CA response

[frenchyvinnie]

Unfortunately the quality regulations and standards are practically non-existant for the gaming industry, hence why so many games can be released in an unfinished buggy state.
Fair enough much of the quality of a game is subjective, but when the frame rate drops regularly or the game crashes regularly then these are issues that could be prevented with proper quality regulations.

This. A thousand times this.

In many ways, I guess the gaming industry is largely immature. As you've perfectly said, it lacks any form of regulations, which is baffling for an industry that grosses between 15 and 22 billion USD per in the US alone, and in excess of 100 billion worldwide.

It's not just the lack of product quality regulations either. There are many things in the gaming industry that are curiously outdated and amateurish. Their community management for one thing is usually abysmal (hence the succession of gaming controversies each year, including this one). And the work practices in the industry remind me of 19th century England (see the repeated lawsuits against game developpers for their abusive use of "crunch time" and other work violations).

I guess the industry will grow and evolve into something more professional and customer-friendly. But in the meantime, the customers will have to deal with the frequent screw-ups like the Chaos DLC.

[Modestus]

from what I understand, total war warhammer would be spread across 3 games + dlcs. Wanting to make every race as good as possible is their reason. we will not know how true that statement is till we have the first game in our hands. I read some where that you can combine all 3 games and their dlcs into 1 huge game, not sure how correct this info is though. I would love that if possible.

Yes as I understood it you would have 3 standalone games that would ultimately combine into one large single game however for some reason CA decided to introduce into the first game Chaos warriors.

They have no budget for this and also intend to give-away for free a Day-1 DLC that makes these Chaos warriors playable if you pre-order.

On top of that according to CA Chaos are part of the trilogy so even if there was no Chaos in the first game they would appear at some point, I presume they have a budget for this.

So basically as far as I can make out CA have no budget for Chaos in the first game and have a Budget for Chaos in the trilogy.

[Adverseness]

Regarding the recent blog post from Mike I understand where they are coming from, I really do. I also understand how hard it is to work to a budget and still keep everyone happy especially with a lot such as us. Here is my suggestion.
There is only a certain amount of info we can gather from watching video's and live streams and listening to other people's opinions on a subject. What I am suggesting is that if you want us to give you serious feedback and make this the best game possible, actually give us a piece of it, give us a demo. It doesn't have to be much. It could be an hour of campaign gameplay with 1 or 2 battles chucked in. It could be the opening tutorial. Surely this couldn't hurt you guys and surely it wouldn't cost a lot on top. Give us something to make an opinion about. Let us get our hands on the new mechanics and feel how the game plays, how the battles fight. That way there is no waiting for patches over the first few weeks. We can help you guys make a better game before you release it.
Like I said it doesn't have to be much but this could really help you guys make the sales you want/need to make. Show us gamer's what you have been working and let us help you improve your finished product so that this doesn't turn into a Rome 2 release. Rome 2 is a very solid game now, but imagine how much better it could have been if you had let us get our hands on a piece of it a couple of months early and actually play test it. Instead of relying on big channels to form an opinion (not so people like Lionheart and Angryjoe who aren't afraid of telling you what's wrong) but people like IGN etc who will play for a few hours and tell us how good it is. I know this is a different genre and totally different game but take a look at Halo 5. They had a Beta nearly 10 months early and look how drastically the game changed from player feedback.
People are always going to be upset about chaos but if you show us how good the game can be before launch maybe some people will be happier to preorder the game.

What do you guys think about this?

[Tim_Ward]

Here's why the "it's a separate budget and team so it's ok!" thing is .

Hypothetical Scenario 1:

Developer A (DA) is in the initial stages of planning their next title, based on a popular and well known franchise setting World Hypothetical (WH). The budget is, let's say, 6 million and there are 40 members of staff assigned to work on the project. 6 factions are planned for the initial release, the 6 most important factions in the WH universe. DA's publisher decrees that pre-orders are the most important things in the entire universe, and that since customers are slowly working out that they're total and don't benefit them in any way, they must be offered """""incentives"""" to pre-order, and that the way to do this is to use offer a new faction as DLC.

Suddenly, the game has five factions but the budget is now 5.9 million and there are 35 members of staff assigned to work on the project. The pre-order DLC by a stunning coincidence has 5 members of staff assigned and a budget of 0.1 million.

Later on, the game is announced with five factions and the totally-not-cut-from-the-main-game-we-always-planned-it-this-way-honest-look-it-has-a-seperate-budget-and-team-and-everything pre-order faction.

Hypothetical Scenario 2:

"So, what factions shall we do for Warhammer: Total War? We've got a budget for four and the main factions are probably Empire, Orks, Dwarves and Chaos so we should just do that"

"Nah, we need to offer one as pre-order DLC in order to con people into pre-ordering our inevitably broken on release title. We'll make it Chaos and the forth faction can be... *grabs a Warhammer rule book and picks a page at random* ... Vampire Counts"

[LionElJonson]

Honestly what I would like a response on is why they decided to reveal this DLC before fully disclosing the information on the main factions. Seems like marketing done ed up. Would like to know if they learned from this and plan to put more focus on the main game in the future rather than DLC.

[craziii]

Honestly what I would like a response on is why they decided to reveal this DLC before fully disclosing the information on the main factions. Seems like marketing done ed up. Would like to know if they learned from this and plan to put more focus on the main game in the future rather than DLC.

mike from ca kinda explained exactly this in the response. did you even read? whether or not you believe it is another story.

[The Despondent Mind]

~ englisharcher89 is a member of TWC, so, please, avoid personal references and name-calling. ~ HigoChumbo

One of the first posts on that thread, it's by someone who already bought a stupendously expensive edition for only seeing barebones of a game, not to mention it's bunch of stupid crap for hardcore fans and collectors. Then he suggests that they release a bit more info on the game? Some people give 100E for a game they barely know anything about and for some stupid toys that don't really have anything to do with the game (Warhammer may be the best TW game of all time, but you don't need some plastic ring to enjoy it)

And that's one of the first posts that CA is gonna see....


Anyway What I understand from this is :

"SEGA is pushing us and counting every dime, please have compassion. "

As previously mentioned, there is no reason for them to have pre-orders if the game is good (and it actually works).

It's also funny how now they have limited timeline and budget, you get the impression this is some indie studio on the brink of disaster. Where the hell are the profits and trust from all those previous sales?

Are you telling me that after so many TW games and so many financial successes they struggle with 5 factions? On the first third of the planed "trilogy"?

Now granted previous TW games did have more factions yet not all of them are unique, but still in RTW2 for example you could probably make roughly 5-8 unique factions, and you get a full game for 60$. Now I get this hunch that they will ask for the same price for the other two parts of the trilogy but that they will basically be "slightly bigger DLC than usual".

Oh and again, dear God again in the old CA tradition, they are gonna remove features from previous games that everybody liked.

[steve1945]

Really great response from CA, filled with PR speak and not actually addressing ANY of the issues with the pre order dlc that people had. I figured they would eventually release something like this, most devs do when they screw up. Its always a long winded post that can boiled down to "were sorry, but not actually sorry, and we aren't going to change anything get **** nerds.".

Im not going to preorder, but I wasn't going to do it anyway. Ill still buy it, probably a couple weeks after it comes out once some none biased reviews come out, rather then the 10/10 game of the year from every "professional" game review site or personality. But I wont pre order. Chaos is apparently already in game and we just can't play them. Thats fine, ill sacrifice my ability to play chaos to maintain my line in the sand.

[craziii]

I don’t want to pre-order without seeing more of the game or a review!
That’s entirely and absolutely reasonable. We haven’t even scratched the surface of the game yet and there’s plenty more to come. Soon, through the eyes of the Greenskins, we’ll be showing you campaign gameplay for the first time. Then there’s lots, lots more, including plenty of livestreams, Lets Plays and Youtuber and press coverage.

Also, for TW: Warhammer we are going to be doing the same thing we did with TW: Attila. Reviewers and Youtubers are going to get the final game before release and can make their own Lets Plays and publish their own reviews in advance of the game going on sale.

Before release day, you should be in a position where you can read reviews and see the impressions from your favourite Youtuber, and still have time to decide if you want to pre-order.

If for whatever reason we aren't in a position where we can send code out to review and give people enough time to review it before release, we will move the release date back until we can.

We know that at the end of the day it is on us to prove to you that the game we’re making is incredible. We hope to do that.

this from the bottom of the response is about as reasonable as it gets. This and the ability to refund should be more than enough

[Deedlit]

The Game can't be any worse then Rome II was in its first six months. The only thing that saved Rome II for me was the Radious Mod and about a year worth of Creative assembly patching it. That's why i waited until it was on sale for 15$ on steam. I still experienced the rare bug such as a ship sailing on land during a siege (Only ever happened once mind you) It was a stable experience. I just want War hammer to be good. We've going to get 5 Very different factions gameplay wise.

I mean, i'd hate for this to happen to my Dwarf or Elven Armies in Warhammer.



Looks like we had Necromancers making Undead of Rome Legions LOL

[Person012345]

So, their budget was not enough, so they decided to make Chaos pre-order DLC to gain more money? Umm, that' would increase their profits, not their budget, which is an entirely different thing. And if they were actually concerned about their profits, then how do they know, six months before the release while the game is still in pre-alpha, that it wouldn't sell well enough to cover their expenses? Because a game highly anticipated by a large number of people and divided into three sounds like a sure bet. BTW, saying that money was the problem and then claiming that, in response to that, you made a faction planned to become DLC free for everyone who pre-orders is contradictory.

The DLC is budgeted separately from the main game. So making a DLC means you have extra budget toi work with (but then obviously you have to sell it as a DLC to make the money back).

TW warhammer II by paradox. it will have 2 factions only. every dlc would have some dingy units and maybe a new faction. the game will have dlc for 2 years. they praise paradox games but crap on chaos dlc? that.

oh, did I mention that it will require a minimum of 1 year of patches to be crash free and playable?

That's not how paradox operate. If it were paradox, all the forces of order would be playable, then they'd make DLC to make the forces of destruction playable (with separate extra units for their rosters as DLC) then they'd DLC a ton for new features, map expansions and would then generally improve the gameplay for everyone alongside DLCs to fund it. Oh yeah, and the base game would cost not $75.

This is a bad analogy, I'm not saying that it would actually happen like this of course developing TW is more costly. But your analogy is also terrible and doesn't reflect what paradox currently do. I don't know how some people are blind to how not all DLC is exactly the same.

[Theo]

That's not how paradox operate. If it were paradox, all the forces of order would be playable, then they'd make DLC to make the forces of destruction playable (with separate extra units for their rosters as DLC) then they'd DLC a ton for new features, map expansions and would then generally improve the gameplay for everyone alongside DLCs to fund it. Oh yeah, and the base game would cost not $75.

This is a bad analogy, I'm not saying that it would actually happen like this of course developing TW is more costly. But your analogy is also terrible and doesn't reflect what paradox currently do. I don't know how some people are blind to how not all DLC is exactly the same.

My god, if CA made DLC that added 400 years, historical dynasties, new government systems, etc, to the main campaign I would be one happy buyer.

Always amazed that people actually complain about all of the awesome new gameplay features paradox add to their already complete and fun games. Of course it's always in an effort to defend some other, unjustifiable dlc made for another similar franchise.

[craziii]

That's not how paradox operate. If it were paradox, all the forces of order would be playable, then they'd make DLC to make the forces of destruction playable (with separate extra units for their rosters as DLC) then they'd DLC a ton for new features, map expansions and would then generally improve the gameplay for everyone alongside DLCs to fund it. Oh yeah, and the base game would cost not $75.

This is a bad analogy, I'm not saying that it would actually happen like this of course developing TW is more costly. But your analogy is also terrible and doesn't reflect what paradox currently do. I don't know how some people are blind to how not all DLC is exactly the same.

if you are so sure paradox can make better games than ca, why don't they? this game series was created by CA back in 2000, 15 years of releases should be more than enough for paradox, the "better" game devs to clone it. I would love some competition for CA go on, make it happen. think dingy paradox is up to the challenge?

[Theo]

I'll add, battles have never been the focus of games like EU or CK. But when they are represented, it is with historically plausible numbers (tens of thousands of soldiers on each side). There really wouldn't be any point in Paradox trying to clone total war battles. Because then they would have the shrink t0 number of soldiers to what people can handle with their PC's. It would completely break immersion, trying to storm Constantinople as the Ottomans with your great epic armies of all of 4,000 men, against a measly garrison of 1400. And then there is the problem of trying to code a decent AI, which even CA has never managed to do.

That, I think, is probably why Paradox hasn't tried to clone total war battles. It would ruin their games.

[Aquila_Mars]

Yes, you feel the weight of the armies on CK2 when you see a doom stack of 40k coming towards your capital and your army of gribbly 10k soldiers. Total war will never be able to emulate that I'm afraid. They are two different games though, comparing them as games is kind of retarded.

As for DLC policies, as far as I'm concerned the Paradox games are already pretty full of content and confusingly full of content that any additional DLC should not be bought until you actually know how to play the damn game.
Sure the game doesn't have the Total War type of battles but what about its diplomacy? Everything diplomacy related works so well in Paradox games. Especially CK2 with personal relations. What about total war?

Need I mention Rome 2? Or heavens Medieval 2 without the mods? You border an AI and they'll attack you, they'll attack you when you are allies.

It is easy to compare the merits of one game to the other by ignoring the other game's superiorities. Don't do dat.

[Person012345]

if you are so sure paradox can make better games than ca, why don't they? this game series was created by CA back in 2000, 15 years of releases should be more than enough for paradox, the "better" game devs to clone it. I would love some competition for CA go on, make it happen. think dingy paradox is up to the challenge?

They do make better games than CA. OK, this is a broad statement, there are some games CA make that are better and some games that paradox make that are better and "better" depends on your mood.

As for why they don't make a TW clone, why would they exactly? And I didn't say they could make it, you're the one who made the comparison. The point is, paradox's DLC may be prolific, but for the most part it's not rage-inducing to the community because the base games are great, they have substance (a lot of gameplay improvements alongside big features) and its also accompanied by free patches which give things to people who don't buy. Then they price their games accordingly.

You know what? They also listen to their customer base and interact with them on a constant basis, explaining what they're doing. CA just do the same crap that their customers hate over and over and only talk when there's a massive outrage and even then they talk in PR speak. So Paradox's community actually LIKE them for the most part and won't hate on a slip up here and there. CA's fanbase for the most part don't really like CA since they were taken over by Sega. At least that's the feeling I get. Because it's almost like they're deliberately trying to piss them off.

[Abdülmecid I]

The DLC is budgeted separately from the main game. So making a DLC means you have extra budget toi work with (but then obviously you have to sell it as a DLC to make the money back).

If the DLC is budgeted separately, then the Chaos DLC budget played no role at limiting their alleged problem that the original budget was not enough to release a game as rich content-wise as they'd like.

[Stark_7]

The Game can't be any worse then Rome II was in its first six months. The only thing that saved Rome II for me was the Radious Mod and about a year worth of Creative assembly patching it. That's why i waited until it was on sale for 15$ on steam. I still experienced the rare bug such as a ship sailing on land during a siege (Only ever happened once mind you) It was a stable experience. I just want War hammer to be good. We've going to get 5 Very different factions gameplay wise.

I mean, i'd hate for this to happen to my Dwarf or Elven Armies in Warhammer.



Looks like we had Necromancers making Undead of Rome Legions LOL

Kinda makes this redundant.

[Person012345]

If the DLC is budgeted separately, then the Chaos DLC budget played no role at limiting their alleged problem that the original budget was not enough to release a game as rich content-wise as they'd like.

It had nothing to do with that? Their stance (unless I've misunderstood and I don't necessarily endorse it btw) is that the base game's budget didn't allow for chaos to be properly fleshed out as a playable faction, but they wanted it to be in the game at release so they did it as a DLC which gave them an extra chunk of cash to work on the DLC with.

Now personally I think if they wanted it in the game at release then they should have put it in the game at release and stopped wasting money on whatever they wasted the 40% extra budget for Rome 2 on (hiring goldfish to mocap the facial animations I guess).

[Abdülmecid I]

It had nothing to do with that? Their stance (unless I've misunderstood and I don't necessarily endorse it btw) is that the base game's budget didn't allow for chaos to be properly fleshed out as a playable faction, but they wanted it to be in the game at release so they did it as a DLC which gave them an extra chunk of cash to work on the DLC with.

IIRC, they claim that their budget wasn't even enough for the first four factions, that's why they turned Chaos, from a DLC planned to be released later, into a pre-order DLC. That is a very fragile reasoning that contradicts itself.

(hiring goldfish to mocap the facial animations I guess).