How much would you have paid for ETW knowing what you know now?

**gardibolt** · 08-04-2009, 23:39

Never been able to get it to run. Waste of money.

**nafod** · 08-05-2009, 04:13

Originally Posted by Monk

I bought this game on day one. Actually I bought it on day negative two as I preordered it from Steam. I spent 50 USD on it and played it from the first hour of release, and if I had a time machine the week after buying to go back and change my purchase (or perhaps choose how much I could pay for it) I'd tell you I wouldn't have bought ETW.

I do not think it's a failing on CA's behalf, rather I think it is the fault of the massive PR campaign us fans were bombarded with in the days leading up to release. Every single gaming outlet reported that this was the "best game evar" and put ETW right in our face. ETW was touted as the best game of the generation, at least when it came to strategy titles, and honestly it was hard not to get swept up in all that hype. No one stood up to point out the flaws in the game, no one was looking out for us, all we got was "buy buy buy!" verdicts and many of us took the plunge.

What was waiting on the other side was a game that, while good and showing amazing room for potential, was nowhere near the end all beat all of strategy titles we were lead to believe it was. It is a perfect example of what high expectations can do to a good game. Most of ETW's problems might have been excused if some reviewers had the courage to stand up and say "Eh, it's alright" instead of anointing the game as the second coming. Unfortunately for me, those sorts of voices didn't speak up until after i'd already made the buy so it was all or nothing for me.

Today ETW has come a long way and I am immensely impressed by CA's efforts, but imo it's still got a long way to go. The potential is still there to be "best evar" but it's still not there.

If I had that time machine now, I'd probably pay up to $25 for ETW (40%ish of what i paid).

Exactly Monk thus the point I've been trying to make. Most of us complainers, ahem well I guess I can only speak for myself, suffer from all the glamour and flora that was placed on the game pre-launch. It's what marketers refer to as an "expectation gap."

---Along these lines anyone notice the scheduled flight times for your flights in the US getting longer, although the route or equipment haven't changed? It's the same thing inversed.

In short am I happy ETW? Nope. Content Yep.
Would I recommend it to anyone else? Nope.
Do I feel the need to sue CA? Nope.

Will I play this as long as MTW2 or RTW? Already decided, no. But that's a trend of computer games today. Take Morrowwind versus Oblivion or even Fallout 3.

**Jolt** · 08-05-2009, 04:27

Haven't bought it. Won't buy it either. I have got many games on top of the priority list than this one. The very simple fact that Portugal isn't a playable faction completely ruins the possibility of CA getting any of my money. Other than that, from what I hear, the diplomacy sucks and the game is riddled with bugs.

Maybe Rome 2: Total War.

**peacemaker** · 08-05-2009, 07:15

This game was most certainly hyped up a huge amount. If it was as good as everybody said it was pre-release, I would have put it in my 'favorite games of all time' (left 4 dead, halo 2, call of duty 4). I would certainly have paid more.

But alas, I knew that there were some issues. I'm definetely satisfied and I'm certain that in that engine, in those files, is the perfect game. But unfortunately CA can't get it together perfectly. The vanilla game, when CA is done patching, will be mediocre to good, depending on my mood. The mods, I imagine, will bring the game to its full potential.

Fingers crossed CA, surprise me

**Didz** · 08-06-2009, 10:22

I paid £29.99 for my copy, but given that its not really finished and really has very little strategy or historical interest I think half that would be too much to pay. I would probably have hung on until it appeared in the budget software section and picked it up for a tenner. I certainly have no intention of paying for the stuff they missed out, particularly when the stuff they are producing makes no difference to the problem the game has.

**Skullheadhq** · 08-10-2009, 13:41

Full price, that CA has to pay me to play their silly game.

**Maleficus** · 08-10-2009, 23:44

In all fairness, with whichever patch number we're on now, it's very much one of the better games around. Not the best, and not as good as it could have should have been, but better than the vast majority of games.

Of course, they really should have finished it before they released it in the first place, and had they not patched as well as they have done, I would be saying that I wouldn't bother with it, in hindsight.

However, in view of the stellar post-release job, I'm going to say 60%, which would work out at around £28 (for SF). Why only 60% for a game I get plenty of hours of enjoyment from? Well, because it shouldn't have taken so long to make playable, and I feel that CA could have made more of an effort with the aesthetics, too. Uniforms, music, etc.

Lucky we have some talented modders among us, eh?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

**pevergreen** · 08-11-2009, 00:27

Originally Posted by Maleficus

In all fairness, with whichever patch number we're on now, it's very much one of the better games around. Not the best, and not as good as it could have should have been, but better than the vast majority of games.

Of course, they really should have finished it before they released it in the first place, and had they not patched as well as they have done, I would be saying that I wouldn't bother with it, in hindsight.

However, in view of the stellar post-release job, I'm going to say 60%, which would work out at around £28 (for SF). Why only 60% for a game I get plenty of hours of enjoyment from? Well, because it shouldn't have taken so long to make playable, and I feel that CA could have made more of an effort with the aesthetics, too. Uniforms, music, etc.

Lucky we have some talented modders among us, eh?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

CA: We're nearing the end of the road! Now, for a few months of solid testing!
Sega: YOU MUST RELEASE THIS GAME TOMORROW!
CA: R U SRS?

Fine then.

Game is released

Sega: We have our money, do what you want.
CA: Guys, we gotta patch this quick, make it how we wanted!

The designers are pushed by the distributors, Sega, in this case.

**Cyclops** · 08-11-2009, 03:49

$0.

In fact I would happily pay someone to undo the damage it did to my system before I installed it.

CA games in the past were very forgiving regardless how old or new the system was: I've had 2 systems since 1997. My theory is spend bomb on a great system, make it as future proof as possible (load up on RAM etc: I get my IT buddy's advice on specs), then just upgrade and tweak in a small way to stay abreast.

STW, MTW, RTW and M2TW all ran well on whether the system was built 5 years before or 5 years after the game was designed (and I have played everything from cutting edge FPS to clunky retro AMIGA emulators happily). Suddenly with ETW its porridge in there, and everything else is screwed up too.

I cannot stress how strongly I resent the Steam fiasco, and I will never buy another game via that system. I hope CA and/or SEGA can disentangle themselves from that poorly performing model.