Brigden Response to Game Flaws in Empire: Total War

[Allu X]

As seen on TWCenter, - one of the CA Developers has commented on the amount of flaws in Empire: Total War, -

** - Link to thread - http://shoguntotalwar.yuku.com/topic...er.html?page=6

His response is also below.

_______________________________________________________

Dear All,

We have indeed been watching and reading all the threads, including this one. And it is a good example of constructive criticism and feedback. If we havn't been as attentive of late it's because the majority of CA staff are working on the patches and overseeing the community beta testing process too. However threads like this one do get read and, if you'll allow me, responded to.

Let me say right off the bat that Empire: Total War is a pretty good game. Great, even, at times. The tech tree, regions, towns, diplomacy, tactics etc. are all good ideas. There is a lot to like, and a lot of promise. But let me immediately follow that with this: It is unfinished, it was rushed, and you (CA, SEGA), know this. The evidence is clear, but I'll post some of the things I've noticed, read, and found just in case there are some who don't know. Consider this "constructive" criticism, I guess.

Thank you for the balance in this statement, we appreciate the feedback on the elements you like or would like to see further developed. I'd like to expand on a few points if I may: Empire is not, 'unfinished'. The features we intended to include upon release are all there, and we've got a good spread of the things we wanted to include for the project overall. There are balance, gameplay and bug isues to address. There is no point denying this, and there's no point in hiding the fact that Empire has some code hitches. We are addressing these as fast as we possibly can, and trying to take in as much feedback from the community as is possible in allowing us to test and fix these issues. What I would stress, and relevant to your later point, is that it is a minority of people experiencing these issues. That minority is naturally more vocal as they have good reason to be. However just because it is a minority does not mean we take the issues any less seriously. We are working as hard on this as if it were all of our fans experiencing issues. At risk of turning this into a soundbite I'd like to say again that as far as CA's concerned a game sold is not a game forgotten.

-Playable "non-playable" factions. What's this mean? Well, people have been poking around in the files, unlocking nations, and have found at least two surprising well-done nations. The Mughals for instance, have their own advisor voice-over/intro, many unique units, a video all to themselves (for their demise), and generally it looks like they could easily have been made a playable faction, indeed, were intended to be, but for whatever reason were not finished. The Italian states are another example, though they are not as robust. They have a unique unit roster, very well done units, a good setup, etc. Practically all that is missing is the advisor intro that the playable nations have.

This is quite correct. A number of extra nations where playable at the outset but these choices were later reduced, not for time reasons but for gameplay reasons. When we design a TW game, each faction must be unique enough that it feels different, that it plays its own story (According to your hands). We don't want any faction to feel like a carbon copy of the other, or to upset the balance by being poorly introduced to the game world. Design decisions were made at various stages in the project not to include factions who had had work put into them as they would not fit this criteria. We recognise some may disagree or just want 'more choice' but Empire is a labour of love and we didn't just want all these nations playable out of the box if we couldnt apply individual balance and a unique experience to each of them.

-Gameplay Features that are there, but just not implemented. Finding a workable family tree with an icon for a button that should be on the campaign map and plenty of code in the game files pertaining to it would fall under this category. We've probably all seen the message about "a new heir has been born securing the line to the throne blah blah blah", and wondered…."What….? Where….?" Well, it's all in there! There's code for successions to the throne, family feuding, assigning a different heir. What fun! There are others but that one takes the cake for me.

This is as above. There are features that were removed for gameplay and design reasons. Where we felt something had been implemented but perhaps didn't properly 'fit' the experience or did not add anything to it, whilst adding another layer of difficulty it was made redundant. There are some examples of features that went in very early into Empire's creation that were later dropped for gameplay or time reasons, but these are deliberately ommitted. Nothing here is 'half finished' or 'incomplete' these features or factions are deliberately not in place. This is because of decisions made at a project level.

-Game ruining bugs. Any graphics problems, sound problems, Steam problems (I love Steam btw…TF2 anyone?), CTD problems, etc. can and have ruined the game for many people(see all the posts). It wouldn't even matter if the sheer volume of posts ends up being a minority, it is still a problem that could have been avoided, sorry. I've had a relatively stable time of E:TW and yet have had some crashes and reboots that inevitably kill my immersion and can ruin the game(until I start playing later, that is).

This is a sensitive issue and one we don't wish to pretend doesnt exist. Does Empire cause issues for some players and not others? Yes. Empire went through testing at every stage of development, every internal build of the game (Right from the beginning) that was created was tested on a large variety of hardware and software. We have a large QA team inside CA itself, and an even larger one is used at SEGA. Both of these teams worked very hard (Overtime and Christmas included) to test Empire prior to release. There are several reasons for Empire containing issues upon release and we'd like to outline some of these, none of these are excuses and you'll see in a moment how we intend to address these problems, but we'd like to clarify how some of these came about.

