolutionary engine with the next full game, so no doubt graphics will be worked on. I'm inclined to say again that the graphics are fine and don't need more work. But I suspect I am deluding myself. If I compare M2TW and MTW, the reason why I play M2TW is that it looks vastly better. I've tried to go back to MTW and STW, but can't. The leap in graphics with the RTW engine was just too great.
I understand and kinda agree. We are no longer in the 8bit Nintendo range anymore. The graphics are actually appleasing and very entertaining to watch. Although I would like to see improvements, there are so many other ideas I like more.Quote:
Originally Posted by econ21
But with a graphical update (Which I voted Least Important out of all updates), I would appreciate seeing some of the following: the grass on fire when flaming arrows being used, bodies in the water on a bridge fight, Mud on the uniforms (I read it on the PCgamer article but I haven't really seen it yet.), destructible buildings, blood, civilians helping or running in a seige battle, or even more camera options. I think that those would be great improvements but if I had development time restraints, I would have to cut them to make the features (as advertised) that make the game enjoyable were at least installed or enhanced to be "Better than expected" if not Legendary. I would like people to look back 20 years from now and say that M2TW is the "Legend of Zelda" or "Final Fantasy 1" of the computer age. No one I have ever heard sticks with a game just because it looks cool, I understand people BUY games for that reason but to stick with it you need more. Its like Lust vs Love. Sure, everyone wants to bang a hot girl but if shes dumb in the head and you can't stand how she is but just love the "private time" or looking at her, the relationship won't last. But, if you marry an ugly girl that treats you good and cares about you and you care about her, it doesn't matter that others thinks shes ugly, (If you would care, perhaps M2TW is too advanced for your mind and you should go back to Counter-Strike) odds are you would marry her or at least stay with her for the long run.
In conclusion, Please CA - treat the followers of your games with the joy of what we are begging you to fix, word of mouth always gets more sales than a good advertisement (especially on a back of a box.) or someone hard up on graphics would enjoy. As my conclusion, the people begging for graphics and really nothing else are the type of people who play simplistic games are busy playing NON STRATEGY or even Console games. People who play this like the graphics but want so much more in a relationship with a game.
Can someone give me an email for CA so I can email these two polls for them to read.
umm i wouldnt consider the sheild bug a "minor bug" it the one bug that buggered the whole battle machanics (ooh a pun)
Indeed. The shield and 2H bugs were major; almost game killers for me (or rather "stop playing while waiting for the patch" kind). But they are both fixed now, so are not very good examples of the agenda for the next M2TW patch. I've avoided reading the current bug list (ignorance is bliss), but am not that concerned about the remaining bugs I've spotted or heard discussed in other threads.Quote:
Originally Posted by crpcarrot
If we are talking about the next TW game, then avoiding such major bugs probably should be a higher priority than it apparently was for M2TW. But realistically, bugs happen - as long as they are patched, they are tolerable.
I think the top priority for the next TW game for me is a dangerous AI, like Civ. I want hard difficulty to mean there is a realistic chance of my losing.
I think this will require most work to be done on the strategic AI (tactical AI can beat me if given enough of an edge, but strategically the AI just never pulls off enough battles where it has such an edge).
But even with a stronger strategic AI, I think the computer will probably need greater economic & other advantages. EB provides a good example of the kind of thing that could be done here.
Once again because apparently it was missed the first time, I just listed two bugs. I meant all the little ones that to be honest, I never paid attention to but other people ranted about. But you mostly got the right idea.
Graphics and Special Effects was my choice. I'm happy with how things are graphically speaking at this time. Its not a FPS game so they dont have to have the latest cutting edge graphics per se.
My second least thing was the old MTW features. Its been so long since I played it that I have pretty much forgotten about it so in my mind its no longer important. But thats just me.
This post reached Page 2 so I am calling it done and dead. There you go. It turns out almost EVERYONE thinks the graphics are fine and other things need to be worked on first.
Thank you all for your time. CA, please take this post to a staff meeting to figure out what to do next. We think you did a splinded job on graphics now other things are just more important.
Thanks.
That poll isn't weighted at all is it...
It could be shortened to
A. New shiny effects (you shallow individual you)
B. Stuff already in the game fixed
C. New stuff (but not including A)
And considering the M2TW is darn pretty already who is going to set that as a priority?
I didn't vote because I wasn't sure what to vote for. With regard to updating graphics and engine, is that why I had the bothersome .net framework installed and my firewall telling me that my pc wants to act as a server?? Upon installing the game? And then every time I load the game I have to skip the annoying updater thing?
Please CA, I respect your efforts in trying to make the game as best as possible but why not try THQ's Dawn of War infrastructural tactic where the game only gets an update if the player bothers with multi player online games, and only updates the game if the player wants to play online with others. And why do I have to search the internet for a patch and not get it directly from the manufacturer of the game anyway? The updater is pointless, badly implemented, and / or maybe I am unaware of it's real function. Market research maybe??
All I know is when I have a game of MTWII, I purchased my copy to play on my pc and not be interrupted by firewall stuff unless I actually feel like playing online. Then an update is fine, after logging into online play, as long as it doesn't corrupt any changes I have made to files where I made them... namely the cfg file and desc_strat txt file, which should be fine; riiiiiggghhhtt?
Updater should have been a clear option in install of game not an arbitrary.
It could have been an option within the game where there could have been more added too for better game play.
Other than that; everything is fine, the flowers smell good, the birds are chirping, MTWII is mostly bug free, and lalalala
Oh, and thankyou CA for a wonderful game which I actually purchased a new GPU for to play! Can't wait to reinstall RTW and see how awesome that looks on high settings.
Your PC wanted to access the net (not act as a server). You can disable this without issues.Quote:
I didn't vote because I wasn't sure what to vote for. With regard to updating graphics and engine, is that why I had the bothersome .net framework installed and my firewall telling me that my pc wants to act as a server?? Upon installing the game? And then every time I load the game I have to skip the annoying updater thing?
The game was updated to fix bugs, not to help multi-player users (who are still irrirated, from what I see).Quote:
Please CA, I respect your efforts in trying to make the game as best as possible but why not try THQ's Dawn of War infrastructural tactic where the game only gets an update if the player bothers with multi player online games, and only updates the game if the player wants to play online with others. And why do I have to search the internet for a patch and not get it directly from the manufacturer of the game anyway? The updater is pointless, badly implemented, and / or maybe I am unaware of it's real function. Market research maybe??
What you are referring to is the launcher, which is entirely optionary.
While I tend to agree, that would have at least tripled the size of the patch ~:(Quote:
Updater should have been a clear option in install of game not an arbitrary.
~;)
Since nobody has commented on this poll in a while, I consider it closed. CA, please take note of this on the next staff meeting on what to do or not do on future products/patches/ect.