Results 1 to 30 of 43

Thread: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Deranged Rock Ape Member Zakor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hell, Indiana (Please pardon the redundancy)
    Posts
    60

    Default Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?

    Quote Originally Posted by BrutalDictatorship
    well...I'd like that.

    I have to be honest, I've never seen a company in this industry act like CA has over the past few months.

    Why do they absolutely REFUSE to ackowledge and address it?

    this is trolling or trying to stir things up...I'm genuinely curious as to what the problem is...
    They've learned from GWB...

  2. #2

    Default Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?

    Anyone who can tell me what CYA means gets a 1.3 Patch to RTW free of charge.

    Now, sure, when we buy the products they have all those legal contracts we agree to, whereby LEGALLY they can have a "two patch policy."

    But deep in their their hearts, they know their patching sucked this time around, they just can't admit to it.

    Try this as an experiment. Go into a McDonald's and order a Bg Mac. Take one bite and say to them: this hamburger tastes bad. See what they do.

    and by the way, the profit margins on hamburgers do not exceed software.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Senior Member Duke John's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    2,917

    Default Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?

    "two patch policy."
    For crying out loud, how many times will people make up the same false statements. They have a 1 patch policy! Patch 1.1 was nothing but a quick fix to make MP playable by more than 30 people.

    Shall we wait till someone says that CA abandons the Total War series for Total Warrior since it has been taken over by SEGA?

  4. #4

    Default Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?

    The quotation marks I included are meant to advise you that it's "sarcasm" or that it's their exact words, but necessarily the reality.

  5. #5
    The Black Senior Member Papewaio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    15,677

    Default Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?

    Quote Originally Posted by HarunTaiwan
    Anyone who can tell me what CYA means gets a 1.3 Patch to RTW free of charge.

    Now, sure, when we buy the products they have all those legal contracts we agree to, whereby LEGALLY they can have a "two patch policy."

    But deep in their their hearts, they know their patching sucked this time around, they just can't admit to it.

    Try this as an experiment. Go into a McDonald's and order a Bg Mac. Take one bite and say to them: this hamburger tastes bad. See what they do.

    and by the way, the profit margins on hamburgers do not exceed software.
    IMDHO

    Ah-ha and the developers are the owners of McDonalds or the Burger flippers... who decides policy the owners or the workers?

    You can complain to CA as much as you want, Activision own the publishing rights to RTW so bark up that tree for patches.

    IMDHO
    Last edited by Papewaio; 06-23-2005 at 12:49.
    Our genes maybe in the basement but it does not stop us chosing our point of view from the top.
    Quote Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
    Pape for global overlord!!
    Quote Originally Posted by English assassin
    Squid sources report that scientists taste "sort of like chicken"
    Quote Originally Posted by frogbeastegg View Post
    The rest is either as average as advertised or, in the case of the missionary, disappointing.

  6. #6

    Default Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?

    @ .ORG mods:
    I apologize as my last posting was a bit exaggerated. I was really suffering frustration at another site which really has done what I said, and let some of it intrude on that post. Please forgive. I remember speaking with you when things were at their darkest hour, and you all seemed pretty reasonable to me.
    "If you demand CA or any company absorb the cost of a future patch, the upfront price rises or you buy a subscription for continuous service. The latter is not available.
    " - killemall54
    "An expansion should be a free standing new feature product, not a bug fixing enticement." - Old Celt

  7. #7
    Moderator Moderator Gregoshi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Central Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    12,980

    Default Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?

    Thanks Old Celt. We all go through those times like that and it is sometimes hard to separate that one thing from the rest of your existence. Take a deep breath and keep on truckin'.
    This space intentionally left blank

  8. #8

    Default Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gregoshi
    Thanks Old Celt. We all go through those times like that and it is sometimes hard to separate that one thing from the rest of your existence. Take a deep breath and keep on truckin'.
    This is why I put the game aside for the time being. It's not worth the frustration, and continuous frustration is harmfull to you. I now play a different game which is a lot more enjoyable than RTW because it works better. We'll see what CA is able to do with BI, but it's going to take a lot to fix this game up to the point where it's worth playing as far as I'm concerned.

    CA keeps their game development secret, and I doubt that will change. As a result I think they will alway miss the mark on the type of gameplay that players want. I believe it was Mike Simpson who said that CA makes the gameplay the way they like it, and they hope that the players like it as well.

    _________Designed to match Original STW gameplay.


    Beta 8 + Beta 8.1 patch + New Maps + Sound add-on + Castles 2

  9. #9
    Lurker Member Mongoose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,422

    Default Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?

    Just out of curiosity...what game are you playing? MTW? Silent hunter 3?

  10. #10

    Default Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?

    No one is bitching about the developers as employees.

    Oh, you are saying CA the COMPANY is equivalent of a menial worker?

    Just like, say, Stephen King is the "developer" and Random House is the publisher, so if the book sucks, I need to complain to Random House.

    and yeah, the quality of a product is also the worker's responsibility, too.

  11. #11
    The Black Senior Member Papewaio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    15,677

    Default Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?

    If the binding of a book falls apart or a ten pages are missing do you complain to the publisher or authour?
    Our genes maybe in the basement but it does not stop us chosing our point of view from the top.
    Quote Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
    Pape for global overlord!!
    Quote Originally Posted by English assassin
    Squid sources report that scientists taste "sort of like chicken"
    Quote Originally Posted by frogbeastegg View Post
    The rest is either as average as advertised or, in the case of the missionary, disappointing.

  12. #12

    Default Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?

    I'd blame the publisher, but the reality of the situation is that the Author's rep is still tarnished.

    I do think you could have used a better example than a book, but still...it serves it's purpose.

    If I wear a suit to a powermeeting at work and the suit rips, my co-workers are not going to laugh at Armani, they're going to laugh at me.

  13. #13

    Default Re: How would CA being more open about their Development be a negative?

    I think a better analogy would be.

    A Macca's emplyee (C.A.)being told by the manager (Activision)to cook the burger(RTW) for 30 seconds instead of the usual 60 seconds.

    the 2% that complain do so to the employee.
    80% don't buy macca's anymore.
    and the rest don't notice the burger is half cooked.

    Result employee loses job.
    But plenty of new jobs at burger king.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO