Rome 2. The 1st game that "improvements" make the game worst than better.

[AnthoniusII]

Grafics:
Patch 0 grafics problem partialy fixed in Patch 1 that caused other visual problems that have yet fixed (buged battle intefase and its results).
Patch 2 improved the battlemap performance and got worst with Patch 3!!!
Now characters on map move on huge steps (fps issue???) a problem that did not exist with Patch 2.
Patch 4 beta makes that issue even worst.
Patch 0 to Patch 2 campaign and battle loading times where much smaller that Shogun 2.
Patch 3 and 4 those times increased by 150%!!!!
CA claims that fixes the game's performance for old pcs but as i see they make it worst for old pcs!!!!!
Does anyone in that company can't borrow from a friend of his/hers an old pc and test their game there????
Is that to hard?????????????
Or the meaning "improvement" has been changed and i missed the new definition of the word?

[bigfootedfred]

I know for certain there are five patches planned. What comes after im not sure, but personally im gonna check it out again post patch 5...

Im done beta testing this game. Good luck to everyone who carries on, thankyou for putting in all these hours..
hopefuly when i come back to rome II, itll be more like the game we all expected

[SirPeacemaker]

Yeah I agree (unfortunatelly). And I can see how some casual players enter this thread and write: This is another stupid ranting thread, stop moaning and whining etc... That saddens me the most.

[craziii]

I know for certain there are five patches planned. What comes after im not sure, but personally im gonna check it out again post patch 5...

Im done beta testing this game. Good luck to everyone who carries on, thank you for putting in all these hours..
hopefuly when i come back to rome II, itll be more like the game we all expected

no way right? only 5 patches planned? what happened to we will be supporting rome 2 for a long time to come? only in dlcs? if I have to buy dlcs to fix the game if at all, this game series would be 100% in the 5$ bargain bin buy category. we will find out won't we.

[karamazovmm]

no way right? only 5 patches planned? what happened to we will be supporting rome 2 for a long time to come? only in dlcs? if I have to buy dlcs to fix the game if at all, this game series would be 100% in the 5$ bargain bin buy category. we will find out won't we.

he is talking about the patch that were numbered in the wiki, thats the only thing that we have in terms of numbers

[bigfootedfred]

no way right? only 5 patches planned? what happened to we will be supporting rome 2 for a long time to come? only in dlcs? if I have to buy dlcs to fix the game if at all, this game series would be 100% in the 5$ bargain bin buy category. we will find out won't we.

oh on there wiki

http://wiki.totalwar.com/w/Total_War...I:_Patch_Notes

be more dlc/upates after that for sure

[archone]

I thought CA was going to patch the game for the indefinite future, where did they say there are five patches planned? I've personally noticed huge improvements over the patches. The game is very far from perfect or even good, but the performance, stability, and AI have all improved for me. I don't know how many of the issues CA will fix, but they're definitely moving at a good pace in the right direction. If you're having campaign map lag, try starting a new campaign. The game runs incredibly smoothly for the first 10 turns, instant response on nearly everything, 60 fps, 10 second end turns. Once you get past 50 turns and the map gets more populated, however, you get the same performance issues again.

[Grimreapo]

XD
This is so funny as on the Paradox forums there is a civil war over the EUIV 1.2 patch with bother sides being passionate about their views but unlike here both sides are putting forth arguments rather than just arguing...

[bigfootedfred]

XD
This is so funny as on the Paradox forums there is a civil war over the EUIV 1.2 patch with bother sides being passionate about their views but unlike here both sides are putting forth arguments rather than just arguing...

Difference is
there they are probably discussing gameplay changes
here: "beta testing patch 4.0, AI is still broken"

[Rasic]

Difference is
there they are probably discussing gameplay changes
here: "beta testing patch 4.0, AI is still broken"

Exactly.

[Grimreapo]

Difference is
there they are probably discussing gameplay changes
here: "beta testing patch 4.0, AI is still broken"

But the title of the thread is "Rome 2. The 1st game that "improvements" make the game worst than better.", no? This title would be fine if had something like "Performance and AI feedback" then it would be fine but its cursed by the hyperbole that seems to rock these forums, I can name several games that have had patches worse than Rome 2 (Oh Poor Relic) and other patches for other total war games have been just as bad. Should CA be ashamed for releasing the game in this state? Yep but its tiresome to see people trying to make it the devil incarnate in every thread...

[karamazovmm]

But the title of the thread is "Rome 2. The 1st game that "improvements" make the game worst than better.", no? This title would be fine if had something like "Performance and AI feedback" then it would be fine but its cursed by the hyperbole that seems to rock these forums, I can name several games that have had patches worse than Rome 2 (Oh Poor Relic) and other patches for other total war games have been just as bad. Should CA be ashamed for releasing the game in this state? Yep but its tiresome to see people trying to make it the devil incarnate in every thread...

dont try to change their ways, just have fun with it

[Mangalore]

dont try to change their ways, just have fun with it

Particularly us casual gamers who have wasted 7 years on a game forum without a clue... If anyone had told me that's what this is I wouldn't have bloody bothered!

[Rasic]

But the title of the thread is "Rome 2. The 1st game that "improvements" make the game worst than better.", no? This title would be fine if had something like "Performance and AI feedback" then it would be fine but its cursed by the hyperbole that seems to rock these forums, I can name several games that have had patches worse than Rome 2 (Oh Poor Relic) and other patches for other total war games have been just as bad. Should CA be ashamed for releasing the game in this state? Yep but its tiresome to see people trying to make it the devil incarnate in every thread...

