This isn't an option because SEGA owns Creative Assembly. I would say that Creative Assembly should limit the number of features offered in their game to what can be successfully implimented in v1.0. This means being realistic with what resources are available, and also having a reasonable cut-off date beyond which new features are not allowed. That way a patch would only have to address unforseen stability issues and playbalance issues which I would think would be less work than also having to fix a myriad of broken features in a patch. It seems to me that SEGA would be more likely to approve a patch if it could be done quickly.Originally Posted by FactionHeir
That's what happens when people buy a game despite it having serious problems. They don't get a better game next time. RTW was enough to convince me that it's now a better policy for players to take a wait and see attitude with games made by Creative Assembly.Originally Posted by alpaca
Bookmarks