Could Rome II be considered a "bait and switch" fraud?

[SirRobin]

If CA truly demonstrated a game with vastly superior graphics and scale, and then cut most of it back before actually launching the game, could that form the basis for a lawsuit for false advertising?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bait_and_switch

But I suppose they covered their asses with some fine print somewhere...

[mutad1]

Please don't, get them some support.What about to SEGA pushed them so hard.................ROME II is unplayable, because of lack any features we loved in previous games.Everybody in the whole world are blaming them for everything.Comm'on guys these are the people who brought us a TWR series!!Please rethink your posts and give them some support.

[Humble Warrior]

You have to understand something that SEGA\CA understand. The population at large just see it as unimportant. It`s a game. The rules required haven`t caught up yet with unscrupulous practises of some publishers. It`s been like this with a lot of things in history and often takes years for official bodies to notice and take action.

Most certainly, if this was explained to anyone in some kind of governing Lawful position, they would admit that what CA\SEGA did was misleading and breaks trade laws. Unfortunately, no one has the wish and cash to take CA to court over it and no authority really exists that has the power to do so for the customer.

Society just needs to recognise that games cost money and many, many of our young people are being taken advantage of and ripped off. It will happen as the games industry gets more notice and more expensive.

[Jedi]

You have to understand something that SEGA\CA understand. The population at large just see it as unimportant. It`s a game. The rules required haven`t caught up yet with unscrupulous practises of some publishers. It`s been like this with a lot of things in history and often takes years for official bodies to notice and take action.

Most certainly, if this was explained to anyone in some kind of governing Lawful position, they would admit that what CA\SEGA did was misleading and breaks trade laws. Unfortunately, no one has the wish and cash to take CA to court over it and no authority really exists that has the power to do so for the customer.

Society just needs to recognise that games cost money and many, many of our young people are being taken advantage of and ripped off. It will happen as the games industry gets more notice and more expensive.

You spoke the truth there mate, really nailed it on the head as no one seems to take notice of gaming advertising the same way they pounce on Tesco and Asda showing prices wrong by a few pence or a few grams in the bags.I know we had our arguements over gloss when Fall of the Samurai removed it from the base Shogun II but this is why i lost it back then it is this same viewpoint you just nailed.


Basically when i first saw Shogun II gloss i loved it and when they removed it it destroyed the visuals and in the gloss thead Craig waded in eventually after 30 pages and we got some dialogue going.But he said to me basically that it was not that big of a deal and they never saw it as fraud or thought the customers will care.You expressed this exact view on your post but they seriously underestimate us i think.

I saw the game on sale for £19 and still wont buy it until it looks just like the pictures in here: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...-extreme/page2

[King Philip II]

You have to understand something that SEGA\CA understand. The population at large just see it as unimportant. It`s a game. The rules required haven`t caught up yet with unscrupulous practises of some publishers. It`s been like this with a lot of things in history and often takes years for official bodies to notice and take action.

Most certainly, if this was explained to anyone in some kind of governing Lawful position, they would admit that what CA\SEGA did was misleading and breaks trade laws. Unfortunately, no one has the wish and cash to take CA to court over it and no authority really exists that has the power to do so for the customer.

Society just needs to recognise that games cost money and many, many of our young people are being taken advantage of and ripped off. It will happen as the games industry gets more notice and more expensive.

"Misleading" is the keyword in most Marketing Practices Act's - for example:

"Part 2
General rules of market conduct
Misleading and improper marketing

Section 3. Traders may not use misleading or improper statements or omit material information if this is likely to materially distort consumers’ or other traders’ economic behaviour in the market. ..."
http://www.consumereurope.dk/Menu/Co...-Practices-Act

I'm quite sure there is a similar law in the UK and I'm also sure there is a complaint procedure (look under Consumer Authority or Consumer Ombudman).

[Agent Provocateur]

Delusional.

[Sharpe]

Delusional.

Indeed. I still believe CA were sincere in making this game, something is not right though. The game is fun but is missing a lot, it feels a bit empty.

Maybe this is the kick up the backside they need, Rome 2 has plenty of promising features.


Oh and people; don't accuse them of lying so freely, maybe they fully intended and still do intend to fulfill those promises of optimization and AI but have hit a few bumps along the road.

[krisslanza]

CA advertised Rome 2 Total War. You got Rome 2 Total War.
I'm not seeing much of a switch here. The fact you got a game that has some bugs/technical issues at launch isn't really a bait and switch -if it was, every major PC game release is Bait and Switch.

The removal of features they never advertised would be in the game - like say the family tree - is not a bait and switch given they never even said it'd be in there.

[SirRobin]

CA advertised Rome 2 Total War. You got Rome 2 Total War.
I'm not seeing much of a switch here.

There's more to a game than a name. What I meant was that if CA produced a version of the engine where everything was turned up 300 percent, the scale, the graphics etc.. then just used this as a showcase, knowing full well that you would need a monster of a computer to run it, and that they would shrink everything down for release.. then maybe that could be seen as a bait and switch?

If they baited with an artificially inflated huge siege of Carthage, full of smoke and lighting effects.. just to deliver a game without all that?

Think of a car manufacturer that develops a new brand of car, and then invite motor journalists for a test drive. But what the journalists don't know is that in that test sample of the car, the engine is much more powerful and the suspension is much more advanced than in the cars with the same brand that will later be available on the market. The journalists hurry back to their motor magazines to write great previews about the amazing new brand of car.

But when you buy that car, it doesn't perform like in those previews. Wouldn't that be a bait and switch?

[Bobz]

There's more to a game than a name. What I meant was that if CA produced a version of the engine where everything was turned up 300 percent, the scale, the graphics etc.. then just used this as a showcase, knowing full well that you would need a monster of a computer to run it, and that they would shrink everything down for release.. then maybe that could be seen as a bait and switch?

