What the Alesia historical battle means

[GussieFinkNottle]

A while back it was discovered that there was a list of historical battles that had been cut from the final game, as their coding is in the game files. The list is as follows:

-Alesia
-Cannae
-Capua
-Carrhae
-Cynoscephalae
-Pharsalus
-Silarus River
-Watling Street
-Zama
-Zela

ALESIA is top of that list, and now you are being charged to have it in your game by buying the Caesar in Gaul pack. Remember when Jack and Will and Craig kept saying that no content is cut, that everything added is worked on by separate teams? Here is the first fairly substantial piece of indicative evidence that a part of the game was cut out in order to sell it back to you a few months further down the line, leaving us with a pathetic 4 historical battles, the lowest number ever in a TW game (RTW had 10), in the base product, in 3 of which you have to play as the Romans. We know that they had these battles in mind, and prepared to be placed in the game files, before release. And now they want to sell them to you.

Furthermore, the advent of the expansion packs with Gaul could indicate a very dubious expansion plan of up to ten packs to juice you for as much money as possible for the full game. Many of these battles could be as part of a broader campaign.

-Alesia was Julius Caesar's final siege of the Gallic capital after years of conquest and fighting revolts.
-Zela was another Caesar battle, the annihilation of Pontus that prompted the general to famously say, 'Veni, vidi, vici' - 'I came, I saw, I conquered.'
-Pharsalus was the battle that won Caesar the civil war against Pompey, bringing the total Caesar historical battles to 4

-Cannae was Hannibal's greatest victory, where he achieved the annihilation of a 90 000 strong Roman army
-Since there is a battle of Capua in the prologue, the one shown here probably means the battle between Rome and Hannibal in 211 BC, when he destroyed the armies of two Roman consuls
-The battle of Silarus River took place shortly afterwards, when Hannibal destroyed a whole Roman army commanded by a Praetor. It was one of the few times Hannibal's army was larger than his enemies'
-Zama was Hannibal's final battle in command of Carthage's forces, where he was comprehensively beaten by Scipio Africanus, who devised a method to neutralise his most potent weapon, the elephants

-Carrhae was the final battle of Crassus, the man who crushed Spartacus, when his legions were shot to pieces by horse archers. He was captured and executed in horrific fashion

-Cynoscephalae was the decisive battle between Rome and Macedon, Macedon could never again aspire to rival Rome

-Watling Street was the battle that put a stop to Boudica's revolt and restored order to Britain in 60 or 61AD

I wouldn't be surprised if more Caesar or Hannibal packs start appearing, or if a civil wars/triumvirate one does. A Boudica's revolt pack could make for a cheap mini-campaign
Notice that every one of these battles involved the Romans, it looks like Raphia is the only non-Roman battle you're going to get.

It's a slippery slope guys, and it's unavoidable in today's market. If only they could have been a bit more honest about it, the obfuscation and excuses are what seem the most unpleasant, the money grabbing no doubt comes with orders from on high at Sega.

Please don't merge this with the other future expansions thread, my point is different, and so would I like the debate to be.

[krisslanza]

That's not proof it was cut out of the game. All it proves is when the game came out, some of the battle was finished, or at least placeholder data was in place. It doesn't prove anything beyond that, however.

Of course, conspiracy theorists will have a field day with it, because they love this kind of stuff.

[iWarsaw]

Yes. You're right. And? Nothings going to be done, nothings going to change.

CA clearly cut content but who cares.

Remember when they said they finished the game early so they released free dlc?

Remember when the released the game and it was unfinished so they gave us free dlc? Which sucked. the nomadic tribes suck. The greek dlc is better but not by much. Spartans look and play like crap and for the most part each greek city are the same empires.

It's a joke.

That's not proof it was cut out of the game. All it proves is when the game came out, some of the battle was finished, or at least placeholder data was in place. It doesn't prove anything beyond that, however.

Of course, conspiracy theorists will have a field day with it, because they love this kind of stuff.

Kriss don't just chalk it up to a conspiracy. Some times you make really good points defending CA, but you defend CA to much. They did a bad job of this game and clearly cut content or finished the game a little early. It should of had a 2014 release date. I'm just going on common sense.

