Would you buy the next TW game if there is no patch for Kingdoms?

[Cheetah]

As the question asks. Please only yes or no answers, as there is already a long discussion here: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=93351

[FactionHeir]

As the CA people said, they do not care about petitions and polls, only about discussion topics, so this topic seems rather .... pointless?

Also, asking for a patch for kingdoms only wouldn't really cut it. I'd prefer one that fixes M2TW (as this will fix Kingdoms too).

[Mouzafphaerre]

.


Oh, I don't care if they care, btw. If they don't care, I won't be their customer, that simple.

Medieval's half finished features (GA points) were standable.
Rome's memory leak can be remedied by adding more RAM and reinforcements bug has a workaround.
But third time pays all.
.

[Zenicetus]

That poll isn't fine-grained enough to cover all users' concerns about CA and their games. For example, I'm very interested in Empire, but I won't buy it if it includes invasive copy protection like Kingdoms does.

I really don't care if they patch Kingdoms or not, except for that issue. Actually I'd rather see the devs spending 100% of their time on polishing up Empire.

[Slug For A Butt]

That poll isn't fine-grained enough to cover all users' concerns about CA and their games. For example, I'm very interested in Empire, but I won't buy it if it includes invasive copy protection like Kingdoms does.

I really don't care if they patch Kingdoms or not, except for that issue. Actually I'd rather see the devs spending 100% of their time on polishing up Empire.

Good for you. I don't care about what they do with Empire because I won't be buying it just as I haven't bought Kingdoms. I care more about what I have already spent my cash on, that should be fixed first shouldn't it?
So that poll covers it enough for me. Until they tidy up the existing rubbish they have sold us, I won't touch another TW title until it's second hand.

[Primative1]

I won't touch another TW title until it's second hand.

I'm with Sally, CA dont get another penny from me.

I've been with the series since Shogan, but theyve got rich and decided to screw us all with shoddy crap and intrusive, hidden malware that doesn't uninstall with the game.

Screw them, theyve screwed us. IMHO of course.

[Meldarion]

I won't be pre-ordering it like I have with other TW games. I guess I'll just hang back see how it goes before making a decision on ETW. I'll go by player opinion this time around rather than reviewer ratings like I did with MTW2.

[Galain_Ironhide]

Finally, someone doing something proactive!

This is the kind of thing I wanted to see. Good on ya Cheeta.



Anyway, No I will not be buying any further titles including Kingdoms until the game is patched.

[DVX BELLORVM]

No.

[Odin]

I won't be pre-ordering it like I have with other TW games. I guess I'll just hang back see how it goes before making a decision on ETW. I'll go by player opinion this time around rather than reviewer ratings like I did with MTW2.

This is the prudent course for any and all PC gamers, no matter the title.

[Hellenic_Hoplite]

Everyone says they won't be buying it but in a year when there's nothing else good out I guarntee that at least some of you will be buying it. I mean at the end of the day You're not playing some boring FPS or just another RTS You're playing Total War Game because no one else has come out with a concept like it. (except for imperial glory and thats considered a total war clone)

[crpcarrot]

i voted no but its not only because of patching.

it includes securom and i'm also extrememly unhappy that the "expansion" left the original purchasers hanging with unbalanced units. so whats the message CA is trying to convey to the purchasers of vanilla?

its absolutley unacceptable to me that i have to get a mod to make my game uptodate with CA's latest balancing. its makes me wonder what they will do next time

as others have mentioned this poll will probably not get much notice except if maybe everyone who voted leaves feedback as well.

[econ21]

I'll keep buying TW games until they make one I don't like. RTW might have been that game, but RTR and EB rescued it spectacularly. BI and especially M2TW have started to pull the tactical battles back towards those we enjoyed in STW and MTW.

A patch for Kingdoms would be nice, but from what I hear of the bugs - some minor features not working - it won't be a deal breaker for me.

If the passive AI and shield bugs of M2TW had not been patched, that would have been a deal breaker, as they were game killers for me. But now M2TW is in a pretty decent shape now. The Kingdoms rebalancing would have been nice, but even then I am not wholly convinced (the rebalancing seems to be based more on RPS and game balance principles than historical accuracy).