i. Compatability vs depth - Empire is a massive game. A massive, massive game. With trade systems, AI, naval, land and campaign systems, diplomacy, graphics and the like it is several projects in one. Every single one of these things is a variable. When you add in all the potential variables and potential hardware combinations they can run on you come out with a massive potential issue list. This is impossible to test fully before release. For example on a Vista 64 system using Winzip and with Steam running whilst Word is open on a blank macro with France in turn 112 when a Dutch ship raids a Spanish port and a Bavarian rake assasinates an Austrian general called Claus the game CTD's. (Please note thats a hypothetical example) but the point there is the potential interplay between game factors and user software/hardware combinations is massive. We do our utmost to examine all game related issues and indeed test across hardware but a truly exhaustive test is simply impossible.

ii. Future technology - One thing people sometimes forget when dealing with computer games over movies, or other entertainment products is their attempts to push technology forward. You'll often see many comparisons such as 'I wouldnt see an unfinished film'. Firstly, as you're all aware, games are interactive. The interactivity of entertainment media adds an entirely new and infinite depth to them. Potential user actions: some people will duly follow tutorials and behave in expected patterns others will stick the mouse up their nose, press windows constantly and turn the screen on and off, expecting it to do something. I'm being fecetious, but serious in the main message. Add to this that Empire genuinly attempts to do more than technology has done before. One of the most exciting things about working in games on PC at this time are the possibilities. The programmers here are CA are incredibly talented people who constantly come up with new ways to draw this or that object faster, or present this shadow more fully or have the general behave more realistically, the ocean surface and so on. We could play it safer, thats true. We could not try for the next thing, we could not aim to push the boundaries forward in how bouyancy is calculated or what waves should look like, but if we did that, ultimately we're not challenging ourselves or entertaining you. We recognise that this push for the next thing can cause unexpected results for some people, but again we test fully as we go and any isues that come about we are dedicated to fixing as soon as we physically can.

-Annoying Bugs. I never know if boarding will work properly so I avoid it now. After losing a fully manned fourth rate to a half manned sloop in boarding action(numbers remained static for about two minutes then my fourth rate broke away, routed, lost half its men, and sank). That's a huge part of sea battles that I don't even try anymore because of a bug. No sea invasions by the AI. AI way too defensive at all times unless you have a city with nobody in it (even if they couldn't see from FoW), and then they suddenly find a will to live. Trade spamming (I want your city this turn….and the next….and the next, ad infinitum). ETC. you get the idea.

A number of these smaller bugs have already been addressed or are being addressed currently, specifically the boarding issues, Naval Invasions are also being fixed and the campaign AI, well, the beta testers are reporting a huge change in their aggression on the next patch. We appreciate there will always be people who take the stance that 'these things should have been done before release' and thats a valid viewpoint. All we can do as a developer here is ask for your understanding as a community based on all the things we want to achieve and hope you'll stay with us for. Critically I'd ask that you judge us by our actions. We have been working very hard to support Empire post release and this will continue, with large gameplay upgrades followed by hotfixes followed by upgrades and so forth. The first major gameplay upgrade is currently in beta testing and we're seeing very positive results.

So before I get carried away and post the little bugs, or the other annoying bugs, or the minuscule bugs, I'll stop myself and get to my point. Why did you let this happen CA? You already delayed the game before because presumably it wasn't done, and yet all these things must have been known by you, and you released it anyways (even with a day 0 patch!). I think the problem might be SEGA and arbitrary deadlines. The inane marketing of the Special Forces, was most likely SEGA. They probably wanted it out by Christmas but thank goodness someone at CA had the kahones to delay them. It's too bad they couldn't delay them until the summer to release a proper TW game.

This is an understandable reaction and I'd like to do my best to explain it if possible. Essentially we didn't let this happen as it appears. We thoroughly tested Empire on a huge range of computer specifications and software setups. Empire was tested in house right up until the minute of release, and was passed by both SEGA and CA QA authorities. This doesn't mean the game is bug free, it just means it's not been recognised to have critical issues across a variety of platforms. Post release we became aware very quickly that there were problems on certain hardware setups, that's when the technical support of hotfix-patch cycle was put into action. We are all gamers. We know how frustrating it is to pick up a new title, one that you've waited for, and get it home only to have it not work as you hoped. We won't ignore that there have been issues on certain platforms since release, and we're working hard to fix these. What I can say is that Empire was not pushed out the door or forced out by SEGA or CA. We need to focus on supporting Empire now it's out, and that's what we intend to do. Again, please, judge our actions on this one and hopefully you will not find CA wanting.

So now instead we have a good game that makes us all scratch our heads and wonder what could have been. You've lost some customers, even if I don't truly believe most of the "I'm returning this game right now!" posts, but more importantly you've lost respect…..again. MTW2 was pretty bad, but Kingdoms made up for it and people forgave. You promised an awful lot with E:TW and at least for the time being, have dashed many peoples' hopes for "game ultimate strategy game". So, was it SEGA? If not then why did you do it CA? Trust me, your fans wouldn't have cared if the release were delayed a few months if the end result had everything that seems to be missing. What maybe these companies don't understand, is that the backlash of the community towards an unfinished product is far greater than the annoyance and anxiety of a delayed release.

In an ideal world we would develop forever, a game would have infinite funding and an eternal development cycle, we could explore everything we ever wanted to do and create it, but the ultimate purpose of a game is to be released and enjoyed. We know there are those who feel that Empire wasn't at the standard they expected and as such have decided not to support CA further. What I would say is as above, we would like to be judged by the way we support Empire after release. Your investment in our game is still valuable to as, our time and lives went into it and so did your money. We will continue to support it, therefore if you feel you can stick with us then thank you.