And you know what I do take the lack of historical battles as a indication that they just didn't have the time but it's weird because they they had enough time to release free dlc.

[GussieFinkNottle]

That's not proof it was cut out of the game. All it proves is when the game came out, some of the battle was finished, or at least placeholder data was in place. It doesn't prove anything beyond that, however.

Of course, conspiracy theorists will have a field day with it, because they love this kind of stuff.

I'm not trying to be all paranoid about it, and I do know what the commercial incentives that guide the market are, but these files would seem to suggest that at least at some stage these battles were planned for vanilla. And it's not a sign of a complete Total War game to include only 4 battles

Which sucked. the nomadic tribes suck

Agreed

[Sharpe]

Is anyone surprised? Honestly - you must be hella naive if you are.

This is the state of the industry guys - Realpolitik.​

[krisslanza]

I'm not trying to be all paranoid about it, and I do know what the commercial incentives that guide the market are, but these files would seem to suggest that at least at some stage these battles were planned for vanilla. And it's not a sign of a complete Total War game to include only 4 battles

Planned is one thing, finished is another. There's nothing too unusual about keeping in content that was finished at release, but it wasn't playable yet.
Though, in the future, CA may want to avoid this given how much people dig through the game and will take anything they find to fuel their speculations.

[Kraut and Tea]

I am not suprised. I am suprised that we didn`t see historical battles for cash in Shogun 2.

If a DLC would only include historical battles I probably wouldnt buy it, since I only play them once or until I unlock every achievement.

[Sharpe]

I am not suprised. I am suprised that we didn`t see historical battles for cash in Shogun 2.

If a DLC would only include historical battles I probably wouldnt buy it, since I only play them once or until I unlock every achievement.

Dragon War Battle Pack for Shogun 2.

[GussieFinkNottle]

Planned is one thing, finished is another. There's nothing too unusual about keeping in content that was finished at release, but it wasn't playable yet.
Though, in the future, CA may want to avoid this given how much people dig through the game and will take anything they find to fuel their speculations.

Again, please don't take me as a conspiracy theorist nutcase, I get that this is the case, but really: 4 battles. 4! Would you not agree that there is at the very least laziness exhibited in this, if not outright greed?

[Frost, colonel]

Well if you look in detail at the amazing amount of DLC(one whole page if you spend the time looking)that's available for COH 2 on Steam(and guess who owns that game? that's right folk are friends Sega) we will be offered every bit of DLC they think they can sell.
It's all about the money folks. It wouldn't be too bad if the game at least was what we reasonably hoped for, or even fixed to a higher standard.
Ah well, all's fare in love and war eh?

[Sharpe]

Well if you look in detail at the amazing amount of DLC(one whole page if you spend the time looking)that's available for COH 2 on Steam(and guess who owns that game? that's right folk are friends Sega) we will be offered every bit of DLC they think they can sell.
It's all about the money folks. It wouldn't be too bad if the game at least was what we reasonably hoped for, or even fixed to a higher standard.
Ah well, all's fare in love and war eh?

Exactly, Sega/CA's DLC policy is no different to any other large, successful developer. It is utterly irritating to see people yelping about "corporate greed" as if it's some sort of revelation. Business' make my money - end of. I would so same because I'm a bastard and I want more money.

[Aenima]

There's nothing too unusual about keeping in content that was finished at release, but it wasn't playable yet.

Do you have any evidence for this claim? I'm not one to know much about game files, code and what they mean etc, but all the same I'd assume that unfinished content would be removed from a game.

I'd say what adds credence to the OP's hypothesis is the fact that threads were made here about how the game had files in it which meant that the game could be played on a console controller, and lo and behold it's being ported to the Steam console (or whatever that may be) It could just all be coincidence, but then it could equally be that the OP is right.

[Rasic]

Yes Company of Heroes 2 seems to have just been a preview of the DLC model SEGA has apparently adopted. It's ridiculous what they consider "content". Although they have mastered the art of carefully removing certain features to spoon feed them back to us. I firmly believe that they weren't just moronic in the decisions of what content to remove from the base game but methodical in manner.

