Not flaming Ca

**The_Reckoning** · 03-26-2009, 15:14

I think the problem is the game industry/game journalism industry corruption. Spore was reviewed and got many 9/10s. That's enough to prove something's wrong.

When people stop trusting these liars, and rely only on word of mouth and forum feedback, then we'll see an improvement in the quality of games. As it is now, reviewers suck up to the games companies because otherwise their magazine/website has advertising pulled. So publishers can just boot a game out onto the shelves and they know if it's so hotly anticipated at E:TW was, it'll still bring in good reviews.

Unfortunately it'll be a while before people learn not to be such blind sheep.

**gollum** · 03-26-2009, 15:21

Originally posted by The_Reckoning
I think the problem is the game industry/game journalism industry corruption. Spore was reviewed and got many 9/10s. That's enough to prove something's wrong.

When people stop trusting these liars, and rely only on word of mouth and forum feedback, then we'll see an improvement in the quality of games. As it is now, reviewers suck up to the games companies because otherwise their magazine/website has advertising pulled. So publishers can just boot a game out onto the shelves and they know if it's so hotly anticipated at E:TW was, it'll still bring in good reviews.

Unfortunately it'll be a while before people learn not to be such blind sheep.

Hello The_Reckoning,
Well these *liars* are there for that reason precisely - however they do have a function - and that function is to review all titles not just the big ones. So instead of giving the responsibility to them why dont we turn the light right back to where it belongs ie to us the fans? How many of us buy games that have a good AI, take time to learn, are well thought out and balanced, have good support but lack a brand name and graphics? How many know about Les Grognards (http://www.battlefront.com/products/les_grog/) or 2nd Manassas (http://madminutegames.com/)? The people that develop them were amateurs like you and me that turned developers undergoing the risk of bankruptcy in the process. So?

Not many i presume... and why? Because they are for hardcores, boring etc etc etc. So now lets go all back to complain about CA/SEGA and after that play some more ETW, before we log back in to complain some more...

**gollum** · 03-26-2009, 15:32

Hello Kaidonni, i see. Imho ETW is better than RTW/M2TW - however it isnt even on a par with MTW.

**CanCritter** · 03-26-2009, 18:59

Originally Posted by gollum

Hello Kaidonni, i see. Imho ETW is better than RTW/M2TW - however it isnt even on a par with MTW.

bottom line for me.....what Gollum said...at least with mtw units were responcive and went and did what ya told them to do...
had a calv unit chaseing a calv arty unit...in mtw l woulda had them dead...in etw they did everything but attack calv arty....across whole map they couldnt catch them or could l force them into a position to block......
anyway what Gollum said.......

**gollum** · 03-26-2009, 19:15

Hello CanCritter,
thanks for the kind words and i agree with you but there are few of us left now - the TW fanbase consist out of many people that never even played MTW. So its really a point of view between us and not for the community as a whole.

PS The Main Hall its still going strong for those left...

**The_Reckoning** · 03-26-2009, 16:21

Originally Posted by gollum

Not many i presume... and why? Because they are for hardcores, boring etc etc etc. So now lets go all back to complain about CA/SEGA and after that play some more ETW, before we log back in to complain some more...

The thing is E:TW would be an amazing game, if it were finished. I'm sure those games are fun, and maybe have awesome AI, but they're not Total War. If TW was just a battle simulator I'd probably not have played it.

It's the interplay between campaign map strategy and battles which makes the games fun and unique. It's not just a battle to kill the enemy, it's a battle where the consequences of losing mean that all the hard work on the strategy map pay off; the one which will put your rival out of the game, or the one which will mean your nation is done for.

E:TW is practically unplayable for me. I enjoy commanding the few pivotal battles, and spending the rest of the time on the campaign map. With so many aspects of the game in a beta state I can't play it. And it's not just for hardcore players, if it has good AI. It's about creating pivotal moments, they're the parts people enjoy. Some people are just too dumb to notice that when the AI's horrible, it makes no difference how well they do. Some enjoy the one-sidedness, where they don't have to do anything right to take over the world in the game. Where it's just a case of how qucikly they can do it, without a chance that the tables would be turned and they fail.

