Why Napolean is Standa-Alone and not an Expansion.

Well, I think I speak for most of us here when I say that ETW was released in what seems to be a Beta State... For whatever reason, they released it as such.
Now, onto it then; The reason NTW is a brand new game, is because it lets CA go back and look at the lower level code, alter it, improve it, make corrections, ect.
Patches are not likely to fix this game...Look at this way:
You build yourself life-size Lego replica of yourself, it is your first time doing this...Now, when you are done, you realize that the model looks very discombobulated and has plenty of holes and unproportianalities in it. Your try and, well, literally patch it with cloth. Eventually, you realize that you can't quite fix certain crucial things by just patching and tweaking, moving one Lego here, and another there. You cannot patch over the unproportionality or a hole deep at the core where your heart is supposed to be. So what you have to do is take the Legos apart again, and rebuild it, uising what you learned about how to do it right, from your first try.

Releasing a new game allows CA to work with the Engine itself, and low-level code, at the root of the game, and fix silly issues: syntax errors, faulty selection statements, ect so that they would eventually compile a much more stable game with an improved AI...Things that CA cannot really address with a patch.

It will be something along the lines of ETW done right. Looking at the Time Frame, it actually seems like ETW should have been released when NTW was, but for whatever reason, they pushed it out to the market in such conditions, a year early. This may be evidenced by the fact that the main campaign in ETW is only 200 turns, ending abruptly at 1799, as if they were expecting to do a game that started at 1800.

But I believe that NTW will be worth it in the end, as the condition will be much better than any ETW despite patches.

I'm no fanboy; I've certainly had my issues with the game, but it was a love-hate affair with Empire.
Things I Hate:
-AI rarely uses full stacks...it is always using small stacks and spamming the map with them...This makes turns take unbearably long...
- The Diplomacy is such that everyone ends up hating you for unexplained Dishounring_Treaties.
- Rakes are useless and almost never advance in rank.
- The Music SUCKS and is nonexistent; it does not exist, at all!
- This isn't a rant thread so I wont continue,

Things I Love:
- No more annoying Diplomats or Merchants, things are more streamlined, which is good because you can focus on other things now.
- Expanded area for Reinforcements, so any Armies within like 8-10 paces will come and reinforce, not just a small tiny block. This is a big plus, making military alliances worthwhile.
- No more annoying Spamming Rebels who appeared from nowhere and just looked like a stain on your lands rather than any threat, now they have a much more grand purpose, that of Arising Nations.
- Visibility lines are extended, You can move many characters, armies, navies, and whatever else, all at once; i.e, not one at a time like in RTW and M2TW.
- Campaign Map looks wonderful, I disliked M2TW color scheme.
This isn't a praise thread, so I stop here.


I can only wonder what else this game will improve on. I could really care less about Graphics, as that is the last thing CA needs to worry about now, ETW looks fine. The last thing they need a game that runs worse than ETW.

I really hope this turns out to be true.

You and Me both, but the pessimism on these forums can sometimes get out of hand.

about your point on graphics, etw was marketed towards i7 owners. the intro movie featured a "runs best on intel i7" ad. so i think they do care about graphics a lot and will probably continue to do so for ntw. one of the features they were very enthusiastic about in interviews was the new smoke and dust effects, as well as the 10,000 man capacity.

however, i have no idea what kind of contract they signed with intel. as far as i know, intel does not advertise their games. and cpus like intel core duo and amd phenom are also capable of running this game smoothly. so i don't think it's just a recommendation by ca. the question is, what does ca get out of it?

I dropped Empire pretty soon tbh, but i agree completely with your list of well-received new features.
This is completely subjective, but if N:TW turns out to be good, i would have cared very little about E:TW anyway. I prefer Shakos all the way .

And graphics... goes for more studios than just CA. i pray they concentrate almost all of their efforts towards gameplay mechanics.

The graphics are cool now, most of us think that NTW don't really need great improvements in that area of the game, but in the other aspects that really suck: IA, diplomacy, historic accuracy, bugs, and so on.

Why it will be a stand-alone game?

The answer could be very easy: because they can maybe sell more copies.
If you don´t have Empire you will and can´t buy a NTW-expansion.

But if you are interested in Napoleon and have not bought Empire you can simply order the standalone-expansion NTW without the need to buy Empire first.

Originally Posted by Xerrop

If you don´t have Empire you will and can´t buy a NTW-expansion.

But if you are interested in Napoleon and have not bought Empire you can simply order the standalone-expansion NTW without the need to buy Empire first.

That hasn't been a problem before, so why now?

Originally Posted by Xerrop

Why it will be a stand-alone game?

The answer could be very easy: because they can maybe sell more copies.
If you don´t have Empire you will and can´t buy a NTW-expansion.

