Can CA recover from Rome 2 ?

[drunkeneagle]

They recovered from Rome,M2TW and Empire which were all just as bad releases.

[Humble Warrior]

They did not need to recover from Rome,M2TW and

Better.

Empire which was a bad release.

Yes.

Had to fix this nonsense. Were you even around when they were released?

[Holger Danske]

Depends on what 'recover' actually means here. The sad truth is that CA has earned a of money (properly most of it from the pre-order sheeps), and for that reason alone they likely don't see a reason to do it any different once Medieval III is announced. TW is no longer for strategist fans, it's for everyone... From a personal point of view they're way beyond recovery in terms of their image and for that reason I'll properly never buy another game from them... Unless I by chance see one in the dirt cheap end of Steam's dustbins...

[WarlordZ]

It is not so bad for CA. The actual number of complainers and die hard whiners who are dissatisfied with the game are a small fraction of everyone (hundreds of thousands) who plays total war. I know dozens of people who just come to these forums to "lurk" and they are all very satisfied. Just because a few dozen (hundred at most) people are very loud and vocal, and take it upon themselves to force their opinions as that of the community doe snot mean everyone hates the game. If you look at the forums and the complaints it is a handful of members who are making multiple threads hating and complaining. People forget the poor state in which all previous CA games were released. Their memories extend to the point where they were playing fully patched and modded versions of them.

At OP, not sure what you are saying about empire being better than Rome II, I could not play Empire after a couple of hours, and did not even really play it with mods. Rome II did fall short of my expectations, but after the patches and adding a few mods i am thoroughly enjoying the game, much more than I did Empire, Napoleon, or Shogun 2.

[wangrin]

If you remember ETW launch, it create a deep trouble in TW players community.
It need a lot of time and effort for CA to try to regain (partly) trust from the community.
S2TW help, being quite "polished" at launch, despite some bugs (as usual with any TW game launch).
They even release a beta for FotS and began to reconcile with modding community after releasing, even late, informations (db schema, commands, etc.) and finally tools (TeD, BoB, DaVe, CS2 converter and .max models (but bugged for the two last of the list).
But, despite this, warscape-based game still have a bad reputation, particularly related to modding, as I have read in TWC.
It is important to note that peoples asserting that warscape engine make game unmoddable did not have tried Assembly Kit tools... nor probably have had a look to mods for ETW, NTW and even S2TW...

Now, R2TW launch look as bad as ETW one, with the difference that CA seems to be more reactive (but I didn't have a good memory here to compare with ETW launch) and modding community having now a better knowledge concerning warscape engine.
But, even if R2TW sellings seems to have been good (around 120 000 players at release for R2TW compare to the 40 000 players at S2TW release, I know it is not sale numbers, but it could give an idea about the ratio between S2TW and R2TW), the "failed" launch could have a negative impact on further sellings as well as on trust between CA and customers.
It will be probably a hard way to regain confidence, and I hope for CA it will not need 2 more TW to do it...

[krisslanza]

Well, Rome 2 isn't some kind of disaster like say... Aliens: Colonial Marines. So... no, CA doesn't really have anything to "recover" from.

They might have to "recover" their reputation on TWC, but that's just not going to happen. The things TWCers want in a Total War game are incredibly varied, and most of them would only appeal to the thousands of people who frequent this forum. It'd be a poor decision to appeal to thousands, instead of millions.

[pajomife]

The problem was the expectations are high. And the product is too bad. We waited 10 years for this? It can not be true.

[Lord Baal]

CA, sure, they made a ton of money. Total War? It remains to be seen.

[Tyso3]

another one http://steamgraph.net/index.php?acti...rom=1377865923

[PointOfViewGun]

Listen. Ill end this 'We love it' vs 'we hate it crap'. Lets look at ACTUAL FACTS not opinions
http://steamcharts.com/app/214950#1m
If you really think rome 2 was such a success, please explain to me why only a 1/4 of the people who pre-ordered the game still play it?
Success is not just about money, because those same 80000 preorder players who arent bothering with rome 2, are not going to pre-order anything next time.
So when the game gets 30/40000 pre-orders, they will get hit a lot harder.

