Alright, since OP seems unwilling to update the OP, here's a quick sum up of the thread. Now I'd like to point out that to me a failed claim means that the claim is not fulfilled in the game. If it is due to a bug, or design doesn't matter.
-
32 000 troops on the battlefield were promised(this would require 160 units on the battlefield with average size of 200 on the field). 64 000 if modded. I doubt this is is possible.
Source
-
Several ships per ship unit. I don't care if it wasn't a good idea. It's a failed claim.
Source
-
They promised improved AI. The AI is in my opinion worse, but you'll be wanting me to prove it and I can't be bothered to argue for that, though I could link tons of hilarious videos and pictures about it. I'm waiting for CA or anyone else to prove it is.
Source
-
AI Pikemen using pikes. I guess they do sometimes use pikes, except when faced by a frontal cavalry charge.
PicOne PicTwo That hoplite unit right next to their pikes is being pretty improved AI too.
-
Improved performance. Considering I'm still running this game worse on low units sizes than Napoleon or Shogun 2 on double ultra unit sizes. They even admitted that the performance wasn't good in their formal apology. They're working on it, even fixed some of it (broken it for some others aswell, based on the response to Patch 3), and I've noticed some improvement, but it can hardly be called improved. Here's a
post about it.
Source
- Just looking at the Steam store page shows a bunch of
touched up images of the game. The only three real looking pictures are the ones at the very end. Not a big deal, but not a business practice I want to encourage, but practically every company is guilty of this. Doesn't make it right, though.
Source
- Promised
big multiplayer reveal that didn't ever happen, but that's a failed claim that was known before the release.
"When we previewed Total War: Rome 2, Creative Assembly told us it was "planning something big" for the game's multiplayer."We haven't said yet what the big change is going to be," Simpson commented, "but it's bigger than that [an evolution of the campaign map multiplayer]." Source
-
African Elephants look like Indian Elephants. (Can only find
second hand accounts of this claim)
-
Missing localizations for Spanish and Italian. Source
-
This picture from Carthage. As far as I know it's impossible to dock there and the buildings look different. Here's a
picture to prove it. Also, found a
clipping bug at the spots where you can actually land.
-
"Armies can embark and cross seas, but are vulnerable to actual navies." Not exactly true in my and many other people's experience.
Source
-
"The UI is very good to use, just wait until you get your hands on it." Here's a
post detailing the issues with the UI.
Source
Exaggerated claims:
-
This video from 4:42 to 4:52. While it is true that you can kinda climb that hill in Carthage, the path up there is no where near where he's pointing, and there's no reason why you would ever want to go there anyway.
And personally, I think the internal politics part was overhyped to the point of practically being false. Sure they said they want to "capture the feel of internal struggle within the Republic with backstabbing and everything" or some such, but I didn't think the politics system would literally be about clicking backstab or promote occasionally.
My main complaints about the game are performance, AI and UI. In that order. If they manage to fix those, this game will be fantastic. But for now I'm just mildly annoyed and am waiting for things to get fixed.
Re: Failed Claims of CA Before the Release
so we can laugh. Got it?
Originally Posted by TheSutekh