But if you are interested in Napoleon and have not bought Empire you can simply order the standalone-expansion NTW without the need to buy Empire first.

Well, it's not that simple.
Probably NTW will be Steam-free because of gamers complains. Also, ETW's reputation is very bad from day one and CA wants to skip the problem. And finally, a stand alone expansion gives them the opportunity to sell the game with higher price.

Since I'm not going to buy the game, I realise that a stand alone expansion will not patch the original game which is just awful. That means that ETW will remain unfinished probably for ever. Obviously they can't fix the game so the only solution is a SAE. Poor decision if you ask me because now I'm absolutely sure that ETW was a known fiasko with no future at all.

Oh come on the lego analogy is a bit useless.

The problem with Empire is not at the lower level code. The problem is a complete lack of decent AI design. It costs a lot of resources and time for CA to make it decent and many of us doubt they will ever get it right.

I for one hate Empire with a vengeance and will buy only Napoleon.

I'm very gland it's a stand-alone.

Well I for one agree with your reasoning I am no expert on programing but I could see from an early stage that the problems with empires went well beyond what we like to call bugs.

The deployment of troops as a large example, can you imagine any company developing a tactical warfare game that ends up having armies deployed in reversed positions, incomprehensible and would suggest absolutely no testing whatsoever or the more likely scenario an inability to find in time the bad code that was causing this.

Reasonably fixed now but that is just one indication of the complete mess that ETW was in at release , its actually amazing that CA managed to release a game that actually ran on some computers.

Unfortunately its now almost impossible to tell whats missing or what could have been except to say that ETW was and is a major disappointment but only because there is a sense that ETW was meant to be a much grander game.

Will we ever know? This is the question that perhaps NTW may answer.

CA must be unhappy with Empires not only did it damage their reputation as developers among other developers ( they will perhaps get some sympathy here) but it also damaged their reputation in my opinion with a seizable proportion of their fans,they are now seen as bluffers, con men. The response to NTW was to say the least lukewarm because I think people do not believe what they say anymore.

No doubt CA believe that they will restore their reputation with NTW we will see but I wont be buying it until I find out what people here think, I can say now that any mainstream reviews can be safely ignored in fact until the day the game is released I would say the constant refrain will be...

Can we believe what your telling us.

Originally Posted by Commander Shepard

Releasing a new game allows CA to work with the Engine itself, and low-level code, at the root of the game, and fix silly issues: syntax errors, faulty selection statements, ect so that they would eventually compile a much more stable game with an improved AI...Things that CA cannot really address with a patch.

I agree that these issues cannot be fixed with a patch but looking at what you wrote here...rewriting the code from the ground up and improving everything etc sounds exactly like the pre release spin on ETW. With the cynicism many of us have on this forum i doubt we're ever going to believe this argument again.

Realistically, It's going to be much easier to reskin units, paint a new map and add more surface features and spin it as "new and improved" than actually go through an expensive, time consuming and (visually) intangible rebuild of the core mechanics and AI. These games are now about dumbing down, flash and graphics and the bottom line.

Originally Posted by Modestus

CA must be unhappy with Empires not only did it damage their reputation as developers among other developers ( they will perhaps get some sympathy here) but it also damaged their reputation in my opinion with a seizable proportion of their fans,they are now seen as bluffers, con men. The response to NTW was to say the least lukewarm because I think people do not believe what they say anymore.

No doubt CA believe that they will restore their reputation with NTW we will see but I wont be buying it until I find out what people here think, I can say now that any mainstream reviews can be safely ignored in fact until the day the game is released I would say the constant refrain will be...

Can we believe what your telling us.

As long as it sells well, keeps the corporate suits happy, keeps the bottom line in the black thats good enough for them and a green light to produce the same drivel again and again.

No sympathy from me.

Originally Posted by bobbo

I agree that these issues cannot be fixed with a patch but looking at what you wrote here...rewriting the code from the ground up and improving everything etc sounds exactly like the pre release spin on ETW. With the cynicism many of us have on this forum i doubt we're ever going to believe this argument again.

Realistically, It's going to be much easier to reskin units, paint a new map and add more surface features and spin it as "new and improved" than actually go through an expensive, time consuming and (visually) intangible rebuild of the core mechanics and AI. These games are now about dumbing down, flash and graphics and the bottom line.



As long as it sells well, keeps the corporate suits happy, keeps the bottom line in the black thats good enough for them and a green light to produce the same drivel again and again.

No sympathy from me.

This Would only be true if we fans were idiot consumers, which we are not...and We won't just frivolously buy games, not especially after ETW.

If I would compare this to anything, it would be to the Windows Vista-Windows 7 relationship; Vista got itself a pretty bad rap early on, and just couldn't get rid of it, even though the two service packs have all but emlimated all the major complaints. It is the perception that Vista is bad, that is hampering its sales. So, you go back to the code, rewrite, optimize, streamline, Iron out bugs, enhance, improve, ect, and now you have Windows 7, which is basically Vista done right...MS did it to shake off Vista's bad rap, which is exactly what Empire has gotten.

