Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Low Effort Remaster Definition

  1. #1
    Huberto's Avatar Praepositus
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,307

    Default Low Effort Remaster Definition

    Steamcharts tells me that the thirty day average number of people playing RTW on Steam is higher than TWRR. 822-770

  2. #2

    Default Re: Low Effort Remaster Definition

    Who cares, based on dissatisfaction of multiplayer community/interaction with devs Feral is clearly pretty 'geeky' about the engine in the modder-kind-of way and this seems to be the priority... Also, many people have problem with Remastered, I noticed... because they want to play on crappy hardware whereas Remastered requires moderately good one. Haven't checked but chances are 8 year old laptop won't do...

    Many of them would probably say "but RTW worked! what a joke!" but hey it's 2021 and they're breaking the hardcoded limits and getting absolute max from the old engine while making it run 2k and 4k. there will be price

  3. #3

    Default Re: Low Effort Remaster Definition

    Quote Originally Posted by Huberto View Post
    Steamcharts tells me that the thirty day average number of people playing RTW on Steam is higher than TWRR. 822-770
    And you are happy about it... why?

  4. #4

    Default Re: Low Effort Remaster Definition

    Quote Originally Posted by GemSignor View Post
    And you are happy about it... why?
    I sure as hell don't know. You would think a remaster of a Pre-Warscape engine game doing poorly would make him worried since it would only push CA to go further into the newer titles fantasy ability spam gameplay.
    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    Who cares, based on dissatisfaction of multiplayer community/interaction with devs Feral is clearly pretty 'geeky' about the engine in the modder-kind-of way and this seems to be the priority... Also, many people have problem with Remastered, I noticed... because they want to play on crappy hardware whereas Remastered requires moderately good one. Haven't checked but chances are 8 year old laptop won't do...

    Many of them would probably say "but RTW worked! what a joke!" but hey it's 2021 and they're breaking the hardcoded limits and getting absolute max from the old engine while making it run 2k and 4k. there will be price
    If you are implying the windows 10 lock is because older versions of windows like 7 or 8.1 can't handle it than you are dead wrong. Games like Troy which recommend windows 10 can still run on older versions at their own risk so long as the actual specs of the PC can handle it. Rome Remastered having a lock was definitely one of the more stupid decisions made for the game, whether due to Feral themselves or CA and Sega, that just further hurt the Remaster's chances of keeping more players combined with other issues. As someone who bought and is enjoying the Remaster it would be foolish at the same time to ignore the glaring faults that hurt it's sells and player base. At least the recent patch proves Feral is passionate about it and wants to continue working on it but they will need to put more time and work on the vanilla game both in fixing it's bugs and issues and in adding more content besides just modders because total conversions like Imperium Surrectum will take a while to come out and in the meantime they need vanilla players just to keep the game alive.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Low Effort Remaster Definition

    Quote Originally Posted by NostalgiaFan View Post
    You would think a remaster of a Pre-Warscape engine game doing poorly would make him worried since it would only push CA to go further into the newer titles fantasy ability spam gameplay.
    They'll do it either way, I'm afraid, and the reason why the Remastered exists in the first place may very well be... because someone from Feral pitched the idea and CA was like, "oh well okay we smell money, here is your budget do your best" (not that they really care and the current CA devs may not even know/care about what made pre-warscape so great). We will never know of course.