So in closing, and reading back, I didn't nearly cover all that I wanted to but it was getting a little long in the tooth, so meh. I just want to say that the game is good, but I am not naïve. I can read, I can look around, and I see that there is a lot of work to be done. There are already grumblings from the community of "Great, now we have to fix CAs mess again." Is that the legacy this company wants? Look at Firaxis games (Civ 3, Civ4), some of the greatest strategy games ever made and some of my favorite games of all time. Yet, they are horrible at patching their games(on time, and in full). Colonization doesn't even have a patch yet and it's approaching a year old! The Civ4 expansion BtS was notorious for community made patches and fixes, and still is. Don't go down that route. I really think you should ditch SEGA and get back to a 3rd party publisher like Activision used to be. Don't let the deadline or focus on wealth rule your product, or you will lose your product.

SEGA have bought Creative Assembly, we are a studio owned and operated by SEGA. Our approach with Empire has been to aim for the sky, I appreciate in some peoples eyes we've got as far as the horizon or perhaps even the field, but we won't stop just because the game has been released. We think it's great now, but that it could be magnificent in time. Therefore for those of you who are still concerned, please treat this as stage 1 of the launch, the booster rockets fall away and we now drive stage 2 with the fuel of patching and support. A clunky metaphor but one that hopefully indicates that we're as dedicated to seeing Empire succeed post release as we were beforehand.

For those of you who decide you don't wish to be part of TW's journey any longer our thanks for your time to date and your support, it means a lot. For those of you who have shown constructive criticism and are still supporting Empire and working with us, thank you, we owe our continued effort and employment to you and we won't forget it.

Kind regards,
Kieran

[satchef1]

This should have been said before release really, it feels a lot like "Hey guys! Thanks for giving us the money to finish working on this game! Yeah, sorry about the problems. They'll be sorted in due course now that we have the money to finish the game."

Personally i'd have returned it to the store and bought it again in a few months if it wasn't a Steam game.

It'll be a great game once they fix the bugs, glitches and CTDs, sort the balance and AI out and release the mod tools :)

[Slaists]

It's funny, how the company response goes exactly along the fan predicted lines of "game was not released unfinished..."

Not sure how the absence of Naval invasions in a Naval era can be called a "finished" feature or the fact that the walls of the top fort level (the star fort) are practically useless, especially when compared to the fort type one level below (gun-fort is deadly to attackers), or the fact that the fort guns, when controlled by AI troops shoot across half the map but become active only when enemy is almost on top of the walls, if controlled by the player, or the fact that ships when grouped are immune to 'anchor' command even though the command is available, etc., etc.

The game, in it's current state, is full of unfinished features or features that do not function as intended.

But I agree, it could be a great one.

[Barkhorn1x]

It's funny, how the company response goes exactly along the fan predicted lines of "game was not released unfinished..."

The game, in it's current state, is full of unfinished features or features that do not function as intended.

I have to agree here as these are "issues" that one picks up on when playing for a day or two. No regression testing with hundreds of testers across hundreds of hours needed.

Oh, and how about the pathing bugs? I just LOST a very hard fought battle as the Prussians in East Prussia vs a combination Polish/Courland army. I was outnumbered 2-1 and by a combination of fire and movement I managed to route the enemy off the field. Except for a single provincial cavalyman who "got stuck" behind an outhouse and would not budge and could not be attacked. So I hit end battle and instead of a victory and half of my army still intact I get a "Close Defeat" and only 10% of my force left!!! This pathing issue ruined my campaign. And I knew that the pathing through scattered houses was FUBAR the first day I started playing.

We appreciate there will always be people who take the stance that 'these things should have been done before release' and thats a valid viewpoint.

Yea, it's a valid viewpoint because these people are correct. Known issues should not be allowed out the door. And Keiran does his company no service in refusing to admit the obvious - that MANY of these bugs must have been known to anyone paying the slightest attention.

But I agree, it could be a great one.

Your keyboard to God's ears.

[Karash]

There is no way this game is "finished" and any CA employee stating otherwise is simply lying for damage control.

[pevergreen]

Yet again, your view points.

Stubborness helps no one.

[nafod]

Absolute rubbish.

The presence of the following in the aggregate makes me believe otherwise:
1. Saved game corruptions
2. No naval invasions
3. AI Ineptitude
4. Pathing in cities and forts
5. Campaign map lag
6. Fleet CTD's
7. Trade zone bugs

[Tsavong]

I think the AI is much improved over M2 sure it its not as good as a human but there are times when it just works wonders on the battle map.

[al Roumi]

Have we learnt anything from what CA said? Not really, and yes they should totally have said this earlier. Instead we've had weeks of frustration met with stonewalling from CA.

Naming a long list of things that are a nuisance in every battle as minor bugs is ridiculous. Have they played their damn game?

Bunkum.

[Gaius Baltar]

I have to challenge Kiernans statement ... "that it is a minority of people experiencing these issues". From my own observations here at the .org, on twcenter and the official forums, a large segment of the consumer base is having stability issues that effect all operating systems and computer designs. It is clearly a software issue. This could be as high as 40% of the customers.

The stability must be improved before any patches relating to gameplay are released, or any attempt to "patch" the experience will be futile.

I wont even bring up the lack of a meaningful AI (naval invasions), battlefield and campaign map bugs that technically cripple this game. Or the clone armies, cannon producing native americans, etc, etc. STEAM was a poor choice for software distribution.

I can sum up my whole ETW experience in one word..

Fraud

We were lied to about the game design by CA/SEGA, we were lied to by the reviewers about the playability, and we have been lied again to about the technical/playability issues that have arisen now that ETW has been released.

Where is accountability? Programming? Design? Marketing, the community? - all have failed here in what appears to be a deliberate fashion.

You all should read the book "The Best Way to Rob a Bank is to Own One".

[NimitsTexan]

I have had three crash bugs in campaign . . . I could play past all of them, and have had no crashes since the last couple of patches.

Those who have CTDs tend to post about them, those who do not, do not. As a percentage of those who have the game across the globe, the number of people who have posted in all total war forums combined probably does not even represent a whole percent.

[Pinxit]

You are all being quite hard on CA.

I for one, believe this game is by far the greatest game of all time. Its so epic and has so much depth. Granted, there are issues thats need to be adressed. Creative Assembly aimed for the stars but got stuck in the clouds. Still, the clouds are higher up than any other game out there in the genre. I believe that with a lot of post release work this game truly could reach the stars.

Some things I want to see except that which have already been said:

1. My stationary (they are all stationary) fortress _moved_. Jupp. It did not move on the campaign map, but during two different attacks against my fortress the battle map looked totally different. This is not a huge error, but still something of a "Oh really? Last battle my fortress was on a huge hill in a landscape full of trees and now my fortress is on flat grass covered landscape. I did not move my fort! The enemy must have moved my fort while I was sleeping!".

2. I want to be able to give my generals names of my chosing.

3. Charles XII should be able to participate in the battles as a general. I thought CA said that Charles XII of Sweden were the only king who could do this? But I sure cant get him to ride with his troops. Sweden should have a huge moral bonus because of Charles going to battle with his army. Ofcourse, his death on the battlefield could turn this bonus in the opposite direction.

4. Reinforcements arrive at very weird places.

5. Statistics at the end of a campaign. Now this is really important to me. And I do mean _really_ important. I would kill for this feature.

I want to know exactly how many battles I fought, how many I won, who was the greatest general during the campaign (not just mine), how many of my soldiers died, how many they killed, who they killed, bars, stats, numbers, economy, awards, largest battle, graphs showing which country was strongest in certain areas during certain times, best regiement (most kills, least losses), worst regiment (most losses, least kills), I want statistics at the end of the game that shows all this. Thats what I really want, the CTD be damned, the statistics is more important.

[hoom]

Clearly the game was not ready for release.

When certain groups around here were clamouring for early release I was stating I'd prefer a year long delay or whatever length of time was needed to make sure everything was working sweet.

If they fix the bugs, I'll be happy & this could be the greatest TW ever.

Some of the things that people are complaining about (eg unit pathfinding) are maybe not perfect but much better than we had in previous games.

There are heaps of truly awesome bits in this game.

There are vastly more features & variables in ETW than in any First Person Shooter, vastly more things that an AI needs to be aware of & to be able to cope with properly.

[SpiritFox]

Well, having worked with a development team for a couple of years, I can sympathize with CAs testing issues. Sometimes, when you've been working on something for so long, some bugs just fly past your head without you even realizing it. It's like using that cranky 6-year-old PC you just don't want to throw away. You grow so used to its little quirks that you're inured to crud that other people will find impossibly frustrating. That's why, when I was doing testing, my boss insisted I spend as little time with the program as possible - so that I wouldn't fall into those little self-troubleshooting routines.

I hate testing myself. It's an endless chore that has to be repeated every time so much as a single line of code is changed. And, for that matter, the CA test team really might never have actually *played* the game. At least when I was working on testing, the dev team gave me a list of variables to test and that's all I did. For weeks. I never actually had an "organic" experience so to speak. Just methodically poking holes in anything that might fall apart - e.g, 1 click variable 1 + 1 click variable 2 + hold variable 2 for three minutes + click variable 4 + click variable 3 etc. I just followed a set test plan and never actually *used* the program I was working on.

That's for a simple data gathering program. Something like ETW... well, let's just say that I would *never* want to test something like that ever.

Still, that's not going to stop me from bitching the hell out of the AI. On normal, the damn thing gets stuck behind walls to the point it doesn't actually just do the intelligent thing and hop over the wall and take cover on the opposite side when I've waltzed around them and hit them from behind. It garrisons buildings in the middle of nowhere, isolated from the bulk of its troops, charges cavalry straight across my line of fire, forms a fucking square in the face of 2 line, 2 grenadier, 3 6pdrs and 2 18pdrs, and generally demonstrates the intelligence of a sackful of rocks. What I'd give for a learning AI that'd take a players tactics apart and react intelligently to them.

I've only had two crashes so far. One immediately after a naval battle against some pirates and another when moving some ships around. Annoying, but not gamebreaking.

[aimlesswanderer]

Nothing really ground breaking in that response, it was a completely standard corporate response to a bugged product.

Apart from the CTDs, being unable to finish a turn, massive slowdowns on the campaign map, stupid pathfinding, etc etc, I think that the biggest bug may well be the lack of AI naval invasions. This essentially means that outside of Europe the European powers don't take any territory and you don't have to defend your provinces there (unless the NA are nearby). After a few games this has meant that factions like the UP don't expand or get killed off, and the only changes - apart form what the player does - take place because of land swaps or faction exterminations.

I guess that it is "historically accurate", but it means that the player is the only one who actually does anything in the Americas especially. The pirates should be able to invade places if they are lightly defended, and perhaps the rebels cold band together sometimes. Also, if a faction's home regions are taken it should trigger a Colonial empire or something which would have most of the faction's overseas holdings. This might actually get the AI to DO something, if it can't stuff around in Europe any more.

[Servius]

I think you all are being a bit rough. I've experience many of the CTD problems since release, so I have as many reasons to be ticked with ETW as anyone else. I've also been playing TW games since Shogun, so I've also had ample time to get frustrated with CA.

But I have to say that ETW is the best TW game they've ever made. I know it had bugs, and they need to be fixed. I know we'd all prefer that there were 0 bugs on release, but console games get released with bugs and they're designed with everyone using the exact same hardware and software set-up!

I'm never surprised by weak AI because it's the hardest thing in the world to do right. It is something I always expect the devs to continue to tweak and improve after release, but I've never played a game with a challenging AI out of the box.

ETW has so many new things that, I think, are HUGE improvements over previous TW games. I don't have to babysit pissy citizens anymore like the worst of times in RTW. I can build multiple buildings at once now, both in the city AND throughout the region. The travel distance of armies, navies, and agents has been increased, so I don't bash my head in frustration about how long it takes to move across the map. The diplomacy system shows you the reasons and numbers behind how other nations feel about you, which is an enormous improvement. I don't have to choose between towns that make money and fortresses that don't like in M2TW. I have real naval combat for the first time in the series. The graphics are beautiful (but don't focus too much on that CA, AI >>>>>> graphics!). No more agent spam. Diplomats are gone and replaced with a better system, princesses are gone, assassins and spies have been merged... You also don't have to build or pay any upkeep for the agents you DO get. There's a technology tree, and it improves existing units and structures rather than just unlocking replacements that you have to build! The trade system is much more transparent and open to your control what with trade goods you produce, trading posts you can park merchant ships on, trade routes you can either plunder/raid or block completely.

Of the things that are bad with this game (bugs primarily), I don't think ETW has abnormally more than usual for other PC games. On the things that are great about this game, I think there are an unusually large number of improvements in this installment relative to the number of innovations you get in other games. I think only Relic does more to mix things up each time it makes a new game, and as a fan of DOW2, I have to say that ETW got more of those new things right than DOW2 did.

Kiernan said the right things. There's only so much words can do to soothe. All I ever care to hear from devs is:
1) They're listening to the players
2) They're aware of the issues raised by the players
3) They agree with the players that the issues are problems and the devs intend to fix them
4) When those fixes are imminent

After that, I judge them by their actions. The patches so far have made ETW far more stable for me. While I still get the occasional unavoidable CTD that forces me to abandon a campaign, they're WAY less frequent now, and I hope I'm able to further reduce the chance that they'll ruin my campaign by cycling 4 save files.

[nafod]

You are all being quite hard on CA.

Yup they produced a product and we paid for it. It isn't as if this game were provided for free, or as a service funded through taxes.

If it were I'd heed your thoughts a bit more. But it isn't so I shall not.

[Monk]

Thanks for the post and link Allu X.

Kiernan said the right things. There's only so much words can do to soothe. All I ever care to hear from devs is:
1) They're listening to the players
2) They're aware of the issues raised by the players
3) They agree with the players that the issues are problems and the devs intend to fix them
4) When those fixes are imminent

I have to agree.

I know that it is very easy to be angry at CA given the way they handled the games release, and quite frankly if anyone wants to stomp their feet and let steam shoot from their ears I'm obliged to listen what they have to say (so long as it's respectful). Personally I feel some of those disappointments and even frustration toward both CA and the finalized product that was released about a month ago.

But that's the kicker folks. We are only one month removed from the release and CA have acknowledged quite a bit of a mishap on their part and are, by all admissions, putting quite a bit of money and manpower in order to fix the game up right. Am I suggesting that you should be grateful for that? Not at all, i'm not suggesting you should be anything. Rather I would suggest that we all take a step back and look at the situation for what it is before anyone goes and makes angry posts, especially those that throw around such livid terms as "lied to" and "deceived".

Sure you can go on about how CA lied to its community if you want but that argument only holds water if CA are genuinely bad people, and I personally don't get that vibe. If I did, I wouldn't have spent the last ten years playing total war games.

[nafod]

I'm not willing to state "fraud" or "incompetence" in any means. But can we all acknowledge there is definitely an expectation gap that exists here?

Also I ask any additional posters if they believe Kiernan has no incentive to defend the company standpoint.