You're using the peak number of players, not unique number of players, which is why that chart doesn't support what you're saying here. You can check the number of players through out the day. Almost any day, when I wake up (living in East Coast USA) the peak number for that day is already reached. If you were to add the actual number of unique players for a day it would certainly be at least twice the peak number of players for that day.

another one http://steamgraph.net/index.php?acti...rom=1377865923

Interesting link. Kudos for finding it. Check this out: Link. The peak number of players for Rome II fell to the highest peak number of Shogun II after 20 days. Here is the first 20 days of Shogun II where you can see a similar downward trend: Link. What makes Rome II much better than Shogun II that it needs to recover?

[Tyso3]

Listen. Ill end this 'We love it' vs 'we hate it crap'. Lets look at ACTUAL FACTS not opinions


http://steamcharts.com/app/214950#1m


If you really think rome 2 was such a success, please explain to me why only a 1/4 of the people who pre-ordered the game still play it?
Success is not just about money, because those same 80000 preorder players who arent bothering with rome 2, are not going to pre-order anything next time.

So when the game gets 30/40000 pre-orders, they will get hit a lot harder.

[LiquitHQ]

Listen. Ill end this 'We love it' vs 'we hate it crap'. Lets look at ACTUAL FACTS not opinions


http://steamcharts.com/app/214950#1m


If you really think rome 2 was such a success, please explain to me why only a 1/4 of the people who pre-ordered the game still play it?
Success is not just about money.

touche, however I doubt you will stop those that like to contradict the obvious legitimate critiques and opinions from those that are disappointed about ROME II, even CA knows they screwed up but these guys just like to contradict the facts at large. I even dare to say that someone along the way will even doubt those links you have given and say they are incorrect

It is beyond me why they do it but maybe they think by not giving them a hard time they will work harder to fix it?

just a guess doh

[Sebashaw]

Maybe because I play it offline and to Steam I've played only 72 minutes, which it's false because I'm near to 40 hours or more.
But I'm not an expert so maybe I completely wrong.

[LiquitHQ]

this is how it looks from the day of release until this day it is not nearly as much that it needs to be for the most epic game they ever released max peak is at 45000 evenly close to that of shogun 2 on release date and the last number is due to its latest patches ..

http://steamgraph.net/index.php?acti...=214950q214950

and this is the paragraph of shogun 2 release period march 2011

http://steamgraph.net/index.php?acti...h&appid=q34330

which is low for a game of this caliber which uses 40 pro-cent more resources then their former installment if you ask me.

but that is my personal opinion.

[PointOfViewGun]

this is how it looks from the day of release until this day it is not nearly as much that it needs to be for the most epic game they ever released max peak is at 45000 evenly close to that of shogun 2 on release date and the last number is due to its latest patches ..

http://steamgraph.net/index.php?acti...=214950q214950

and this is the paragraph of shogun 2 release period march 2011

http://steamgraph.net/index.php?acti...h&appid=q34330

which is low for a game of this caliber which uses 40 pro-cent more resources then their former installment if you ask me.

but that is my personal opinion.

You're using the time intervals completely wrong.

[krisslanza]

You're using the time intervals completely wrong.

Admittedly twisting facts into the wrong way, is pretty normal for some of the posters around here.

[LiquitHQ]

Admittedly twisting facts into the wrong way, is pretty normal for some of the posters around here.

nope I've seem to have don something wrong seems that you need to put it from the first to the last day of every period or it will not read the chart right so mine are wrong.

[LiquitHQ]

You're using the time intervals completely wrong.

seems that I made a mistake but on the other hand you say this one is also not correct because it does not count unique players?

http://steamcharts.com/app/214950#1m

but if I read the chart right its dated from august 31 2013 to 30 September 2013 and reads all time players piek players and the avg players, if i look upon this chart and the one that you have been posting it looks that they do not contradict each other and that the number of players is dropping drastically over a period of less then 21 days.

Still I doubt that the mayor part of the pre ordered players are still playing this game on a regular base due to the issues that the game has ....

best of regards

[Kitsunegari]

Not likely that they will ever recover fully, Empire was just such a disappointment, that they really needed a great release here IMO.

[LiquitHQ]

it let me set date start time and end date time I put in 3 September to 30 September and then call up the chart like it is said on the site it selves.

So for me it is correctly I did the same for shogun but then from march 15 to march 31 2011 and it gives me those reading, not sure what I can do wrong