Creative Assembly Business Practice Discussion Thread (Rome II)

[big_feef]

I like how people are saying Paradox games aren't a spreadsheet game because reasons. You get to know the end result of most actions in static numbers before you even act on them. Oh, you want to break that King's title? That means all these people won't like you. They aren't bad games, I actually like what I have played and watched of them, but they are a much "simpler" game in terms of cause and effect.

Wow, everytime guys like you make comments like this; a programmer somewhere codes an angel to die. The ignorance, and dare I say it, stupidity is not that surprising given the nature of the internet; but still.

So what you're saying or the point you're trying to make is that a game trying to accurately model historically plausible situations and responses to certain actions by the player make it a "spreadsheet game". OK, using your example; Total War games are also spreadsheet games because I already know "the end result of most actions in static numbers before I even act on them." If I attack a unit of spears head-on with cavalry; that unit of cavalry is very likely going to be destroyed. If I attack Athens while it's allied to Egypt; Egypt and her allies will very likely go to war with me. These aren't obvious responses at all to an overt act on the player's part; it's simply coded into a spreadsheet somewhere that these things will always happen that way no matter what.

[IlluminatiRex]

Well I'll give paradox one credit at least they release games that work unlike CA.

I heard that some of their releases were terrible, mainly HoI3. However, EUIV went smoothly. I missed the boat on the CKII release and I heard that was pretty smooth for Paradox as well.

[Aeneas Veneratio]

Why are you bringing up an old game like RTW? At least bring up a more recent TW games, at the very least one made on the warscape engine.

[big_feef]

Why are you bringing up an old game like RTW? At least bring up a more recent TW games, at the very least one made on the warscape engine.

Are you trying to say that the more recent Total War games are more challenging? If anything they're even less so; with the Warscape engine dumbing things down (they call it streamlining) and actually taking away from the strategic elements of the game. Shogun 2 was an improvement on Empire in this regard; and Rome 2 is even worse than Empire in that same aspect. I'm not even going to get into the fact that Rome 2 also 'streamlines' the tactical aspect of the game; which is something that has always been the forte of the Total War series.

[krisslanza]

Boy are you naive. You`re gonna get a shock later in life.

Ever heard of corruption? One hand greasing the palm of the other? No, that only happens in other places, right?

And you show your sheer ignorance by calling Paradox games `simple`.

Everyone knows about corruption - but the sheer fact to suggest that somehow CA is part of some worldwide conspiracy to overhype and falsely sell Rome 2 is ridiculous. Next thing you know, there'll be claims of the CA mind controls satellites. Certainly not every review is a 'honest' or 'unbiased' review, but it is still the most successful Total War ever, no matter how much you may think otherwise.

And yes, I do. Coding wise, and gameplay wise. I have 143 hours in CK2, and I can honestly say most of that time was spent with the game in max speed, waiting for anything to happen. I often, jokingly, say Paradox games aren't really interactive games, given much of the time is spent waiting for things to happen. Though I will confess, this is probably because I dislike starting as anything larger then a County, because the fun of a game is to start small and get huge.

This also isn't really the place to discuss the two games I suppose.

[RedGuard]

@Nameless I think we can both agree Duke nukem forever had anything but an ideal development. Also there was a game finished but it was not released because the studio went bankrupt. but yes i think deadlines are needed but a year is not enough for a game like this

[big_feef]

And yes, I do. Coding wise, and gameplay wise. I have 143 hours in CK2, and I can honestly say most of that time was spent with the game in max speed, waiting for anything to happen. I often, jokingly, say Paradox games aren't really interactive games, given much of the time is spent waiting for things to happen. Though I will confess, this is probably because I dislike starting as anything larger then a County, because the fun of a game is to start small and get huge.