IMO, the big issues for ETW are (a) improving the strategic AI, which is still weak; (b) coping with the added tactical complexities of Napoleonic battles. To be honest, I doubt CA - or any games designer - will succeed fully on both scores, but it is a pretty safe bet they will do better than the competition (Imperial Glory, ).

[Ethelred Unread]

Like econ, I'll probably keep buying titles until they make one I don't like, and like
Hellenic_Hoplite it's because there's nothing like it out there at the moment.

[R'as al Ghul]

BI and especially M2TW have started to pull the tactical battles back towards those we enjoyed in STW and MTW.

Erm, I think that a lot of players disagree.
I know that you mostly see it from an SP perspective but RTW and everything that came after are not the tactical games that you get with MTW and STW. Everything is dumbed down, too fast or not included. We've been over the details many times.
I for one won't buy a new TW game until convinced that TW returns to real-time tactical battles at least on the basis of MTW/VI 2.01. We've had 2 full games and 3 expansions since then and the MP players or those that focus on the tactical side have gained nothing but only lost features.

HistWar: Les Grognards will probably take over some disgruntled former TW fans. CA can still have them back if they do it right this time.

R'as

[Puzz3D]

The very fact that Creative Assembly wanted to cut and run demonstrates a decline in their commitment to quality. If they patch Kingdoms now, it will just be for the purpose of damage control, and I would expect only a minimal effort will be put into it. Of more concern to me, since I don't have M2TW, is the decline over the last few years in the commintment to quality of the finished product and how that will affect the quality of ETW.

[Viking]

I enjoy to play M2TW. It does not fulfill it's potential, but that does not prevent me from enjoying it. It is not cool that they will not patch the game, but as long as I enjoy TW games, I'll keep on buying them.

[lancelot]

Wont buy next TW nor Kingdoms until fixed and invasive software removed. Period.

[Ferret]

looks like CA will be losing a lot of sales, and if they don't listen to polls why is there one about this subject in the launch menu?

[Jack Lusted]

As the CA people said, they do not care about petitions and polls, only about discussion topics, so this topic seems rather .... pointless?

We've just said we don't listen to petition, we've said nothing about polls.

[foop]

I've voted "no", but what I actually mean is that I'll say I'm not buying it. Then I'll be slightly interested, despite the huge buglists on the org ("French ships of the line cannot fire grapeshot, as the animation is missing"). Then I'll give in and buy it and feel dirty for the next couple of months.

[Kobal2fr]

I voted "gah".

I most probably won't buy Empires, but it has nothing to do with lack of patches for Kingdoms - as is the game is good 'nuff for me, and I'm sure EB2 will blow my mind away anyway. I wouldn't count M2TW as a total failure.

But thing is, Napoleonic battles don't do it for me. The historical period just doesn't suit my tastes in bloodshed . If people around here can't shut up about how grrrrreat it is, then maybe, just maybe. But signs point to no.

[econ21]

BI and especially M2TW have started to pull the tactical battles back towards those we enjoyed in STW and MTW.

Erm, I think that a lot of players disagree.

I chose my language carefully - "started to pull the tactical battles back". People may disagree with how far they have started to pull back, but I have not read anyone mount a convincing case that M2TW battles are not better than RTW ones.

I know that you mostly see it from an SP perspective but RTW and everything that came after are not the tactical games that you get with MTW and STW. Everything is dumbed down, too fast or not included. We've been over the details many times.

Yes, indeed, well travelled territory. But as the realism mods for RTW showed, the "too fast" issue is eminently moddable and my impression is that vanilla M2TW is closer to MTW than vanilla RTW in both walk speeds and kill rates. Even if I am wrong on that, M2TW battles are slower paced than RTW.

....those that focus on the tactical side have gained nothing but only lost features.