CA has made it clear that they have little regard for fan input in the games they make. People have been writing constructive feedback for years to no avail. They only respond to fans when they whine the loudest, and only to save face. That is the climate they have created for themselves with lack of communication. Hell just look at your own example, I can see on the front page of the forums many many developer responds in the Paradox forums. What have we heard from CA besides "we'll fix it"? We have no idea how long this patch support is planned for, if any of the features we all dearly miss will be returning, nothing. You can't blame this entirely on the fan base.

[VINC.XXIII]

CA has made it clear that they have little regard for fan input in the games they make. People have been writing constructive feedback for years to no avail. They only respond to fans when they whine the loudest, and only to save face. That is the climate they have created for themselves with lack of communication. Hell just look at your own example, I can see on the front page of the forums many many developer responds in the Paradox forums. What have we heard from CA besides "we'll fix it"? We have no idea how long this patch support is planned for, if any of the features we all dearly miss will be returning, nothing. You can't blame this entirely on the fan base.

Agreed, Paradox devs seems to be more receptive to user's complains.
Here, out the help provided by Lusted for basic units modding, I don't see that much C.A devs coming to listen us, right or not? I means the dudes who decide of AI, those who invented flamming javelins and napalm torches that burn bronze gates...where they are? How can we communicate with the team about the concepts of games, the good things they removed, the bad things they implemented.
Actually that forum is full of modders and users who know enough history and game possibilities to help them if they need. Recently I've learnt they refused the EB help!
Can we do something for a professional dev team that refuse such precious help?

[bigfootedfred]

CA has made it clear that they have little regard for fan input in the games they make. People have been writing constructive feedback for years to no avail. They only respond to fans when they whine the loudest, and only to save face. That is the climate they have created for themselves with lack of communication. Hell just look at your own example, I can see on the front page of the forums many many developer responds in the Paradox forums. What have we heard from CA besides "we'll fix it"? We have no idea how long this patch support is planned for, if any of the features we all dearly miss will be returning, nothing. You can't blame this entirely on the fan base.

I have only ever lurked on the paradox forums. Played the original hoi, never picked up the new one. maybe i will. at any rate i have never signed up there never feeling the need to complain/ask/or be enthusiast about it.
Only ever lurked with civ til they released civ 5, racked up a few hundred posts over the opening big patches, was there couple of months later still. Game started to get really good so i stopped going.
If we have that level of support from CA, many won't say anything. Just buy the products and occasionally talk 'game'.

[Crymson]

XD
This is so funny as on the Paradox forums there is a civil war over the EUIV 1.2 patch with bother sides being passionate about their views but unlike here both sides are putting forth arguments rather than just arguing...

There are more than a few differences between the two. First off, EU IV is a perfectly functional game whereas Rome 2 is not. Second, there are not exactly two sides here, nor is there much to discuss; there are those many who believe that the game is incomplete and broken, and the few who rage constantly at them for criticizing the game.

[familyguy1]

There are more than a few differences between the two. First off, EU IV is a perfectly functional game whereas Rome 2 is not. Second, there are not exactly two sides here, nor is there much to discuss; there are those many who believe that the game is incomplete and broken, and the few who rage constantly at them for criticizing the game.

And those who see the game is incomplete, but are willing to help CA by reporting bugs etc for them to fix.

But there is also a side it seems(albeit small) that whenever someone comes and says that their playthrough is fine, those people respond with "they must certainly be a shill for CA or just blatantly lying!" "The game is completely broken, totally unplayable. Anyone who says otherwise is lying, working for CA, or kissing CAs ass!"

Christ, it gets annoying.

[AlexCouceiro]

This is so funny as on the Paradox forums there is a civil war over the EUIV 1.2 patch with bother sides being passionate about their views but unlike here both sides are putting forth arguments rather than just arguing...

By the way, I am one of those who defended patch 1.2 - except for the 50% less bloody battles.

Anyway, there we have a game, here we don’t have a game yet.

Another difference is that we know Paradox developers will communicate with players and patch EU4 to the death for many years ahead, always sincerely looking for what is best, even when players will heatedly disagree with them.

As for CA/SEGA, five or six patches will do the job. And if anything after this point is still messed up… Oh well, happens.

[EmperorJulian]

That's one of the chief differences between CA and Paradox. In 2016 we'll still be talking about EU IV - it might be getting long in the tooth by then, but after many patches, fixes, expansions and tweaks it will still be relevant. Rome 2 on the other hand will be a non-entity, completely forgotten and (if it weren't for steam) more or less consigned to the realm of abandonware. For me, this is the most upsetting part of this whole farce. The certainty that the problems are not likely to be fixed, the missing features are likely not to return and the paid DLC will arrive anyway; thereby slaking the thirst of the few (fortunate) souls who feel Rome 2 is fine as is and can get something out of the experience. I have no animosity towards those who are pleased with what they have, lord knows I wish I could join them. But the fact remains that what we've been given is a broken and unfinished mess, lacking in depth of detail, challenge and potential. I suppose if it was some other era, and not the sequel to RTW I might be less upset, but here we are.

Of course, there's always the chance (albeit slim) that future patches, expansions and mods can cut through some of these issues. It's even possible that in the fulness of time, Rome 2 will become something akin to a serviceable entry into the Total War franchise. It will likely be no less than a year however before we can speak to that for sure and in the interim I can't see any reason to keep playing. I put in my ~ 60 hours, but so little has changed from September 3rd to October 3rd that I just can't be bothered. Yes bug fixes are good, I agree with at least the attempt to remedy the situation that CA is putting forth but the fundamentals of the game remain the same, so far with little modification. I suppose I'll hang around at least to see how things develop, but do I ever wish CA operated more like Paradox these days.