Yikes! So let me get this straight: you're claiming Paradox games are simple gameplay wise because you play at the most basic level where nothing much goes on, where you don't have much independence; and expect things to happen around you? You do know that at that level *you* are supposed to be making things happen right? That game is a historically accurate model of dynastic and political interactions during the Medieval era; most of what went on was at the duchy and kingdom levels.

Just to put things into perspective as it relates to Rome 2, a game you claim is far more complex: That is like playing with a Seleucid satrapy and not being able to declare war on any other power except another Seleucid satrapy; but only if Seleucid laws allow you to do so. Part of your military force will randomly be taken from you when the Seleucids go to war with another power; and if you do decide to take matters into your own hands with the military force you have left, anything you take will probably be kept by your Seleucid overlords. But you don't do any of that; instead, you'll just sit there with your little satrapy and wait for things to happen around you.

This also isn't really the place to discuss the two games I suppose.

When you make absurd claims and assumptions about another game to try to bolster your opinion that Rome 2 is a deep and complex game; then yes, it is the place to discuss the two games.

[krisslanza]

Yikes! So let me get this straight: you're claiming Paradox games are simple gameplay wise because you play at the most basic level where nothing much goes on, where you don't have much independence; and expect things to happen around you? You do know that at that level *you* are supposed to be making things happen right? That game is a historically accurate model of dynastic and political interactions during the Medieval era; most of what went on was at the duchy and kingdom levels.

Just to put things into perspective as it relates to Rome 2, a game you claim is far more complex: That is like playing with a Seleucid satrapy and not being able to declare war on any other power except another Seleucid satrapy; but only if Seleucid laws allow you to do so. Part of your military force will randomly be taken from you when the Seleucids go to war with another power; and if you do decide to take matters into your own hands with the military force you have left, anything you take will probably be kept by your Seleucid overlords. But you don't do any of that; instead, you'll just sit there with your little satrapy and wait for things to happen around you.

No I play as independent countesses. I'm not going to mess around with someone controlling me. I have done that and made empires before, it's not too particularly difficult... it just takes a long time. A long time of waiting for things to happen. A long time of waiting for random chance to trigger to forge a claim and such.

Paradox games are less games are more of simulators - you can only do whatever it thinks you should be able too. And that's fine, that's the niche Paradox works in, making simulators. They make, objectively, sleep-inducing games however due to the lack of actual interaction going on in the game. I mean, I don't dislike their games, but I don't find them engaging either. Friends I know like them, but they will admit the games can be fairly uninteractive unless you play as the game "intends" you to do.

When you make absurd claims and assumptions about another game to try to bolster your opinion that Rome 2 is a deep and complex game; then yes, it is the place to discuss the two games.

Rome 2 is certainly more complex in some ways, Paradox games are more complex in others. In general, Rome 2 is more complex in its coding and thus more prone to bugs. It's just like a real world machines, the more cogs in it, the easier it is to break.

[wulfgar610]

Edit : I could not say it better Rasic. Despite Tim Heaton affirmation I believe it is the exact opposite and SEGA allows CA to do most of the marketing work for the simple reason that CA have no independence toward SEGA. Just look at the man, freshly recruited from EA and already at the head of CA. There no upper post than studio director so nobody from CA could had recruited him. The decision could only come from SEGA.

Mainstream marketing is a massive operation that is way beyond CA's capability. But they have consult with CA about the product to be marketed don't they?

Your memory is selective, isn't it ?

Let's go for a shameless copy of my reply to the same statement formulated by you in a different thread.

?

[big_feef]

Rome 2 is certainly more complex in some ways, Paradox games are more complex in others. In general, Rome 2 is more complex in its coding and thus more prone to bugs. It's just like a real world machines, the more cogs in it, the easier it is to break.

Again, stop making ridiculous assumptions about things you have repeatedly shown in this thread alone that you know nothing about. It really irks me when an ignoramus like yourself comes out with these types claims based on some false perception on how programming is done. Unfortunately this is a very common assumption among what some like to call the 'console generation': that flashy lights and pretty graphics means complex coding. Nothing is further from the truth and I will go out of my way to ridicule any premise implying this fallacy.