    Quote Originally Posted by NostalgiaFan View Post
    If you are implying the windows 10 lock is because older versions of windows like 7 or 8.1 can't handle it than you are dead wrong.
    No not at all, I meant people who are angry because it won't work on their low end laptop etc., and I agree the lock is a bit silly... but then again, I can imagine "make it run on Win10" versus "that AND make it run on officially *discontinued* versions" (with such an old engine, mind you) would probably take more time/bug testing and so on, and Feral's resources were limited, most likely. But here is the thing: if you hate Windows 10 you're right but then we also have 2021 which is already "a little too late" if someone hadn't realized it yet. You either accept to live with Win10 (get yourself an SSD for it ideally) and don't complain about it, OR learn to use alternative systems like Linux Mint for example but you also use Win10 primarily for games and stuff. Because Microsoft holds the market in their claws and are not backing down, their Win11 sounds even more ridiculous than 10 in that regard. Simple but honest truth. Difficult times, tbh, hard to imagine it's real, anyone remember XP? I thought the user experience was nice. And if it's that the game runs bad compared to OG RTW... well, too bad, those Remastered improvements like graphics, limits and such have their price, get better hardware. And if you have better hardware nothing prevents you from running Win10, really. The reasoning behind CA/Feral's decision here is solid and in different scenario, if someone said "make it run across all windows!" no matter what because the chart says it'll help multiplayer base... well, it's quite easy to imagine we would get a remastered and many of the limits unbroken because there would be no more time in the development process. Maybe. Potentially. Who can tell, but it's plausible.

    We can all blame CA, of course. Just... simply put I dislike the negativity here, many people only have the bad things to say about the Remastered or laugh at it (like the OP? Not sure what's that all about). But the underlying reason is simply because they refuse to use Win10 or something like that. Or that multiplayer sucks.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Low Effort Remaster Definition

    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    They'll do it either way, I'm afraid, and the reason why the Remastered exists in the first place may very well be... because someone from Feral pitched the idea and CA was like, "oh well okay we smell money, here is your budget do your best" (not that they really care and the current CA devs may not even know/care about what made pre-warscape so great). We will never know of course.
    Since when do game studios not care about making money? Do you think they just live off of good will from any amount of people still playing their games? And the point was that the Remaster doing poorly was that it hurts the chances of CA seeing what people liked about those said games so they might just try to incorporate it in later titles like Med 3 so that it might not be a huge blunder like Rome 2 was. If only for the faintest of hopes.
    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    No not at all, I meant people who are angry because it won't work on their low end laptop etc., and I agree the lock is a bit silly... but then again, I can imagine "make it run on Win10" versus "that AND make it run on officially *discontinued* versions" (with such an old engine, mind you) would probably take more time/bug testing and so on, and Feral's resources were limited, most likely.
    Yeah sorry not buying it, Troy being able to run on 7 cripples this argument. If the newest game running on the newest engine can do that than there is zero reason RR should not be able to, especially since the engine is the same only updated to look newer but still behind the new titles graphically.
    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    But here is the thing: if you hate Windows 10 you're right but then we also have 2021 which is already "a little too late" if someone hadn't realized it yet. You either accept to live with Win10 (get yourself an SSD for it ideally) and don't complain about it, OR learn to use alternative systems like Linux Mint for example but you also use Win10 primarily for games and stuff. Because Microsoft holds the market in their claws and are not backing down, their Win11 sounds even more ridiculous than 10 in that regard. Simple but honest truth. Difficult times, tbh, hard to imagine it's real, anyone remember XP? I thought the user experience was nice. And if it's that the game runs bad compared to OG RTW... well, too bad, those Remastered improvements like graphics, limits and such have their price, get better hardware. And if you have better hardware nothing prevents you from running Win10, really.
    I'm seeing a lot of excuses, no valid points. Nothing in the Remaster looks graphically better than something like Rome 2 or Shogun 2 even(if we are talking art style that's a different story) it's at best Napoleon level and I fail to see how that is so graphically consuming that it needs to be windows 10 or higher yet games on the newer engine can do that just fine.
    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    The reasoning behind CA/Feral's decision here is solid and in different scenario, if someone said "make it run across all windows!" no matter what because the chart says it'll help multiplayer base... well, it's quite easy to imagine we would get a remastered and many of the limits unbroken because there would be no more time in the development process. Maybe. Potentially. Who can tell, but it's plausible.
    Why do you people always use hyperbole to describe other's arguments? No ones asking why it won't run on windows xp or whatever they are asking why the newest TW games like Troy can run on Windows 7 yet Rome Remastered needs to be locked to windows 10. So far all I am getting is excuses for why, but no real answer.
    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    We can all blame CA, of course. Just... simply put I dislike the negativity here, many people only have the bad things to say about the Remastered or laugh at it (like the OP? Not sure what's that all about). But the underlying reason is simply because they refuse to use Win10 or something like that. Or that multiplayer sucks.
    That's funny because you sound more negative than most around here with your very aggressive, anger filled posts that make you sound like you are getting stingy. I'd recommend you calm down before you post instead of acting like you need to be on the attack 24/7 because you spend too much of your time watching others bicker or engage in bickering with others in this forum. This is the same kind of attitude I saw from Rome 2 apologists who after getting excited than seeing the fallout of the Rome 2 launch disaster became hyper defensive of not only the game but CA's actions to the point of causing arguments and attacks on anyone they saw criticizing them which is where this forum and the whole TW fanbase became so toxic to this very day. Just because you like the Remaster and want to defend it does not mean you need to be so zealous about it and belittle those who have genuine problems with it if they are at least stating it in a respectful manner. I find the needless hatred annoying but I don't let that get in the way of trying to be reasonable to the people who have real issues with the Remaster.


