Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: What Then?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Team Sleep's Avatar Semisalis
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    United States, Florida
    Posts
    450

    Default What Then?

    I'm posting this because I have a couple of general questions to the community on this particular general discussion thread. However before I post those questions I want to put my opinion about the thread out there and let those of you reading this know where I'm coming from before people decided to get all huffy puffy with me.

    I've always been interested in the Total War Games. I picked up Shogun @ a Gamestop when it came out long ago but didn't commit to the purchase. I received Total War: Rome as a gift, and was hooked. I played it for years. Then I got Medieval 2 and played it as much as I've played Rome. Then I discovered Mods more specifically Europa Barbarorum & Stainless Steel. After which I didn't go back to the vanilla versions of those games. I bought Empire, before reading reviews. I played through an entire single player campaign on Vanilla w/ Sweden normal difficulty. But the game wasn't as immersive as the previous 2 titles. I bought into DLC & got as far as I could w/ in that before I was bored with the game. I didn't have some of the horrible experiences I've read about on these forums...and I've also skipped plenty of naval battles not being particularly fond of the combat. When I discovered the reviews about empire and read about how consumers were being scammed on the DLC that was my eye opening moment. It all came to light about how the video game industry of old was gone and how the new one would take shape. I was disgusted @ the whole industry, but CA bore the brunt of my frustration because they have been closest to my heart (and relatively speaking stooped pretty low). It wasn't just the DLC whoring, it was reading about glitches and how things were never fixed or completed properly, how they treated their most vocal critics/fans, complete lack of historical accuracy for alternative fantasy units (blame EB for this) and situations, and tons of ways they could have made the game better but didn't because of whatever restraints or motivations they had, lack of modability, basically an unfinished game sold in piece-meal. I promised myself never to purchase another CA game before reading reviews and checking mod forums & threads. Shogun came out...and although I like the time period, I figured I'd wait to hear/read reviews also...the game seemed a bit *sigh* bland? I later read the reviews and found that it was a mediocre game compared to CA standards of yesteryear. I abstained from the purchase.

    Now R2 is here. I'll admit...I was intrigued...for a day reading previews...but like with Shogun...I decided to wait and see where CA was going with it. Well it's out...and I think all the forums in here speak for themselves. Being an outsider looking in...not having purchased the game...based on what I've heard/read/saw...everything about the game...is...like a Greek tragedy & comedy rolled up into one. I mean seriously. Please...guys & girls...let's be honest with ourselves...based on what is released here by fans/players/observers/modders and casual readers alike...to put it nicely...this game...(I use the term loosely) is ...crap. There are so many things apparently wrong with it...where does one begin? Let me start by lumping a few things into a few large categories.

    Category 1: The game is unfinished. It has a ton of game breaking glitches and bugs. I mean come on...whole concepts of the game which should be at it's core are just...broken. I mean...the AI can't function properly or logically.(sieges/naval/diplomacy/etc). This is game breaking and unfinished.

    Category 2: Concepts. Wow...I've seen reviews in here where people write about features used from previous older games that added to immersion and replayability that are completely void in the new release. Just completely stripped from the game leaving but a basic skeletal framework that leaves much to be desired by a player. And on the other hand new features added which have excellent potential...if they weren't BROKEN or NOT FLESHED OUT! I don't know where they were going with it...but perhaps some lucid fetus stage idea @ the forumulation stage of the games' concepts, capture points or army traditions could've been great. But instead they just thrown into the game in the same slapdash, lucid fetus idea stage they were originated from and never worked on to gel with the rest of the game's mechanics just so they could MARKET new features being added since their last releases.

    Category 3: CA/Sega/WHO EVER's treatment of their fans: WHAT THE HELL?! How could you NOT have seen the utter pile of crap your game was before you released it? There is no way they couldn't have. You're everything wrong with the game industry! Now you placate angry fans & casual players alike because they're angry and expressing to you that the game is not up to even a Neanderthal's expectations of what a video game should be. You lied to them during marketing! You released DLC for a game that was broken before or during the release of your first PATCH! Your effort is to little too late CA. It's not even about damage control at this point. It's about saving face so that you can at least recoup some fleeting fans to your next title. And I've been reading that in many cases even after patch releases specifically designed to fix certain issues...DON'T! Not to mention NOT 1 patch has come out that EXPLAINS or IMPROVES on any of those new "features".

    Seriously people....I could take the board from my board game "RISK", tear it in half...put it in a cardboard box along with some nails, screws, a die w/out dots on it, some loose ruled paper with phrases on them like: "more guns" "more soldiers" wrap it all up & sell it for whatever the market would bear and call it "Risk II" This is what these companies have done to the consumers...and I feel so sorry for those who have cashed in.

    So now...my questions

    What happens when the CA team stops patching? The game still has glitches and bugs, new features are never explained and/or fleshed out to their true potential DLC & expansions are whored out (which has been ominously predicted by some posters). What does it mean for the fans/casual players/and the companies involved? Individual & general answers are welcomed.

    As I stalk these general discussion forums for my daily laughs and responses to this thread...I will still eagerly await the drop of EB 2...which I might add has spent significantly more progressive years in the making than Rome II has.

    Thanks for bearing through it and responding.

    PS Rome II slogan should be: "I CAME....I SAW...I DIED."

  2. #2

    Default Re: What Then?

    I've read everything, and I share your sentiments.

    I tried playing SPQR mod for R1 again just for the heck of it, but I'm also tired of it. Maybe in a few years, 5 or so, I'll play a TW game again.

    It's how I've always dealt with it. For now, I'm playing R2 but just couldn't keep playing it for hours on end. Most of my time is consumed by END TURN waiting anyway, so if the game did play as fluid as it could have, my hours played would be shorter.

    I'm actually more interested at reading fellow forumer's thoughts than the game itself.

  3. #3
    Campidoctor
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Danmark
    Posts
    1,507

    Default Re: What Then?

    What happens when the CA team stops patching?
    Well, same as with the other games in the series, Medieval 2 for example.. the derelict hulk drifts away on the tide, and they start hyping up another one.

    On an aside note, I wouldn't mind paying for DLC, if the core game were solid. I'm full ready to pay good money for good quality.
    The game development business is one of bottomless greed, pitiless cruelty, venal treachery, rampant competition, low politics and boundless personal ambition. New game series are rising, and others are starting their long slide into obscurity and defeat.

  4. #4

    Default Re: What Then?

    I think we have to be mindful we don't get too hysterical. The reason why it's disappointing is that Rome II has a lot of promise, but doesn't live up to it.
    If a few mistakes weren't made, we'd have an amazing game on our hands.

    There's also a separate issue, and that's fatigue; most of us have been playing TW since Rome, and some of us (including me) since Shogun. The titles haven't really changed enough since Rome to keep things fresh, in fact a large amount of the new features in a TW title get cut out in the next one, which keeps progress minimal. Every time we hope CA will introduce a radical change, or at least a true evolution, but the reality is we're getting bored with more of the same each time. If you started this series at Shogun 2, things would probably look very different.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •