Creative Assembly Business Practice Discussion Thread (Rome II)

[Jonoleth Irenicus]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24554511

If it ain't ready - don't release it.

Pay attention CA / Sega.

Your competitors do it better.

[Americanus Supremus]

Releasing a polished product is so much better than damage control and weekly patches. You would think anyone in business or with general common sense would know that a job worth doing is worth doing right...

Great article and relation to current mess with RTW2

+ rep

[Rittsy]

Well it's actually what a publisher is prepared to do, I think most developers would take the extra time if it were possible.

[archone]

I wouldn't mind if they released the game early and just flat out said, "hey we didn't have time to finish these features and we'll patch/DLC them in"

At this point I'm not sure if they're going to finish the game or if they think this is actually a quality release

[Jonoleth Irenicus]

I wouldn't mind if they released the game early and just flat out said, "hey we didn't have time to finish these features and we'll patch/DLC them in"

To their credit, this is pretty much what Paradox do.

Their games are not always polished (HOI series), but they patch them and improve them and make it quite easy for MODs to change just about anything.

Then of course they also go ahead and release gems like CK 2.

[Inhuman One]

Publishers are still the cancer of the gaming industry.

It proved fatal to many good companies, and it will prove to be fatal to many more.

[craziii]

um, they are delayed to make 2014 revenue for ubisoft look good. op, you bought into it too easily.

[Cathal]

um, they are delayed to make 2014 revenue for ubisoft look good. op, you bought into it too easily.

Ummm, they took a hit this year because they expected Watch Dogs to be released this year.... I don't think you read it properly.

[Vor]

Ubisoft is both the developer and publisher here. Had CA been their own publisher would Rome 2 have been released? We don't now. But Ubisoft don't have that third party hovering over them.

[krisslanza]

CA is a developer - not a publisher. They don't get to make the decision on when a game is released, that's SEGA. If SEGA says the game has to be out by a date, it has to be out by that date - they can get an extension, but that's only if they can prove the time is needed.

Rome 2 probably performed fine on their test machines, the problem came up when it was released officially and it didn't run fine on customer's computers.

[Humble Warrior]

The thing is, it makes sense to hold back and even lose some money until it`s tested and actually suitable for release. If released finished and working well, your Devs will gain a good reputation, copies will fly off the shelves from good word-of-mouth plus HONEST advertising and that spills over to PROFIT for the Publishing house.

It is good to earn profit honestly through GOOD WORKS, than to earn profit through deception. Remember that, CA\SEGA.

[krisslanza]

The thing is, it makes sense to hold back and even lose some money until it`s tested and actually suitable for release. If released finished and working well, your Devs will gain a good reputation, copies will fly off the shelves from good word-of-mouth plus HONEST advertising and that spills over to PROFIT for the Publishing house.

It is good to earn profit honestly through GOOD WORKS, than to earn profit through deception. Remember that, CA\SEGA.

Certainly it makes sense to hold back a buggy release - if any bugs show up in your testing. Computers are complex machines with a mindbogglingly huge amount of variables in setup and the way the customer handles them. It isn't possible to feasibly test how your product runs on all these setups. CA's test machines certainly worked, or suffered few important issues, and as a result their data could only reach the conclusion of the game running fine on any setup.

Of course, the launch clearly shows that this wasn't at all correct. CA could perhaps stand to consider having some test machines with more unusual configs, or maybe actually trying to have an actual beta release of their product to select customers to actually see how they run on a variety of setups.

Or, if you want, you can just assume CA is corrupt and greedy and they just don't care to do testing. Whatever floats your boat.

[Jonoleth Irenicus]

Certainly it makes sense to hold back a buggy release - if any bugs show up in your testing. Computers are complex machines with a mindbogglingly huge amount of variables in setup and the way the customer handles them. It isn't possible to feasibly test how your product runs on all these setups. CA's test machines certainly worked, or suffered few important issues, and as a result their data could only reach the conclusion of the game running fine on any setup.

Of course, the launch clearly shows that this wasn't at all correct. CA could perhaps stand to consider having some test machines with more unusual configs, or maybe actually trying to have an actual beta release of their product to select customers to actually see how they run on a variety of setups.

Or, if you want, you can just assume CA is corrupt and greedy and they just don't care to do testing. Whatever floats your boat.

How about all the gameplay and AI issues ?

Do you think they came up on the in house machines or are problems like uber-powerful transport fleets something that only happens on external customer machines ?

[krisslanza]

How about all the gameplay and AI issues ?