    Considering how Rome 1 along with Med 2 did not need Steam to play and were used for years on win 7 and had most of their mods need it to run it only makes sense that going to the Remaster that they would have issues with it being win 10 only. And if you think that is the only reason than you ignore how much people have complain about the UI, hell I get more of a feeling people are mad about the UI than the win 10 lock since I hear not only on forums but from so many reviewers on YouTube and the like. The clearly rushed release showing all the path finding and AI problems not being fixed did not help matters, but the biggest problem was the crappy marketing and it not doing enough to show off the game and not doing enough with it's time to tell people about it and build up the hype.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Low Effort Remaster Definition

    I disagree. I've read a lot of Remastered critiques, people unhappy for trying to play it on low-end were pretty rare. Most (including me) dislike the Remastered for that godawful UI (which was designed for iPad, not PC), having some glaring issues (like siege pathfinding, which is for some worse than the original) and not making improvements where needed (e.g. diplomacy AI). All of these are perfectly legit.

    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    They'll do it either way, I'm afraid, and the reason why the Remastered exists in the first place may very well be... because someone from Feral pitched the idea and CA was like, "oh well okay we smell money, here is your budget do your best" (not that they really care and the current CA devs may not even know/care about what made pre-warscape so great). We will never know of course.



    No not at all, I meant people who are angry because it won't work on their low end laptop etc., and I agree the lock is a bit silly... but then again, I can imagine "make it run on Win10" versus "that AND make it run on officially *discontinued* versions" (with such an old engine, mind you) would probably take more time/bug testing and so on, and Feral's resources were limited, most likely. But here is the thing: if you hate Windows 10 you're right but then we also have 2021 which is already "a little too late" if someone hadn't realized it yet. You either accept to live with Win10 (get yourself an SSD for it ideally) and don't complain about it, OR learn to use alternative systems like Linux Mint for example but you also use Win10 primarily for games and stuff. Because Microsoft holds the market in their claws and are not backing down, their Win11 sounds even more ridiculous than 10 in that regard. Simple but honest truth. Difficult times, tbh, hard to imagine it's real, anyone remember XP? I thought the user experience was nice. And if it's that the game runs bad compared to OG RTW... well, too bad, those Remastered improvements like graphics, limits and such have their price, get better hardware. And if you have better hardware nothing prevents you from running Win10, really. The reasoning behind CA/Feral's decision here is solid and in different scenario, if someone said "make it run across all windows!" no matter what because the chart says it'll help multiplayer base... well, it's quite easy to imagine we would get a remastered and many of the limits unbroken because there would be no more time in the development process. Maybe. Potentially. Who can tell, but it's plausible.