But you are overstating the case by stating everything is dumbed down and nothing is gained. Just off the top of my head, we have gained:

- Better controls (IIRC, some of the STW/MTW controls for reshaping your line or controlling the camera were painful).
- Decent siege battles: those in STW/MTW were soulless
- Better AI controlled and more lethal horse archers, including Cantabrian circle and Parthian shot. Those in MTW were dogfood in the AI hands; in RTW and M2TW they take their rightful place as amongst the best units in the game.
- More varied missile weapon modelling (in MTW, there were horse archer bows, normal bows and long bows only - in RTW, M2TW differences in missile troop effectiveness can be better modelled)
- More historical units (e.g. Scots Guard) and less generic army composition (no "Catholic army" with one or two unique units)
- More moddable units (one reason that playing battles in EB or other RTW mods is a joy)
- No more agonising multi-hour SP battles waiting for various waves of enemy reinforcements to appear and then run away
- Less suicidal generals
- Night battles
- A general that you can identify and identify with on the battle. (Together with the better trait system, it is a big plus to fighting battles)
- Potentially better modelling of cavalry charges and their receipt: I may be wrong but I don't think the earlier engines modelling the need for cavalry to get a decent run up to a charge, nor the need for infantry to be braced to negate their charge. Getting off a good cavalry charge is quite an art in mods such as RTR:PE.
- Elephants! (Dogs! Flaming pigs!.. sorry, I am starting to be provocative.)

Now, I know you can link to a post by Puzz3D or yourself listing 101 egregious errors of the RTW battle engine. But again, I choose my words carefully - I am not saying M2TW is a better engine (ie that the net gains are positive), just that it is blatantly false to claim nothing whatsoever has been gained.

Likewise, ETW will doubtless give us lots of new features (required by the new weapons technology).

[Mouzafphaerre]

We've just said we don't listen to petition, we've said nothing about polls.

.
Thanks for this clarification. I may not be content with your support but I definitely am with your civil manner (except one person's one particular act but no need to open that can of worms) and keeping your contact with the fans up.


.

[Lorenzo_H]

As the question asks. Please only yes or no answers, as there is already a long discussion here: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=93351

If you only want yes and no answers then why did you make the gah option?
I voted "gah".

I most probably won't buy Empires, but it has nothing to do with lack of patches for Kingdoms - as is the game is good 'nuff for me, and I'm sure EB2 will blow my mind away anyway. I wouldn't count M2TW as a total failure.

But thing is, Napoleonic battles don't do it for me. The historical period just doesn't suit my tastes in bloodshed . If people around here can't shut up about how grrrrreat it is, then maybe, just maybe. But signs point to no.

It's funny. The Napoleonic Period at the mere mentioning of the name has me salivating uncontrolably. It has been my favorite period of History for a long while, and I think it always will be.

[Hellenic_Hoplite]

Hellenic_Hoplite it's because there's nothing like it out there at the moment.

Exactly and I doubt there will be anytime soon but who knows and if that does happen maybe a little competition would be good for CA than maybe they would get their butts into gear and make some better TW games.

[Gaius Terentius Varro]

won't buy it anyways since i am not interested in naval combat but the lack of support for the product is an epic FAIL from CA

[nafod]

No.

Perhaps if the reception of the game is warm 1-3 months out.

I needn't explain why, nor will I discredit CA. As they have produced two titles I enjoy.

I do not consider MTW2 unplayable or broken. I consider it unfinished and the stance they have taken doesn't push me to anger, it merely makes me hesitant to do business with them in the future.

It could be worse; at least they aren't offering cheap console ports on the PC like another one of my ex-favorite development houses.

[RoadKill]

You guys are a bunch of bandwagoners (no offence). One guy complains about the problem in Kingdom cuz some guy got it for free, while he had to pay 60 bucks for it, then he starts a riot about something that hardly effects gamers.

Sorry to say, but I will be getting the next one. E:TW is going to be awsome and all of you know it, so sorry if you guys are gonna miss out over a stupid problem.

EDIt: (Wait you guys are complaining that Kingdoms won't have a patch for the Securom right?)

[Zenicetus]

EDIt: (Wait you guys are complaining that Kingdoms won't have a patch for the Securom right?)

Well, some of us are complaining about that. It's not a homogenous user group here. We all have our own gripes, 'ya know.

I've enjoyed RTW, RTW/BI and M2TW for what they are. I've had fun with those games, even though they're not perfect. No games are perfect. I would have bought Kingdoms if they hadn't put that stupid, invasive DRM on it.

I buy several PC games each year. I know that means living with copy protection. It doesn't have to mean living with invasive, arrogant, hassle-inducing copy protection. We all have to draw the line somewhere, and we're not all going to draw it in the same place.