Rome 2 is a simple case of not doing proper Q&A before release. Many of the bugs, which were obvious from the minute you ran the game and would have been caught by any competent Q&A team, are not the result of some perceived complexity in its coding.

[Anna_Gein]

?

What ? You post on a thread and then never stop by to check the state of the discussion ? Or you don't know how to click on a link and that each each quote have a link so you could so the original post in its context.

Mainstream marketing is a massive operation that is way beyond CA's capability.

Care do develop this ?

I heard that some of their releases were terrible, mainly HoI3. However, EUIV went smoothly. I missed the boat on the CKII release and I heard that was pretty smooth for Paradox as well.

CKII release was good. The intrigue system did not worked well immediately, the requirement were too high but it was quickly fixed.

On the whole TW versus Paradox, at the very least TW welcomes newcomers (with adequate tutorials), while Paradox just takes a dump on the newcomers (with their dismal tutorials). CKII? Worst "job" ever!

Na, CKII tutorials were better than EUIII tutorials. But it does not mean so much .

[DavidtheDuke]

I agree with you david - and thats the point. CA wil not listen to its customer base, a large part of their previous games sold soley on the merits of RS2 SPQR TATW SS and many more, surely they should clock on theres obviously SOMETHING they are doing right that CA could be missing?

But you aren't their customer base (or if you and I are, then we are obviously still buying the game anyway).

[Ultra123]

your kind of right david however i was addressing the masses in their thousands who downloaded mods and bought the previous games solely on those mods being released, most of them are forum 'ghosts' who do not join the convo here (i was one for a long time). Therefore surely seeing people buy the game that you made solely for the work of other that was created for free, downloaded in their thousands, must make a impression of some sort.

I just defys logic, they must know of the popularity of the mods lusted was a modder himself, its just the metacritic loving managers who know jack all about the series and what makes it good having the ultimate say in the design.

Of course all of that is just my opinion, it could very well be that every man programmer and cleaner at CA are just blithering idiots.

[Omar Nelson B.]

Where do I sign the complaint letter that we are sending to ca?

[dmastri]

It's amazing that this thread even exists. Rome 2 was it for me; this is where we part ways CA. I'm relegating them to the pile of devs I will never give another cent... Blizzard, Gearbox: welcome the new guy.

Some of the comparisons to Paradox are warranted, but there's some key differences. Paradox is a smaller studio working with smaller budgets. And they, unlike CA, develop a variety of games that get better with each iteration. Have some of their releases (looking at you HOI3) been utter garbage? Yes. But even here we have differences... HOI3's release was plagued with bugs and AI problems, but the foundation was strong. The features, the vision, etc. Rome 2 is the worst of both worlds... bug riddled mess and the foundation is shaky. Tons of missteps in core design. Huge step backwards from the franchise's previous offerings.

By far I think the biggest slap in the face, and one of the reasons Paradox got so many passes when their older releases dropped with so many problems, is all the prerelease marketing hype. 40% bigger budget they shouted from the rooftops. Amazing "in game" battle footage. Interviews with Julian the AI mastermind. Those gaudy "cinematic" trailers. All the E3 prerelease awards. It was all lies and now we are asked to "stay calm" and "be reasonable" and wait while they fix it. Why should we? Why do they deserve anything other than our scorn and derision?

People keep pointing the finger at SEGA. I don't know if they forced the release. We also don't know if CA asked for an extension. Let's not forget Gearbox got SEGA to give them years worth of extensions for Aliens Colonial Marines. And we also don't know why CA didn't choose to do a beta. "It didn't fit into our dev model" said Mike Simpson. What an utter crock of , because what the do you think you are doing right now Mike? These 5 hurried patches are a beta, your studio just chose to deceive people and charge them full admission to QA your game.

Really though it's too late. CA blew it and this time it's the end of the line. Liquidate the studio and sell the IP to someone competent.