    We can all blame CA, of course. Just... simply put I dislike the negativity here, many people only have the bad things to say about the Remastered or laugh at it (like the OP? Not sure what's that all about). But the underlying reason is simply because they refuse to use Win10 or something like that. Or that multiplayer sucks.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Low Effort Remaster Definition

    What a discussion... RTW lived on its mods the last ten years. Nothing really big is done until now, people played after the release to get the old childish vibe around vanilla and will return when some big overhaul mods are done. These games do not attract millions of players at one time, they will over years or even decades. This remastered will be a slow return of investment for the studios, but it will be one for sure.

    Are there any signs how well the game sold until now? My bet is many have it sleeping in the library and wait for futher development and mods, like me.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Low Effort Remaster Definition

    NostalgiaFan, you're completely missing the point and it's clearly you who is being "toxic" here with lots of aggression and "I'm going to dissect every piece of their post with my rightful anger!" kind of attitude. But you haven't really said anything of solid value, just demands that Remastered should be treated like Troy. All I said was my opinion and nothing "angry." Just my opinion, but honestly I don't care what you think... You can hate the game and CA/Feral and spread only negativity, do as you like.

    I fail to see how *I* am being negative -> realistic would be more like it.

    But yeah, just to point it out - you're completely missing the point and no, this is not Rome 2 situation, sorry to burst your bubble if you feel you're having some "bad memories" "de javu" or something. Rome 2 was mainline TW title. A NEW GAME. Remastered is just it... Remastered. The same old engine with features and functions build on top that bring it closer to modern standards but very likely introduce new complications, lots of bugs to deal with, engine challenges and whatnot. (Troy doesn't have this code issue). So Remastered was *a side project.* This pains but it's reality. Done by Feral, not even CA devs, this is how much they care (but thank Zeus for that! I prefer Feral). Not sure if there are information about it available (my guess is not) but do you think CA gave them the same kind of budget they normally think is enough to spend for modern Warhammers, Three Kingdoms or even Saga games? Most likely not. It wasn't this "big" project that was going to become their main source of revenue... it was a side project that's going to get them a decent revenue and boost the future sales of RTW but not a rocket that launches them into space, perhaps some kind of nostalgia experiment at best but nothing that will significantly influence the decisions of completely different devs working on modern titles. So, reasonably, one gotta keep that in mind rather than act like a spoiled brat. Just my two cents but of course you're entitled to your own opinion, aggressive critique or even hate.

    The UI issue is indeed one of the biggest flaws of the Remastered, I agree. One that - before 2.0.2 came out and modding improvements were still uncertain - made me really REALLY sad about the state of the Remastered. They did it because they thought it's closer to what modern TW's look like, from the business standpoint probably so CA could easily sell it to modern TW players too (so somehow unique but still a familiar interface). Which was horrible because RTW really IS NOT suitable for that kind of UI warscape TWs have, it also has a different building / management system altogether. This really made me go 'goshh so this remastered failed huh...?' Until... I found out UI is moddable to a huge extend. There are already mods and there'll be more!

    What exi123 said... Remastered is here to survive on mods and stay for the long-term replacing RTW and - maybe - Medieval 2, as alternative to Warscape engine and its new iterations. In case people want better graphics, modern support and all that stuff but still pre-warscape, let's be honest - pre-Warscape is getting old. It's possible there were some huge "set in stone" rulesets set by CA "you can do that!" "you can't do that!" "do that!" that they thought were necessary to enforce during Remastered development for whatever marketing or shortsighted biased reason but otherwise I think Feral has pretty much lots of control over what they're going to do with their time, which features they can improve and which they would rather not because it's too much work/time and perhaps unfeasible with Remastered engine unless you redesign it completely from the ground up which would be a whole new game code basically (and that's not what they do here). So again, your arguments and disappointments here come mainly to the old classic "new graphics! new features! add X! add Y! change all of these!" that occur in so many older MMOs where there is usually the same problem underneath - old, messy code and even more complicated adjustments build on top that's simply too hardcore to dissect and realistically improve. So basically, people demanding stuff that is simply too time consuming, unfeasible and unrealistic to achieve within the set timeframe/budget are going to get burned. Now THAT'S Remeastered. Rome 2 - a different story... a new game with huge budget gone completely wrong and wasted in so many ways that gave rise to our current Warscape experience that's even worse, even more spammy and filled with more shortcuts (either because player base WANTS it easy/unrealistic or it's easier to design in code and get rid of issues like pathfinding)