That's why multiplayer is so much more fun in most games, because you get comebacks, surprise tactics and innovation.

Why I blame the journalists, is if the corruption didn't exist, if they made their money being brutally honest and ripping games to shreds, like Yahtzee, rather than being fluffers for the publishing compaines who advertise with their media, then companies like SEGA would rather their dev. studios make the best product possible, the incentive to rush things would be massively reduced. They'd know that if their game came out and was so buggy as to be unplayable, they'd get bad reviews and bad sales.

It'd work the same way the restaurant industry works. You don't get bad food and well-reviewed restaurants, because critics are harsh, and make their names on being honest. The same of everything with a media complex surrounding it. The countries with the most liberal media are often the best governed.

**gollum** · 03-26-2009, 16:36

Hello Didz,
you are preaching to the converted. All i tried to point out is not to let CA slip past the hook in your books. They know very well the game and play by the rules.

Hello The_Reckoning,
you are right mp has this advantage over sp - in case you are interested feel free to join the org ETW mp group;
http://steamcommunity.com/groups/etwmp

**Beskar** · 03-26-2009, 16:44

I think a point is, who has actually used the special forces units?

I certainly haven't, they are subpar to my other choices. They do nothing for the game for me, just a waste of space on the UI.

**gollum** · 03-26-2009, 17:20

Originally posted by Quickening
As for CA being publically pleased having Sega as their publisher, well, they aren't exactly going to come out and say "yeah these guys suck, this will be a testing time"

Hello Quickening,
Actually CA in the past have made it publicly known that their previous publisher Activision wasnt all that good to them. They havent done it a single time yet with SEGA though and there are many reasons to believe that they are genuinely happy with them.

**Quickening** · 03-26-2009, 16:21

Originally Posted by The_Reckoning

I think the problem is the game industry/game journalism industry corruption. Spore was reviewed and got many 9/10s. That's enough to prove something's wrong.

When people stop trusting these liars, and rely only on word of mouth and forum feedback, then we'll see an improvement in the quality of games. As it is now, reviewers suck up to the games companies because otherwise their magazine/website has advertising pulled. So publishers can just boot a game out onto the shelves and they know if it's so hotly anticipated at E:TW was, it'll still bring in good reviews.

Unfortunately it'll be a while before people learn not to be such blind sheep.

Quoted for truth but I also agree with Gollums assertion that the responcibility should rest with the buyer themselves although lets face it, it's too much to ask people to think for themselves.
It's a sad state of affairs when you can guess the kind of score a game will get in major publications the moment it is announced but trust me, you can. I've been doing it for years. I knew that Empire: Total War would get rave reviews just like you can predict shallow tat like Spore getting rave reviews because the "innovation" of such games is hyped so much that by the time the review comes the reader has already bought it. Black and White was a great example of such a game. I'm not saying it was bad, but by God did the mainstream go mad over this thing in the day and although an enjoyable game it wasn't exactly the work of genius it was claimed to be.

Now as it happens, I love Empire and I've been fortunate enough to not have any problems aside from being unable to install from the second DVD. But on the matter of CA... I just don't know. I don't buy this "evil publisher ruling with an iron fist over the peasant developers who toil away alturistically" thing. The fact of the matter is that we've had this same experience time and again with this series and some people will always blame the publisher. They may well be a factor but I really doubt it's as simple as that. We just don't know.
As for CA being publically pleased having Sega as their publisher, well, they aren't exactly going to come out and say "yeah these guys suck, this will be a testing time"

**MikeV** · 03-27-2009, 01:44

Originally Posted by Quickening

It's a sad state of affairs when you can guess the kind of score a game will get in major publications the moment it is announced but trust me, you can. I've been doing it for years.

A bit off-topic, but I've noticed the same things with movies from Hollywood: the more advertising near the release date, the more of a dog they're pushing. Since game companies are consciously imitating Hollywood (why ?!?!

), the inverse correlation you note is probably to be expected.

Nowadays, I don't buy anything Hollywood is selling. Will the same become true of game software?