Can CA recover from Rome 2 ?

[PointOfViewGun]

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

There is being wrong and then there is willfully being wrong. You knew very well that those graphs you made made no sense but you used them anyway.

Here is Rome II between September 3 and September 30: Link.
Here is Shogun II between March 15 and Marc 31: Link.

[LiquitHQ]

There is being wrong and then there is willfully being wrong. You knew very well that those graphs you made made no sense but you used them anyway.

First I will say this:

You have no reason at all to accuse me of lying or being willfully wrong while you do not really know me, Even if you think to out smart the person that you are talking to try not to degenerate a person you are discussing with, this says a hell of a lot more about you then about me to begin with, I merely tried to look if the readings you had are correct because they were not really contradicting the ones the poster before you had posted in hes first post.

So do not question my integrity because you think you know to know me or even that you think to know what I tried to do

secondly:

I used the date boxes, as said there is no real explanation how you need to use that chart to start with, or not one that I can see and this is the first time that I even try to use something like this.

Third:

While your charts seem to be correct, like I already pointed out the ones that the previous poster showed in hes first post are not contradicting with the ones you are showing now and giving a huge drop of players over a period of the last 21 days if I read it correctly.

now I am still in doubt that the mayor pre ordered players are still playing the game on a regular base ...

best of regards

[PointOfViewGun]

First I will say this:

You have no reason at all to accuse me of lying or being willfully wrong while you do not really know me, Even if you think to out smart the person that you are talking to try not to degenerate a person you are discussing with, this says a hell of a lot more about you then about me to begin with, I merely tried to look if the readings you had are correct because they were not really contradicting the ones the poster before you had posted in hes first post.

So do not question my integrity because you think you know to know me or even that you think to know what I tried to do

secondly:

I used the date boxes, as said there is no real explanation how you need to use that chart to start with, or not one that I can see and this is the first time that I even try to use something like this.

Third:

While your charts seem to be correct, like I already pointed out the ones that the previous poster showed in hes first post are not contradicting with the ones you are showing now and giving a huge drop of players over a period of the last 21 days if I read it correctly.

now I am still in doubt that the mayor pre ordered players are still playing the game on a regular base ...

best of regards

I did not question your integrity but merely commented on the obviousness of your comment about the graphs being wrong. I would comment similarly to a person who looks at the sun and then continue to speak as if it's the moon.

If you read my post properly you can see that it's purpose is not to contradict what someone else said but to provide a different view, comparing Shogun II and Rome II launches.

None of these charts however says anything about the actual number of players that play the game. They show the peak number of players for any day and that is it.

[LiquitHQ]

I did not question your integrity but merely commented on the obviousness of your comment about the graphs being wrong.

I din't stated anywhere that yours are wrong, my mere observation was that you pointed out that the former poster only gave daily readings but when I read your charts they were not really contradicting so I tried to figure it out. I however on the other hand did it completely wrong with my links ...

the thing is whatever reading I find about ROME II all show the same, a massive drop

I only hope that they will not stop to support the game because of it I've seen it happening before ...

best of regards

[craziii]

even a few thousand closed beta testers would help tremendously. just make sure they choose ppl with a wide variety of hardware.

but this is all assuming CA doesn't know about the performance problems. which I am 99% sure they did.

I don't really mind the current state of the game, but I am also not happy. as long as ca continues to patch, I will be happy.

[Kye]

Rome 2 is hugely successful. There is a layer of the business that could not care about quality, its all about money.

If DLC didn't sell very well, or the next expansion didn't sell well...they will not look back at the launch as to why. CA will, but Sega wont and they are the ones calling the shots.

If you bought the game and are really unhappy, then boycott DLC. Chances are its going to sell very well regardless. CA might even add in features that they had in their alpha which would be great, but they would have to convince Sega to why its a good decision first.

[absinthia]

CA/Sega made a ton of money on R2, they do not need to recover.

the question is wether or not they have any future plans for the TW series at all...? and do they really care?!

[krisslanza]

CA/Sega made a ton of money on R2, they do not need to recover.

the question is wether or not they have any future plans for the TW series at all...? and do they really care?!

Without a doubt they do. TWC's opinion isn't a good grasp of the overall reception to Rome 2, which is positive.
They also recently got the Warhammer license, didn't they?

[Idomeneas]

Without a doubt they do. TWC's opinion isn't a good grasp of the overall reception to Rome 2, which is positive.
They also recently got the Warhammer license, didn't they?

Games Workshop + Sega... talking about evil empire here, Im sure they must be building a death star.

[alQamar]

Games Workshop + Sega... talking about evil empire here, Im sure they must be building a death star.

Feel free to read the feedback in comments on Facebook, youtube, and under press releases. I cannot find much positive there. So "bashing" is more general than you think mate.

[PointOfViewGun]

What SEGA saw with this release is that they can make a huge sale from this genre. They will not back off from the genre in any way.

[LiquitHQ]

What SEGA saw with this release is that they can make a huge sale from this genre. They will not back off from the genre in any way.

Well you may be right about the genre but for me ROME II does not feel the same as their previous tittles at least not to me.

I know it may sound like a personal opinion

best of regards

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

I'm not buying Rome 2, I'm going back to playing Shogun 2. I played it on my buddy's computer and it sucks, really it's just a 2 minute melee fest with absolutely no strategy present. Just invade them, crush the enemy with your legions in a straightforward assault and conquer their cities.

[daelin4]

The real question is whether CA sees it as a problem to recover from.

One does not fix a leaking roof if s/he never thought it was leaking in the first place.