    Not saying Remastered is perfect and there were things that disappointed me too, but... do the new features, moddability and *unlimited* limits outweigh those issues? Sure they do and it's worth mentioning. I think it's also priceless for the pre-warscape modding community and well worth my bucks spent... unless, of course, Troy will allow for moddable campaign map but somehow I don't hold my breath... and Troy is still a warscape game anyway

  10. #10
    Zarax's Avatar Triple Chaosmaster
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    8,382

    Default Re: Low Effort Remaster Definition

    Could you please point us to any good UI mods?
    The Best Is Yet To Come:

  11. #11

    Default Re: Low Effort Remaster Definition

    Use Better UI Classy

    Unless by "good" you mean the exact copy of old RTW one which is most likely impossible and kind of unrealistic

  12. #12
    Zarax's Avatar Triple Chaosmaster
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    8,382

    Default Re: Low Effort Remaster Definition

    Looks interesting, will try it, thanks!
    The Best Is Yet To Come:

  13. #13

    Default Re: Low Effort Remaster Definition

    I hope you guys won't get angry but I made this quick video for people who specifially struggling with UI: https://youtu.be/BQ3kOw4yXh4

    To be fair I would probably used that mod as well, if using mods wouldn't disable achievements. I hope Feral enable them for mods eventually. I mean you get them playing on easy/easy as well...

  14. #14

    Default Re: Low Effort Remaster Definition

    I came back after weeks of spending time elsewhere in life so to everyone else pardon me if I want to catch up after being gone for the last 3 weeks.

    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    NostalgiaFan, you're completely missing the point and it's clearly you who is being "toxic" here with lots of aggression and "I'm going to dissect every piece of their post with my rightful anger!" kind of attitude. But you haven't really said anything of solid value, just demands that Remastered should be treated like Troy. All I said was my opinion and nothing "angry." Just my opinion, but honestly I don't care what you think... You can hate the game and CA/Feral and spread only negativity, do as you like.
    >says I am the toxic one here
    >belittles me with "you haven't really said anything of solid value"
    >says I am "demanding" that RR be like Troy, as if Rome itself was not originally playable on wind 7 to begin with
    >says he does not care, writes an entire essay worth of words right after
    >thinks I hate the Remaster and am only "spreading negatively"

    Way to show you missed the point while proving my own. Once again you are acting defensive and putting words in other's mouth instead of addressing any points. You contradict yourself while also completely making crap up that shows you don't pay attention, like how the hell did you get it in your mind that I hate the Remaster? I'm literally one of the few here who have been overall positive about it, like being the only one who thought of making a thread about the 2.0.2 patch when no one else did and have defended it on both here and the steam forums while talking with some of the actual members of Team Feral on how I think they could improve the game. I have bought the game and played it to get an understanding of it and I overall like the Remaster and think it is much more improved than before but still find it has issues that need addressing. But you being the big brain defensive guy you are decided I am just a hater who only spreads negatively? This right here is your problem and why you do more harm in your "defense' of the Remaster than you do good.