If they baited with an artificially inflated huge siege of Carthage, full of smoke and lighting effects.. just to deliver a game without all that?

Think of a car manufacturer that develops a new brand of car, and then invite motor journalists for a test drive. But what the journalists don't know is that in that test sample of the car, the engine is much more powerful and the suspension is much more advanced than in the cars with the same brand that will later be available on the market. The journalists hurry back to their motor magazines to write great previews about the amazing new brand of car.

But when you buy that car, it doesn't perform like in those previews. Wouldn't that be a bait and switch?

So we're comparing like for like, have you seen any car advertisements? Almost all of them have small print stating that the model shown is the high-end one, containing features not included in the basic models. Same principal here, as long as some computers can produce the graphics shown in the advertisements there is no problem.

[SirRobin]

Well, I suppose all we can do is to quote the Romans themselves: Caveat emptor...

[Zenky]

Seriously ? you guys really have nothing to do , you put so much time posting non sense about a game you hate , usually I just move on when I don't like something , I wont even start to argue on the legal part this is gone to far.

[War lord]

A bait and switch would require proof that CA marketed something of a much higher quality than what they released. Which is what the Gearbox team behind Aliens: Colonial Marines did. Marketing a product by hype, on the otherhand, is business.

Gamers keep shelling out money for released betas, Pre-ordering, and spending astronomical sums on DLC, thus encouraging dodgy business practices, it's a community created problem.

[Lugotorix]

This. This is what we need another thread on. FFS the game's better than Shogun II. My machine is from 2008, my card is from 09' and it runs this game very well, and I can prove it.

[Durnaug]

...or a "pump and dump" scheme

Seriously though - I invested in the game because I have faith that CA will see it through. That and the modders

[haukim]

Holy okay lets play this out.

You should seek a legal opinion not ask some videogame nerds. I recommend trying to form a class for a class action lawsuit.

Oh wait, you don't want to spend a few hundred dollars for a lawyer to laugh in your face in a consulting session over a $60 game? Then why waste our time with this stupidity?

That is not how the world works. No one outside this delusion community will give two if you got your guard mode button or the je ne sais quois you wanted in this game of your dreams. I am playing Rome 2 on a decent pc and it looks great and...

[SKSlave]

CA advertised Rome 2 Total War. You got Rome 2 Total War.I'm not seeing much of a switch here. The fact you got a game that has some bugs/technical issues at launch isn't really a bait and switch -if it was, every major PC game release is Bait and Switch.The removal of features they never advertised would be in the game - like say the family tree - is not a bait and switch given they never even said it'd be in there.

Some bugs/technical issues at launch? Understatement of the year right here.I think the removal of the Carthage video graphics, doubly painful by the "this is way way pre-alpha, the finished game will look even better than this!" Is a blatant lie. Deny it all you want, but they lied. They lied about good AI. They lied about optimised for all systems, high and low. They lied about 700 units in the game (I don't count different colour clothing a different unit, I'm afraid.) They lied about an in depth politics system. They lied about working phalanxes... shall I go on?

[krisslanza]

Some bugs/technical issues at launch? Understatement of the year right here.I think the removal of the Carthage video graphics, doubly painful by the "this is way way pre-alpha, the finished game will look even better than this!" Is a blatant lie. Deny it all you want, but they lied. They lied about good AI. They lied about optimised for all systems, high and low. They lied about 700 units in the game (I don't count different colour clothing a different unit, I'm afraid.) They lied about an in depth politics system. They lied about working phalanxes... shall I go on?

Anyone who thinks what you see on the showroom floor is what you'll get, is deluding themselves. It's been common video game practice since forever to have the showcase version touched up to look as good as possible. I didn't really look at that showcase footage, but from what I have seen, I can get around that same look - I'd have some pretty wonky frames though since my computer isn't that great.

Optimizing is something they're working on and, frankly, is an overwhelming huge task. Think about how many sheer kinds of computer parts are out there - there's no way for CA to test how their product will run on the likely billions of combinations out there. They can't afford to build the billions of computers to test every possible hardware set-up: and that doesn't even account for individual user software choices and such. It's the kind of thing that can only be done by releasing the product and getting live feedback.

To my use of a little bit of Sparta, phalanxes work if you don't run them. Many people seem to overlook that most units do not have Formation Attack, meaning they aren't trained to retain their formation if you ruin it via charging. The politics is a little shallow, but it does its job. It could be more, but it's not exactly terrible either. Also even if you don't count different colors as a unit, I don't think CA ever claimed 700 unique units, or claimed what 700 'different' units was. Different can be as simple as a color differences or looks.

[Phier]

For me the only real question I'd like answered is did they lie in their interviews, or did they get forced to release it in an inferior state but had every intention of doing what they talked about.

Anyone who followed Sword of the Stars II knows what real gaming fraud is. I'm not 100% sure in this case.

[Durnaug]

For me the only real question I'd like answered is did they lie in their interviews, or did they get forced to release it in an inferior state but had every intention of doing what they talked about.

Anyone who followed Sword of the Stars II knows what real gaming fraud is. I'm not 100% sure in this case.

Perhaps there's a "gap" in the CA testing setup - something that was missed as they expanded their team with the influx of SEGA money? Yup, pure tabloid speculation. If I'm being impetuous I would suggest SEGA pushed 'em to release early but that doesn't make sense? Surely such a big company would wait for their investment to mature and bloom in time for Christmas? Plus, I've read many comments from players who state they have encountered zero problems - so is there a subset of players who all share a bugged component not experienced by others, e.g. a driver? Just shooting the breeze