Not that I disagree with his approach, I'm glad to see feedback from devs.

But I'd rather not have to see it at all.

[Monk]

I'm not willing to state "fraud" or "incompetence" in any means. But can we all acknowledge there is definitely an expectation gap that exists here?

Also I ask any additional posters if they believe Kiernan has no incentive to defend the company standpoint.

Not that I disagree with his approach, I'm glad to see feedback from devs.

But I'd rather not have to see it at all.

Without a doubt there is an expectation gap: However if you were here for the weeks leading up to ETW I'm inclined to say that even if the game had cured cancer not everyone's expectations would have been met. Many were hyped up by the insanely high scores ETW was receiving from many (read: all) media outlets who were not willing to tell us the down and dirty truth about ETW. And who could blame us for getting our hopes up? With such praises as "best strategy game of all time" it was impossible, not having the game in hand, to wonder if this would really be what it was claimed to be.

What is the truth? The truth about the game is that it is without a doubt, the best game we've gotten in the last five years from CA. What is also true is that it is buggier than a bee-hive and many of the core features, the meat and potatoes, are either glitchy or just not working right now. (AI aggressiveness, Trade zone glitches, MP issues, I could go on.) What is further true? CA has released around four patches thus far for ETW, two of which have caused at least two more problems then they fixed - but that is the point of the community beta. They realized they released ETW in a less than polished way and turned to patches. They again fouled their patches in not testing them, caving to the community's outcry and thus only making the problem worse, therefore they have turned to a slower patching process.

It is without a doubt that CA could have handled any of the stages, be it release or the following patches, in a much better way than they did. And I agree. In a perfect world I would have loved ETW to have completely shattered my mind and melted my eyes by how amazingly polished it was on day one, but considering that CA is hard at work on getting to that point I really can't sit here and claim they are worthy of my ridicule.

If anything: My ire is reserved for the media who were so eager to get their hands on this game that they took off their critic cap and threw roses at ETW's feet. The game is good, but it's nowhere near as playable or polished as we were lead to believe.

[nafod]

Without a doubt there is an expectation gap: However if you were here for the weeks leading up to ETW I'm inclined to say that even if the game had cured cancer not everyone's expectations would have been met. Many were hyped up by the insanely high scores ETW was receiving from many (read: all) media outlets who were not willing to tell us the down and dirty truth about ETW. And who could blame us for getting our hopes up? With such praises as "best strategy game of all time" it was impossible, not having the game in hand, to wonder if this would really be what it was claimed to be.

What is the truth? The truth about the game is that it is without a doubt, the best game we've gotten in the last five years from CA. What is also true is that it is buggier than a bee-hive and many of the core features, the meat and potatoes, are either glitchy or just not working right now. (AI aggressiveness, Trade zone glitches, MP issues, I could go on.) What is further true? CA has released around four patches thus far for ETW, two of which have caused at least two more problems then they fixed - but that is the point of the community beta. They realized they released ETW in a less than polished way and turned to patches. They again fouled their patches in not testing them, caving to the community's outcry and thus only making the problem worse, therefore they have turned to a slower patching process.

It is without a doubt that CA could have handled any of the stages, be it release or the following patches, in a much better way than they did. And I agree. In a perfect world I would have loved ETW to have completely shattered my mind and melted my eyes by how amazingly polished it was on day one, but considering that CA is hard at work on getting to that point I really can't sit here and claim they are worthy of my ridicule.

If anything: My ire is reserved for the media who were so eager to get their hands on this game that they took off their critic cap and threw roses at ETW's feet. The game is good, but it's nowhere near as playable or polished as we were lead to believe.

Excellently stated. But I will also point out that the game media as well has an incentive to give rave reviews to those who throw revenue dollars at their feet. This is to an extent minimalized with your local (READ important) news, but the "gaming" news seems to lack this ethical boundary.

[aimlesswanderer]

I believe that it is reasonable to expect to be able to play a short campaign to completion with only a few ctds with the game as it was released. However, I had a minor "can't finish the turn because the finish turn button is greyed out" problem, which required 25+ reloads and a massive autocalc rush to finish the game before it totally died on me.

I think that many of the new features of the game are really good, however, they are so bugged that they end up being very frustrating. I can see what they wanted to do and how it should make the game better and more interesting, but since they don't work it just annoys me no end.

Previous TW games had their share of problems, but not as many or as serious ones as this game, at least in my experience. They tried to do more, yes, but that seems to have meant many more serious bugs, which, at this time, are a much worse problem.

Not to mention trying to start a new game after a "patch" and not being able to finish the first turn even, that is just pathetic. Come on, it can't even last 1 turn? After few patches too. That put me off for 4 days.

I will still play the game, but definitely not as much, or with as much enjoyment (which is, after all, why I play in the first place), and I will be eagerly awaiting some good mods, since who knows when official "fixes" will eventually meander through.

[Ordani]

I think you all are being a bit rough. I've experience many of the CTD problems since release, so I have as many reasons to be ticked with ETW as anyone else. I've also been playing TW games since Shogun, so I've also had ample time to get frustrated with CA.

People are forgiving of sound and video crashes. It happens. We know. Not every unit has exactly the right jacket and hat. It's ok, modders get off on fixing that sort of thing anyway. But the dozens of enumerations of the AI-faction crash bugs and savegame corruptions that result in unplayable campaigns, the AI being ignorant of entire areas of the game, numerous map transit problems, et al -- these are the same sort of problem that plague every CA release since Shogun. These problems are design and testing failures independent of the interface of the game.

This isn't 2000 anymore. This isn't their first big game. You can tell me you had QA people working around the clock for months the minute after you explain how they totally missed that the AI NEVER performed sea transit operations for armies and that several of the land-bridge points only work one way and splitting trade fleets destroys the trade lane they were on as well as making the units unactionable. This is not obscure, arcane considerations exposed by exposing their idiot-proof game to a Better Idiot. This is nobody bothering to try and move a unit across Denmark.

I've implemented unit and regression testing automation for far more complex systems that a single-input game state with a high level scripting language built into it. Once you have the basic operations instrumented for your test apparatus, it's just attention to detail. You can buy development packages that do the majority of this work for you, and even dumb-terminal oriented testing software that simply replay key/mouse input if you're super lazy.

I cut CA a lot of slack. I know they're a small shop working in a niche game market, and I appreciate their games more than nearly anybody else's. But with the possible exception of the VH/VH unplayable campaign bug and the other "no naval transit" bug, they've never had anything this much of a show-stopper for so many people, much less several of them at the same time. Maybe the original MTW was worse, I never played it, but out of the box they've never had something this sloppy before and despite my fondness for them, this was simply too much. I'm apparently not alone in feeling enormously let down and disillusioned with ETW.

[lenin96]

Lets sum it all up like this: If you don't love TW games or don't support CA then what are you doing on these forums!?

[Zatoichi]

They did say they were testing right up until release - this may explain the lack of naval invasions - maybe there were more naval invasions than you could shake a stick at right up until the the last pre-release patch, and something was tweaked that stopped them working, but as it wasn't on the list of things to test, it got missed. I doubt there was time for a full regression test in the final few hours.

That's not to say it isn't annoying, just that it is possible for something like this to slip through.

Or maybe it was never working and in the thousands of hours of testing it underwent, no one noticed.

I'm glad that they're working on these things to improve the overall experience, and address some of the problems that were evident in the released version - I want this stuff to work how they designed it.

[Yun Dog]

I think you all are being a bit rough. I've experience many of the CTD problems since release, so I have as many reasons to be ticked with ETW as anyone else. I've also been playing TW games since Shogun, so I've also had ample time to get frustrated with CA.

But I have to say that ETW is the best TW game they've ever made. I know it had bugs, and they need to be fixed. I know we'd all prefer that there were 0 bugs on release, but console games get released with bugs and they're designed with everyone using the exact same hardware and software set-up!

I'm never surprised by weak AI because it's the hardest thing in the world to do right. It is something I always expect the devs to continue to tweak and improve after release, but I've never played a game with a challenging AI out of the box.

ETW has so many new things that, I think, are HUGE improvements over previous TW games. I don't have to babysit pissy citizens anymore like the worst of times in RTW. I can build multiple buildings at once now, both in the city AND throughout the region. The travel distance of armies, navies, and agents has been increased, so I don't bash my head in frustration about how long it takes to move across the map. The diplomacy system shows you the reasons and numbers behind how other nations feel about you, which is an enormous improvement. I don't have to choose between towns that make money and fortresses that don't like in M2TW. I have real naval combat for the first time in the series. The graphics are beautiful (but don't focus too much on that CA, AI >>>>>> graphics!). No more agent spam. Diplomats are gone and replaced with a better system, princesses are gone, assassins and spies have been merged... You also don't have to build or pay any upkeep for the agents you DO get. There's a technology tree, and it improves existing units and structures rather than just unlocking replacements that you have to build! The trade system is much more transparent and open to your control what with trade goods you produce, trading posts you can park merchant ships on, trade routes you can either plunder/raid or block completely.

Of the things that are bad with this game (bugs primarily), I don't think ETW has abnormally more than usual for other PC games. On the things that are great about this game, I think there are an unusually large number of improvements in this installment relative to the number of innovations you get in other games. I think only Relic does more to mix things up each time it makes a new game, and as a fan of DOW2, I have to say that ETW got more of those new things right than DOW2 did.

Kiernan said the right things. There's only so much words can do to soothe. All I ever care to hear from devs is:
1) They're listening to the players
2) They're aware of the issues raised by the players
3) They agree with the players that the issues are problems and the devs intend to fix them
4) When those fixes are imminent

After that, I judge them by their actions. The patches so far have made ETW far more stable for me. While I still get the occasional unavoidable CTD that forces me to abandon a campaign, they're WAY less frequent now, and I hope I'm able to further reduce the chance that they'll ruin my campaign by cycling 4 save files.

This post sums up my thoughts

Already I have seen greater support for this game than the previous titles where we waited months for a single patch, which wasnt guarenteed and god forbid you should want 3 patches!!!!

Lets get the platform and stability issues fixed so more people can play the game, then I think we will be amazed at what a few playability fixes will do.