    Oh and if you hate seeing me pick your posts apart than maybe don't waste my time typing in word salad responses to where I will obviously do so. You have no one but yourself to blame if you are going to whine about my just as long winded retorts.
    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    I fail to see how *I* am being negative -> realistic would be more like it.
    You got a strange way of being "realistic" from how off your readings are because your entire "who cares" belittling attitude is as negative as you can get without outright cursing at someone.
    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    But yeah, just to point it out - you're completely missing the point and no, this is not Rome 2 situation, sorry to burst your bubble if you feel you're having some "bad memories" "de javu" or something.
    Yeah no what you said right here is exactly the kind of drivel I read back in the forums during Rome 2's launch, the same narcissist and pompous attitude with the same vapid and hollow talking points meant to talk down instead of address anything. I say you are the one trying hard not to burst your own bubble.
    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    Rome 2 was mainline TW title. A NEW GAME. Remastered is just it... Remastered. The same old engine with features and functions build on top that bring it closer to modern standards but very likely introduce new complications, lots of bugs to deal with, engine challenges and whatnot. (Troy doesn't have this code issue). So Remastered was *a side project.* This pains but it's reality. Done by Feral, not even CA devs, this is how much they care (but thank Zeus for that! I prefer Feral). Not sure if there are information about it available (my guess is not) but do you think CA gave them the same kind of budget they normally think is enough to spend for modern Warhammers, Three Kingdoms or even Saga games?
    Earth to Tessalion the Remaster being a new game or not means nothing when it comes to your apologetic attitude. It could be an HD Remaster and nothing else added and it still would not make your arguments any better. Unlike Troy Rome was always able to run on Windows 7 so the windows 10 lock was something added AFTER, not there to begin with. It would make sense If Troy was locked to Windows 10 as it is the newest TW game running on the newest engine, but it's not and yet "just Remastered" is only locked to 10, budget means jack here, it would have cost them nothing if they left it open to run on 8 and 7 instead of adding a lock.
    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    Most likely not. It wasn't this "big" project that was going to become their main source of revenue... it was a side project that's going to get them a decent revenue and boost the future sales of RTW but not a rocket that launches them into space, perhaps some kind of nostalgia experiment at best but nothing that will significantly influence the decisions of completely different devs working on modern titles. So, reasonably, one gotta keep that in mind rather than act like a spoiled brat. Just my two cents but of course you're entitled to your own opinion, aggressive critique or even hate.
    "muh hate" Oh spare me this nonsensical world view in your head that dictates anyone with serious gripes with the Remaster is full of hate and not simply puzzled why a less graphically strenuous game has harder locks than a more recent and therefore graphically superior game. "act like a spoiled brat"? How about act less like a whipped slave and treat Feral with the gloves off because you help no one by this incomparably dense defensive attitude. The biggest reason why the 2.0.2 patch did so well because they took all the serious complaints at heart and made serious efforts to change and fix them which is also why the next patch is looking to be just as good. Being purposely disingenuous by labeling guys like me as haters is the last thing that will help the remaster.
    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    The UI issue is indeed one of the biggest flaws of the Remastered, I agree. One that - before 2.0.2 came out and modding improvements were still uncertain - made me really REALLY sad about the state of the Remastered. They did it because they thought it's closer to what modern TW's look like, from the business standpoint probably so CA could easily sell it to modern TW players too (so somehow unique but still a familiar interface). Which was horrible because RTW really IS NOT suitable for that kind of UI warscape TWs have, it also has a different building / management system altogether. This really made me go 'goshh so this remastered failed huh...?' Until... I found out UI is moddable to a huge extend. There are already mods and there'll be more!