[krisslanza]

There's no need for CA to panic either. TWC just blows it all up and out of proportion because, again, pretty much aside from here and the official forums, Rome 2 is very widely praised for what it did.

CA has acknowledged the number of technical issues shouldn't have happened, but they never once said any of the features TWC complains about, are issues or things they need to really address. The overabundance of VP battles perhaps, but that may simply be because the AI used Forced March WAY too much.

[stackero]

There's no need for CA to panic either. TWC just blows it all up and out of proportion because, again, pretty much aside from here and the official forums, Rome 2 is very widely praised for what it did.

CA has acknowledged the number of technical issues shouldn't have happened, but they never once said any of the features TWC complains about, are issues or things they need to really address. The overabundance of VP battles perhaps, but that may simply be because the AI used Forced March WAY too much.

I don't know whether to admire you for you're faith and loyalty to CA or feel sorry and sad. But, to each his own.

Good Gaming.

[Radzeer]

There's no need for CA to panic either. TWC just blows it all up and out of proportion because, again, pretty much aside from here and the official forums, Rome 2 is very widely praised for what it did.

Sorry, but this makes me giggle. If there is a lot of bashing going on at the official forum and the largest fan forum, and Amazon gets horrible game reviews, plus we know how the "official" gamer magazine reviews are written after a few hours of play when the "ooooowwaaahhhh" factor over the graphics still holds - well, I'm not sure what widespread praise is going on. (Note that I did not mention Metacritic or Angry Joe, as neither are relevant for this point.)

I think the real issue is whether CA can handle the publicity damage. The game sold well, but it's a question how well the longevity of the sales would work. A lot of comparison is drawn with Empire because of the horrible release, but I think there is a fundamental difference. Back then CA hyped the new engine, new stuff like naval battles and the scope of the game, but it was uncharted territory for them. That people can forgive. MTW2 was a bugfest when released, now people remember it as a great game. This time CA overhyped the game too much. If a company promises 40% more but delivers the same underdeveloped product, well, the company will look 40% less in performance.

And what is the most important: people will forget mistakes eventually (see Shogun2, widely praised now in comparison). They are much less likely to do this with marketing lies. And that is where the difficulty for CA lies.

Somebody wrote somewhere that maybe they should split and have a separate team doing hardcore TW games and another one going further down the arcade-y / console-y titles for the new target audience. Not a bad idea.

Edit: it was Huberto a few posts before. Excellent point.

It might be better for them to devote their energies to titles like Alien and Warhammer and their MMO and and spin off a studio that actually want to make historically authentic war games. Maybe there are staff at CA who would love to be part of that new company making games for the audience that actually cared about them.

[stackero]

Sorry, but this makes me giggle. If there is a lot of bashing going on at the official forum and the largest fan forum, and Amazon gets horrible game reviews, plus we know how the "official" gamer magazine reviews are written after a few hours of play when the "ooooowwaaahhhh" factor over the graphics still holds - well, I'm not sure what widespread praise is going on. (Note that I did not mention Metacritic or Angry Joe, as neither are relevant for this point.)

I think the real issue is whether CA can handle the publicity damage. The game sold well, but it's a question how well the longevity of the sales would work. A lot of comparison is drawn with Empire because of the horrible release, but I think there is a fundamental difference. Back then CA hyped the new engine, new stuff like naval battles and the scope of the game, but it was uncharted territory for them. That people can forgive. MTW2 was a bugfest when released, now people remember it as a great game. This time CA overhyped the game too much. If a company promises 40% more but delivers the same underdeveloped product, well, the company will look 40% less in performance.

And what is the most important: people will forget mistakes eventually (see Shogun2, widely praised now in comparison). They are much less likely to do this with marketing lies. And that is where the difficulty for CA lies.

Somebody wrote somewhere that maybe they should split and have a separate team doing hardcore TW games and another one going further down the arcade-y / console-y titles for the new target audience. Not a bad idea.

Edit: it was Huberto a few posts before. Excellent point.

Awesome. Another good one. Got to rep ya +1




"If all the world were just, there would be no need of valor."~~Plutarch

[Deathcake]

There's no need for CA to panic either. TWC just blows it all up and out of proportion because, again, pretty much aside from here and the official forums, Rome 2 is very widely praised for what it did.

had to have a bit of a chuckle at that. "Everyone is praising the game except on the games own official forums, and arguable the largest fan forum as well". Sorry, but where then is it being praised that matters more than the games own official forums and largest fan forums?

For mine, I agree that Sega and CA will still call it a win and carry on with business as usual, purely for the numbers of sales, do you think either really cares if you are still playing their game 6 months later (apart from trying to get you to buy some DLC). They got their money, I do not think they care much really whether you played for 5 minutes or 5 months. Either way, however much you play/ed, they will just claim 'look, it sold X units. It was more than Y game, so it was a win'.

[stackero]

had to have a bit of a chuckle at that. "Everyone is praising the game except on the games own official forums, and arguable the largest fan forum as well". Sorry, but where then is it being praised that matters more than the games own official forums and largest fan forums?

For mine, I agree that Sega and CA will still call it a win and carry on with business as usual, purely for the numbers of sales, do you think either really cares if you are still playing their game 6 months later (apart from trying to get you to buy some DLC). They got their money, I do not think they care much really whether you played for 5 minutes or 5 months. Either way, however much you play/ed, they will just claim 'look, it sold X units. It was more than Y game, so it was a win'.

Correct. But wait and lets see what happens when they go to sell their next game. Yes, they'll hype it good, but they'll be people like me on the forums, Amazon and other outlets warning potential buyers. Will they make money on the game, likely so. But not near as much as they'd wished for.

Good Gaming