Do you think they came up on the in house machines or are problems like uber-powerful transport fleets something that only happens on external customer machines ?

Or that, you know, an actual navy with decent ships in it will defeat transports any day of the week. Transports are not nearly as powerful as TWC claims. Their only strength is in numbers - just don't think your fleet of 3 ships can go beat 20 ships. It's just like any other battle in the game, numbers matter. Even if the 20 enemy units are garbage, you can't honestly expect a significantly smaller number of units to defeat them in the open.

[Yarkis de Bodemloze]

Or that, you know, an actual navy with decent ships in it will defeat transports any day of the week. Transports are not nearly as powerful as TWC claims. Their only strength is in numbers - just don't think your fleet of 3 ships can go beat 20 ships. It's just like any other battle in the game, numbers matter. Even if the 20 enemy units are garbage, you can't honestly expect a significantly smaller number of units to defeat them in the open.

Just accept the fact that the game was released unfinished. Bugs are only half of the issue the game has.

[krisslanza]

Just accept the fact that the game was released unfinished. Bugs are only half of the issue the game has.

It's only a fact if it was true. Last I played, pretty sure the game works. It's not unfinished at all. It's buggy, yes, but there's nothing in it that screams "unfinished". It is your opinion, that the game is unfinished.

[DropkickCleary]

The developer is indeed prepared to delay and do the necessary testing.

Trust me, as a designer, I know we'd rather release a great game than release on time.

Publishers, on the other hand, would not.

It's a flaw in the organization of the game industry. The other side of the coin is that if there were individual owners of development studios that would accept nothing less than a perfect product, there wouldn't be any games on the shelves. They'd all be in perpetual development.

[Jonoleth Irenicus]

Or that, you know, an actual navy with decent ships in it will defeat transports any day of the week. Transports are not nearly as powerful as TWC claims. Their only strength is in numbers - just don't think your fleet of 3 ships can go beat 20 ships. It's just like any other battle in the game, numbers matter. Even if the 20 enemy units are garbage, you can't honestly expect a significantly smaller number of units to defeat them in the open.

I do actually.

A small number of warships can and should easily sink a large number of troop transports : vessels that are typically slow, have low defense, and no offense.

But if you like the present state of the game, you probably have no issue with the CAI or BAI either.

It's not CA's fault you say : game runs fine on their machines.

It's the customers and their poor computers that are too blame ... Sorry ... Nonsense.

[krisslanza]

I do actually.

A small number of warships can and should easily sink a large number of troop transports : vessels that are typically slow, have low defense, and no offense.

But if you like the present state of the game, you probably have no issue with the CAI or BAI either.

It's not CA's fault you say : game runs fine on their machines.

It's the customers and their poor computers that are too blame ... Sorry ... Nonsense.

The transports are ships that are slow with low defense and no direct offense. The only way they can kill you is by ramming/boarding you. Well, and missile attacks if the troops onboard have it - which makes sense. Why would they magically lose their ability to fire projectiles just because they're on a boat?

A small number of warships, proper ones, can still beat a much larger transport fleet - unless you try to board them anyway. Just ram them, or better yet, use artillery ships to pick them off.

[rakenan]

I do actually.

A small number of warships can and should easily sink a large number of troop transports : vessels that are typically slow, have low defense, and no offense.

But if you like the present state of the game, you probably have no issue with the CAI or BAI either.

It's not CA's fault you say : game runs fine on their machines.

It's the customers and their poor computers that are too blame ... Sorry ... Nonsense.

Boarding was a huge part of naval combat in this time frame. Boarding a transport ship filled with Roman infantry troops is not a trivial endeavor. Winning the boarding action even less so.

Now personally, I consider the ability of troops to produce transport ships at will a serious flaw in the system, precisely *BECAUSE* a troop ship full of soldiers was at least a semi-functional naval vessel in those times, and as such the ability to produce such troop ships needs to be balanced against actual naval vessels. It's not a difficult problem to solve - at a minimum, every Total War game prior to Rome 2 did a better job. In this particular case, CA just completely dropped the ball. Embarking troops on transport ships that don't have to be explicitly built and have no cost is just a bad fit for a Total War game. Having those troops able to actually sink true naval ships if they have a numerical advantage is not particularly unlikely if you are willing to grant the initial bad decision.

This and a few other flaws in the game are just bad decisions that got so far along by the time they were revealed to be awful that nobody in the developer meetings wanted to be the one to speak out and say that the Emperor was naked. CAI, BAI, and bugs are just issues that are hard to fix regardless of team problems.