Quote Originally Posted by [cF]Adherbal
no, but I remember all of us commenting how the soldiers and horses moving in syncronization looked stupid. And it seems CA picked that up and changed it. So I don't like people commenting on little details that have nothing to do with gameplay and probably take quite a while to fix. I rather have ppl commenting on possible gameplay problems the screenshots reveil, such as that cavalry charge through friendly infantry.
Sorry, I just don't think it works that way.

CA have an art department for the graphics and an AI department for the AI. It's not as though they are going to pull the AI programmers off the job to go and do some extra work in the art department, it's not their field of expertise.

Rather, it's a matter of the art department having a given time and given budget to create a given number of effects, and it's a matter of deciding which effects get put in and which get left out. Same with the AI dept. So I don't believe it makes a lick of difference to the eventual standard of the one to make a request of the other. That's not how things are organized.

Apart from which, it's not my fault that CA decided to make graphics a priority, that was their decision, based on their belief about what sells. I think you're just kidding yourself if you think their emphasis on graphics has anything to do with what I or anyone else in the community has requested, because on the contrary it's clear that with RTW they largely ignored our requests for better gameplay in preference for better graphics.

It's CA who decided they wanted to put the big biccies into graphics, if you don't like it I suggest you take it up with them and quit trying to blame end users like me for a strategic decision we didn't ask for, had nothing to do with, and in the final analysis can only choose to either accept and adjust ourselves to, or just continue to moan about even though it's clearly not about to change.