    I already knew about the mod and think it is nice though not perfect but the problem is first impressions are everything and them not at least allowing a choice for the old one did a large amount of damage to it's initial sells and in turning off people from the game. It's sad because on almost everything else to do with the changes they made them optional so you could choose if you wanted them or not. I had zero problems with the battle UI from the stupid looking modern missile trails to the ugly modern unit banners because Feral made sure you could just remove those things and keep the game looking more like the original which I greatly appreciated but the UI was the one thing they left you without options and it needing mods at all is annoying when it should have been like that from the start than it would have had a better release than it did. This and the rest of the changes in patch 2.0.2 is why I believe they Feral were rushed into a spring release and it was instead meant to launch in fall which would have been far better.
    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    What exi123 said... Remastered is here to survive on mods and stay for the long-term replacing RTW and - maybe - Medieval 2, as alternative to Warscape engine and its new iterations.
    As shown by the numbers that was a flawed strategy that looks to be barely holding onto it's own life. It's clear the game was meant for more, and by more it does not mean be a new game on it's own or anything else as you so put it in your own hyperbolic terms. Just more stability and options.
    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    In case people want better graphics, modern support and all that stuff but still pre-warscape, let's be honest - pre-Warscape is getting old. It's possible there were some huge "set in stone" rulesets set by CA "you can do that!" "you can't do that!" "do that!" that they thought were necessary to enforce during Remastered development for whatever marketing or shortsighted biased reason but otherwise I think Feral has pretty much lots of control over what they're going to do with their time, which features they can improve and which they would rather not because it's too much work/time and perhaps unfeasible with Remastered engine unless you redesign it completely from the ground up which would be a whole new game code basically (and that's not what they do here).
    Do you have any idea how much it costs to put a lock on a game to certain versions of windows? or more importantly, how much it costs not to lock them? because you have yet to explain why it was "cheap" to put in a lock to win 10 when everything makes it sound like more work and cost to put it in to begin with.
    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    So again, your arguments and disappointments here come mainly to the old classic "new graphics! new features! add X! add Y! change all of these!" that occur in so many older MMOs where there is usually the same problem underneath - old, messy code and even more complicated adjustments build on top that's simply too hardcore to dissect and realistically improve. So basically, people demanding stuff that is simply too time consuming, unfeasible and unrealistic to achieve within the set timeframe/budget are going to get burned.
    It's a wonder how you could go five days and not understand a single point I made because I'm not even asking for something new, I'm asking why something that was there from the start is now locked away for no explainable reason at all.
    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    Now THAT'S Remeastered. Rome 2 - a different story
    Not when it comes to the comparisons of it's fanbase and it's attitude to yours.
    Quote Originally Posted by TesalionLortus View Post
    Not saying Remastered is perfect and there were things that disappointed me too, but... do the new features, moddability and *unlimited* limits outweigh those issues? Sure they do and it's worth mentioning. I think it's also priceless for the pre-warscape modding community and well worth my bucks spent... unless, of course, Troy will allow for moddable campaign map but somehow I don't hold my breath... and Troy is still a warscape game anyway
    The main issue you ignore is how so many that would have benefited these new more moddable features were turned away by the release. If the launch of the game had been more successful we would have had even more modders, in particular ones like Europa Barborum, would have added more to the Remaster along with others I have found on Moddb that have outright said they do not like the remaster because of the launch going poorly.

  15. #15

    Default Re: Low Effort Remaster Definition

    Even among modders there will be people with unrealistic attitudes so that's not something where a lot can be changed and even then I guess, in time, people will realize some features of the Remastered are beneficial for one reason or another. Long-term this is still a win, believe it or not. And like I said, I was also pretty angry at first after launch, so don't tell me I sugar coat everything here. But there is a point when a person needs to find balance between disappointment and reason, not everything is perfect nor will it ever be. Now, the game looks like it's in a pretty good state and even more promising forward. Modders are already doing amazing things with it. Meanwhile Win 7 you're so angry about is an outdated system without any security updates that will hardly matter in upcoming months and years... so

    Anyway, not going to play this game of cat and mouse anymore, because once again you completely miss the point and repeat the same over and over and over... without the basic understanding of it and actual game development nuances I mentioned. Feel free to torn my posts apart with quotes out of wider context if that's all you're here for and no, I did not miss your point, I actually addressed it in length and tried to explain my approach. For example, you completely misunderstand why the lock might be the thing to begin with, you act like they deliberately and artificially put it in place in the engine as some sort of lame accident or malicious intent wasting precious time when, perhaps, it's just a lack of additional development time needed to actually make it RUN with those systems in mind. Translation/possibility: perhaps the game doesn't even work and will crash if run on 7, for example. That's very likely. Reason: this is no longer RTW that worked on 7, it is an edited version of RTW with new features on top that make this game crash on 7 and fixing this would require lots of precious development time that they would rather put elsewhere to make the game better (which you actually WANT to happen... but you also want it to run on 7 and 8... well, maybe you want too much, whereas they're just prioritizing, unfortunately they don't have 10+ years to develop the game with all cool features in mind, I hope we'll at least get lots of patches, not just few). So regarding the "lock" of course I can't be 100% sure this is the case but it's a common thing in the game development, that things don't work as ideally expected when you change the old messy code too much. It's a known fact. Just trying to keep that in mind when I make my judgment here regarding remastered. Whereas you, from the looks of it, would literally explode with dissatisfaction even now and even in the future just because Win 7 isn't supported, apparently. But we've already talked about it and I explained my thought process and you still think I'm just a "salad" idiot or something and provide no decent reasoning behind my words, and in the end you still fail to see WHY Remastered (or any other old game with lost of changes to the old code) may not be available to 7 and 8 in the first place if it lacks budget=development time. So let's leave it at that.

    Quote Originally Posted by NostalgiaFan View Post
    This and the rest of the changes in patch 2.0.2 is why I believe they Feral were rushed into a spring release and it was instead meant to launch in fall which would have been far better.
    Possible since they did all those cool improvements with initially raised limits and other planned but... oh, we forgot to show how many battering rams the attacker has! Kind of shows where they priorities lied with this game (at least Feral's) and modding was definitely big part of it. But you completely contradict yourself with this statement because this is exactly the kind of money issues/development cycle/budget thing etc. I was talking about. And if your theory is true, which I actually can subscribe to because very possible this happened makes sense, then you're only re-enforcing my reasonable attitude here. This actually confirms they're on low budged/short development cycle/hurry up attitude from CA and it's perfectly reasonable they're not able to do everything. While this would make me LOL *** THEM with any other CA games (heck, it does make me say that with most of their games, actually, when I see some of the lame results) the Remastered is an exception because it's just a Remastered, something CA most likely doesn't care much about to make a significant budget/time contribution towards, so from the get-go completely different treatment than their other games, thus hindering the development process. Expectation curve in regard to such releases is rather low to begin with and they've still delivered amazing new things with it, thanks to how Feral devs handled the development process, mainly, and chose to actually enhance this old engine so much and tweak some things with modding in mind (UI positioning included)

    I realize you want the game to be near-perfect and you were excited about remastered (otherwise you wouldn't be here) but the reason why I called your attitude "hateful" "toxic" (with bracket) is this kind of pretentious, lets-shout-angry-about-this-X-thing-how-dare-you-not-it-hurts-the-game and make it look like the worst issue ever that outweighs all the benefits (when, in fact, you yourself don't even think it does? I guess?). If you want the game better I would rather focus on what can be improved and what's valuable to discuss right now (plenty of modding opportunities yet, or bugs to be found) I too talked with Edwin and suggested things, some of which they've already fixed and improved. I too have high hopes/and "demands" (little things that in my mind need to be fixed /added) but requiring them to do something that's just clearly not on their list because it's not feasible to do is just.. not one of them

    Like I said, felt the same about the UI, and I hear you, but at the same time they did what they did with it for the reasons they did and no turning back now, I doubt they'll all of a sudden include a toggle for the old UI because that UI simply does not exist anymore in the current code, most likely, or at the very least it's probably not functional anymore. And once again, they would rather be doing other things for us (like dealing with more hard-coded limits) than incorporating the old UI back now and upscaled to modern resolutions, no less. So mods are our way to go
    Last edited by TesalionLortus; September 26, 2021 at 11:00 AM.

Posting Permissions

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