I agree this has been an ambitious build and am willing to be tolerant with regards the issues as I believe they will be fixed and when they are I will be playing what I think is the greatest TW made. I also agree with Pinxit, 4 titles and we still cant get an end of game summary, its clear from my stats page on steam, the numbers are all there, so can we get a small scorecard wrap up for a game. Its a would be nice, maybe the expansion.

[Daveybaby]

They did say they were testing right up until release - this may explain the lack of naval invasions - maybe there were more naval invasions than you could shake a stick at right up until the the last pre-release patch, and something was tweaked that stopped them working, but as it wasn't on the list of things to test, it got missed. I doubt there was time for a full regression test in the final few hours.

That's all too likely. Anyone who has ever played around with an AI even 1/10th as complex as this one will know that tweaking something to fix one bit of errant behaviour will quite often have unintended and unforseeable consequences elsewhere. It's like trying to get 3 ferrets into a box.

There are some pretty obvious errors which i find it hard to believe weren't spottable before release. But then again, i doubt many of the people throwing tantrums on the various TW forums have any idea just how insanely manic the last couple of months of development have probably been at CA, once a release date is set in stone and they have to get a workable product out the door. But i guess people sometimes have a busy day flipping burgers and think they know what pressure is.

And also: There's no way you can fully regression test something as complex as this game. There are just too many different behaviours and too much persistent state over too long a duration for it to be possible to test all of the possibilities even if you carried on until the end of the universe. Things are ALWAYS going to slip through that will only be found once you have thousands of people playing the game in different ways on different hardware for months on end. The best we can hope for in the real world is that CA fix the problems once theyre found.

People arent going to like this, but: if you want complexity youre going to have to accept the fact that youre going to be a paying beta tester for a few months. Throwing tantrums isnt going to change the reality of the situation one bit, and that's that games have a finite development budget - and therefore a finite development timescale - you *cant* just sit there for years testing the thing before you release it or you will go bust and there wont be any more total war games, ever. If you dont like it then either wait a month or two before you buy or just abandon the whole thing and go buy an xbox and fire up gears of war or some other shiny yet wafer thin slice of gameplay with everyone else.

I mean... you people *do* realise we're getting slightly more than just shogun with better graphics each time, right?

[Frankenbeasley]

I have to say, every time a new game is released, the forums for each respective title seem to be carbon copies of each other: some people experience game-breaking issues and they (rightly) make noise about it. Others assume that because there is noise being made then such problems are the norm rather than the exception. Truth is, only a minority of the players of any particular game actually post on forums. Only a minority of those who do post actually experience each problem. It doesn't mean that these issues are somehow 'less important', of course, but nor does it mean that the title is a disaster. It is just the nature of a complex product.

I used to work in the car industry. We could work for years on the development of a new model, be certain that we had it tested to perfection and yet, when we actually went to launch, we would always find issues cropping up in the real world that had somehow evaded our testing in development. In the months after launch we always had to redesign parts or change specs. I've known models come out that have been seen to develop potentially fatal flaws. No-one considered the model 'unfinished', it was just the way things happen with absurdly complicated bits of tech.

Issues will get fixed, eventually everyone will have a fully working game and, I expect, the majority of players will get past any initial disappointment and get on with enjoying what is swift becoming an awesome game.

[Allu X]

I have to say, every time a new game is released, the forums for each respective title seem to be carbon copies of each other: some people experience game-breaking issues and they (rightly) make noise about it. Others assume that because there is noise being made then such problems are the norm rather than the exception. Truth is, only a minority of the players of any particular game actually post on forums. Only a minority of those who do post actually experience each problem. It doesn't mean that these issues are somehow 'less important', of course, but nor does it mean that the title is a disaster. It is just the nature of a complex product.

I used to work in the car industry. We could work for years on the development of a new model, be certain that we had it tested to perfection and yet, when we actually went to launch, we would always find issues cropping up in the real world that had somehow evaded our testing in development. In the months after launch we always had to redesign parts or change specs. I've known models come out that have been seen to develop potentially fatal flaws. No-one considered the model 'unfinished', it was just the way things happen with absurdly complicated bits of tech.

Issues will get fixed, eventually everyone will have a fully working game and, I expect, the majority of players will get past any initial disappointment and get on with enjoying what is swift becoming an awesome game.

The problem with saying only a minority of players experience problems though - is that it is totally not true.

Okay, so I myself have only ever encountered 1 CTD in a battle - however, you can't say that the minority of players don't have Naval Invasions, since it is a fact that 100% of players don't have them. The same goes with poor Ai pathfinding and such, everyone has them.

[I of the Storm]

That's nothing but PR rubbish. Just read this part and think about it. With twist and turns of words, it basically admits that the game was not finished on release and nobody cared.

Empire was tested in house right up until the minute of release, and was passed by both SEGA and CA QA authorities. This doesn't mean the game is bug free, it just means it's not been recognised to have critical issues across a variety of platforms.

Seriously, this whole official statement is nothing but official blahblahblah. The usual strategy, all good intentions, everybody did his best, nobody's fault, just as intended blablabla...

I haven't bought ETW yet because I expected something like this to happen. I didn't expect it to be as bad as it seems to have turned out. Will buy next year maybe, if at all.