Originally Posted by Commander Shepard

This Would only be true if we fans were idiot consumers, which we are not...and We won't just frivolously buy games, not especially after ETW.

Point taken and I'm not suggesting people on these forums are idiot consumers. But think about the less hardcore people who dont visit these forums, the casual gamers, those that read the amazing reviews and the newcomers to the series, can they be so easily jaded as the cynical amongst us? I'm sure they would be more likely to buy the next game than we are.

Originally Posted by Commander Shepard

If I would compare this to anything, it would be to the Windows Vista-Windows 7 relationship; Vista got itself a pretty bad rap early on, and just couldn't get rid of it, even though the two service packs have all but emlimated all the major complaints. It is the perception that Vista is bad, that is hampering its sales. So, you go back to the code, rewrite, optimize, streamline, Iron out bugs, enhance, improve, ect, and now you have Windows 7, which is basically Vista done right...MS did it to shake off Vista's bad rap, which is exactly what Empire has gotten.

Not quite, Windows 7 has been beta tested for ages...its good and the user feedback is promising. NTW isn't out yet so you should wait a few months after release before making comparisons like this.

ETW doesnt have a bad perception like vista. ETW IS bad. Fact.

Up to a point I welcome the making of Napoleon Total War even though I won't buy it
Firstly because it will give us an opportunity to see if they have ironed out some of the problems from Empire
Secondly when it comes out they can concentrate on something I might want to buy IE RTW II

Got a short answer for the thread question: Money

On the whole "CA has shattered it's reputation as a developer and no one is going to buy their crappy titles anymore" - i very much doubt that, for two reasons.

a) a load of people here claim they won't buy - some never, some only after thouroughly checking the reviews and these very boards. Some may stay true to this, others will see the shiny new package, imagine all the fun others are having in their fisticuffs with Napoleon, and will buy it. I'm no exception, but i wasn't looking forward to much to E:TW anyway (and got it for free), since the 18th century can't fill me with the excitement i feel for the revolution and the 1er empire.

b) there's barely any competition. Sometimes it sounds as if the shelves are creaking from the weight of all those Napoleon-related titles, but either i'm blind or there aren't that many current games for this period. Especially none with this level of eyecandy - not the most important aspect for me, but a major one in these kind of games

c) sorry, i try to think of any developers who came out exclusively with well - rounded, solid and wholesome titles since 2000. Apart from shooters which - from a layman's point of view - are a lot less complex than games like the TW series, most games in this millenium have been bug-ridden trashheaps on release, or didn't contain any value in terms of gameplay mechanics. If CA gets the same criticism, they'll have to wait in the queue.

i really doubt things are going to change that much just for E:TW not being what was expected.

Yeah and A LOT of people absolutely hated Fallout 3 as well.

Still it sold more than E:TW, but that probably has more to do with RPG/shooters being more popular than strategy games and it being on consoles as well, and I wouldn't say that empire flopped by any means.

I like E:TW, I bought it at release and have played it since.

I have owned all the TW series, and play most of them still (shogun and the original Medieval are the only one I don't have installed currently). I like strategy games and also play the Hearts of Iron and Civilization series. I wish the AI in total war games were as good as those two titles, but I wish they had many features from total war.

I had some technical problems early on, but it won't stop me from being a customer again. Not because I just love Creative Assembly but because for all of their flaws I have enjoyed the total war series and the mods the player community has made for them. 50 bucks for 3 Napoleon campaigns and new features... yeah I'm going to buy it.

With total war at least so far I do feel comfortable buying it because I know in the long run I won't be disappointed. Call me naive if you want to, but your opinion of empire is just that an opinion. No developer or game is without its flaws or critics.

Also I blame most of the technical problems on PC as a gaming platform in general, because I didn't experience most of the problems others reported (CTD's etc, worst I had was a graphics glitch during certain fort battles with deployed defenses) just shows how unsuitable it is to develop games for. That said I don't own consoles and play exclusively on my computer, but I'll admit it needs more standardization and cooperation between the different hardware companies (ATI/Nvidia mainly) and microsoft to create a more stable platform. This is a problem that faces MOST games released recently which push the envelope of PC technology.

I think NTW will be the "Alexander" of ETW, but with three campaigns instead of one.
"Extra units" yeah yeah, big deal-modders do that for free and the do a better job of it, IMHO. "Changes to the AI" because I guess a lot of it will be scripted.

Don't be suprised if, like "Alexander", there is one playable faction-Napoleon-with the single player battles being the only opportunity to play as a different faction.....just a gut feeling here.