[Radzeer]

It seems to me that Rome 2 was the intersection of two factors, both equally devastating for the franchise.

One is the increasingly greedier title management where somehow the suits upstairs are strongly motivated to make as much money as fast as possible. This would explain the release date fiasco, the bending over Metacritic attitude, the marketing bs etc.

The other is a new generation of developers unconnected to previous titles, cutting out old gameplay features to be replaced with new (mostly garbage) stuff. Probably they want to prove themselves and think of their own ideas as super while shrug off any criticism, including that they are not capable of producing a working AI. This explains the family tree, the torches, magic buttons, the places with no walls etc.

These two factors together explain the arrogant attitude of handling the fans with empty PR messages, the ridiculous defense of features most of the community hates, and the reluctance to do anything beyond the minimum patching/tweaking. But most importantly, this also explains how CA is looking for a new fanbase: those who are satisfied with the barebone, streamlined, arcadey game. A sucker is born every minute, so there is a steady supply of casuals, obviously greater in numbers than the core, many of whom have been around since the birth of this franchise. I just feel sorry for the casuals because they don't know what they are missing.

[Humble Warrior]

It seems to me that Rome 2 was the intersection of two factors, both equally devastating for the franchise.

One is the increasingly greedier title management where somehow the suits upstairs are strongly motivated to make as much money as fast as possible. This would explain the release date fiasco, the bending over Metacritic attitude, the marketing bs etc.

The other is a new generation of developers unconnected to previous titles, cutting out old gameplay features to be replaced with new (mostly garbage) stuff. Probably they want to prove themselves and think of their own ideas as super while shrug off any criticism, including that they are not capable of producing a working AI. This explains the family tree, the torches, magic buttons, the places with no walls etc.

These two factors together explain the arrogant attitude of handling the fans with empty PR messages, the ridiculous defense of features most of the community hates, and the reluctance to do anything beyond the minimum patching/tweaking. But most importantly, this also explains how CA is looking for a new fanbase: those who are satisfied with the barebone, streamlined, arcadey game. A sucker is born every minute, so there is a steady supply of casuals, obviously greater in numbers than the core, many of whom have been around since the birth of this franchise. I just feel sorry for the casuals because they don't know what they are missing.

Spot on!

Where`s my Rep button? Oh wait...

[vonVince]

Creative Assembly is the developer - SEGA is the publisher; they throw in money and bark orders and deadlines - the developer throws in input for the publisher about game's status and can request extension to the game's development, but it is the publisher who has ultimate word on "where and when it is going to be released". It seems like some of you people are just pointing the accusing finger at Creative Assembly just for the hell of it, when you should be pointing the finger higher - you know, at the SEGA board members. I do not claim that game developers themselves cannot make mistakes when it comes to development of a certain game, but most of the time it is the publisher. Think about what happened to Ultima with EA as the franchises sugar daddy (if you were around back then <) and you know what I mean.

[Katsumoto]

The game can't be released until the developer has finished working on it. The publisher can bark all day but without a developer they cannot produce the game. All these developers need to do is just stand up for themselves and not fold to pressure from the suits just because they have the money, because the publisher needs the developer just as much as the developer needs the publisher, and their relationship should reflect that.

[vonVince]

I agree, but video game industry (that's right; it's an industry these days) is just like any other industry in that the investors want to get money for the money that was thrown into the development. There are lots of good developers who are really into what they do and want to create good games, but publishers do not necessarily care as much about the game's quality upon release as they care about money; even if many consumers will be dissatisfied. I can name several titles that - while receiving very mixed reviews - were lauded as successes by their publishers because they sold well: if one is to just look at the numbers, then - by all accounts (quite literally accounts!) - Rome II was a success.

What video game industry really needs is people who are real gamers themselves working as suits; people who can make sure that there is a complete understanding with the developer and the publisher so that a game gets all the time it needs.