[GussieFinkNottle]

Exactly, Sega/CA's DLC policy is no different to any other large, successful developer. It is utterly irritating to see people yelping about "corporate greed" as if it's some sort of revelation. Business' make my money - end of. I would so same because I'm a bastard and I want more money.

We know, that's what businesses do.
But there's no reason you can't purchase a product or service, pay good money for it, receive a good product that is what it says on the tin, and everybody's happy. It's when the product is sub-par in the first place that there's a problem. Everyone expected a DLC campaign from CA, that is what companies do now. What was not expected was a reduced, incomplete game sold back in pieces, nor to be straight-up lied to by CA employees. As I said in the OP, it's not so much the moneygrabbing as the contempt for the customer that is the problem.

[Unwelcome Guest]

What can I say. The worse I get treated by developers or publishers with questionable practices like Ubisoft, CA, Activision, Bioware, EA, the more likely I am to resort to piracy, or just avoid their game altogether.

Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age were 2 of my favourite action RPGs ever. Dragon Age II however was such an abomination that I didn't even touch Mass Effect III.

TW is different as a PC only title but they are headed that way, for sure.

[cogidubnus]

I don't see that they were cut from vanilla, i would guess that as a business plan all elements of the dlc were planned at the beginning. I think it would be good if in future when a game was released they let customers know what sort of contents are included and what are sold as add ons. I think lack of transparency is the only crime committed. People sometimes forget they are a company with share holders so bottom line is making money, if they are a good company they will please their customers and keep loyalty.

[krisslanza]

Again, please don't take me as a conspiracy theorist nutcase, I get that this is the case, but really: 4 battles. 4! Would you not agree that there is at the very least laziness exhibited in this, if not outright greed?

It unfortunately basically IS one though. You're outright claiming the battle was finished already, but then cut out to be sold later. That is completely in line with the popular conspiracy theory that DLC is always cut-out content.

And no I would not. The main team has its own deadline, and then any extras have their own seperate deadlines. All it means is the team who got to make the battle for Alesia, had more time to work on it then the main game. There's nothing to suggest the battles were finished on time, then cut out to be sold to you later. All the files being in the game suggests, is the battles were being worked on but not finished in time to meet the deadline. Pushing back a game's release date is only done in the most dire of circumstances, and even then, nothing suggests the battles would've been in the base game to begin with.

The fact the files are there is not proof, all it proves is the battles were worked on during the development of the game, which is again, completely normal for game development.

[tungri_centurio]

for this game they had to push the deadline to at least end 2013/start2014 than at least they had the time to deliver a more finnished game and all that are now mad at CA/SEGA did not need to be so negative about rome2

[Rasic]

It unfortunately basically IS one though. You're outright claiming the battle was finished already, but then cut out to be sold later. That is completely in line with the popular conspiracy theory that DLC is always cut-out content.

And no I would not. The main team has its own deadline, and then any extras have their own seperate deadlines. All it means is the team who got to make the battle for Alesia, had more time to work on it then the main game. There's nothing to suggest the battles were finished on time, then cut out to be sold to you later. All the files being in the game suggests, is the battles were being worked on but not finished in time to meet the deadline. Pushing back a game's release date is only done in the most dire of circumstances, and even then, nothing suggests the battles would've been in the base game to begin with.

The fact the files are there is not proof, all it proves is the battles were worked on during the development of the game, which is again, completely normal for game development.

We can agree it's not clear yet if things like seasons or these battles were left out intentionally to make a DLC like this relevant to people like me, who have little to no interest in it. If seasons for example are indeed transferable to the main campaign and everything works somewhat functionally then we can assume that it was left out either to further increase end turn times (which we can all agree were way too long at launch) or what I purposed above that they knew people would unlock 4 TPY and realize the game actually plays BETTER (when you balance build times and things like that) with this change, and they will eventually want proper seasons, provided with the least amount of work as they can via this DLC.

If CA was serious about the customer they would release seasons for the main campaign. The one I paid 60 bucks for. The turn times are reasonable now and the excuse that they "just can't do it" will either be proved or disproved shortly. Concerning motives are often the basis of many conspiracies, so maybe this does fall into that category, but something tells me there is a pinch of truth to this.

[jamreal18]

Ca intentionally cut contents to sell us. Historical battles are now to be collected if you want to play them all.