HAH! Creative Assembly just doesn't give a fuck anymore.

[Inglorious891]

snip

Considering how badly CA fucked up Rome 2, I'm not surprised.

After all the DLC, lies before the game's initial release, buggy launches, and the fact that Rome 2 is a shit game even when it's running smoothly, I've completely lost faith in them. Sega is milking the franchise for all it's worth and CA just isn't making good games anymore, and without Darth Vader to come in and fix everything I see no point in buying anything from them.

 

[gigastar]

DLC announced for a game thats only been out for a week?

Where were you when Evolve was running roughshod over everything with its DLC leaked before the game was announced proper?

 

[Megalodon]

Yeah, turning it from paid to free probably wont hurt, but turning from DLC to actual on disk main game content while the main game has been sent for certification might.

Doesn't that strike you as kind of dishonest?

Doesn't that happen anyway at the moment, Capcom especially iirc have taken a lot of flak for shipping disks with 'dlc' on them? Hell. wasn't the Prothean DLC also found to use substantial on disk assets? Besides, I assume certification boards are also told about day 1 dlc, what I am proposing does not change that system in the slightest.

That's a completely different issue. You're talking about publishers selling you a few KB of data to unlock content already present on the disk.

I'm talking about the devs submitting one version of their game for certification from the big three, and then shipping and selling a different version with new content that wasn't present for the certification build.

Nowhere does selling on disk DLC come into play, it's an example to show you that your idea of "just bundle it and sell it for a higher price" doesn't work.

Then how does dlc get by the certification boards now? My proposition does not change anything other than the pricing system.

So? If the DLC is ready within a week of the game being released, then it seems a safe assumption that the devs/publishers know that content exists beforehand. So they are capable of folding the cost of that dlc into the cost of the base game. Hell, that would make Atilla around £40 (not exactly an unusual RRP on Steam these days) rather than £30. What's so hard to understand here? The devs know about the DLC they are making. All I'm saying is that content being included in the base price of the game would be better imo than the nickel and diming we see today.

Except that it's not really possible to bundle Content B with Game A if Content B is still being developed while Game A's disks are being pressed and shipped. And it would be bad from a business standpoint to add the content in after the game has been submitted for certification.

I'll try one more time. I don't know where you're getting either this 'bundle content B with Game A if Content B is still being developed' or 'certification boards wouldn't stand for it' ideas. All I'm saying is 'do exactly what you're doing now, but charge a bit more up front and make the new content (which, as publisher, you know is being made) available without additional payment'. Esentially, it's sort of like an automatic, limited Season Pass (which seem to exist no trouble now), so you get the early DLC, which carries the greatest 'nickel and diming' stigma atm included with your initial purchase.

Now I'm not saying this is ideal, but I would find it a bit more straightforward and honest from devs/publishers.

If you want an actual reason why this idea wouldn't be adopted, try what Extra Credits called the 'JC Penny' effect. Essentially, consumers seem to think £30 and £10 separately feels cheaper than £40.

 

[BarryMcCociner]

The answer to your second question is yes.

Is Attila better than Rome II? On a mechanical level, it certainly is. But Attila is a much harder game, there are lots of reports of veteran players abandoning Very Hard ("The only way to play Rome 2" if you believe them) and going so far as to play on normal difficulty, because the game is punishing. Both Romes suffer, the migratory people are hounded by the Huns, the Germanic peoples have some easy pickings in the Roman provinces but struggle to get their economy going... Only the Sassanids seem to be an easy start and that makes them feel more like playing Rome in Rome 2.

If you like the idea of playing a game in which you constantly feel that you are fighting an uphill struggle and like Total War games in general, then Attila is a great game. If you prefer the more traditional "Start from scratch and paint the map in your chosen color"-style of play form previous Total Wars, Attila might not be your cup of tea.

The pleasure I got from Total War seemed to stem largely from Medieval 2's RPG like elements with characters and family trees...the sometimes random, sometimes inherited traits would drive the character of a campaign. That element was progressively streamlined out in later games, and I found myself playing very pretty and utterly disinteresting RTS skirmish battles.

Has Attila done anything to put this element back in? Or is it just a less janky Rome 2?

There's a ginormous focus on traits this time around, the way you operate your ruling class has been reworked since Rome 2, meaning you can actually have an effect on your family.

 

[Scow2]

I'm just going to post this here, because it seems that nobody listens even now, ages after this image should have become common knowledge and understanding...

Spoiler

For my part, I haven't played Atilla yet, but I also haven't played through Rome 2. When I get a new PC, one that can run current-gen games without a problem, I'll definitely pick them both up, but for now this doesn't really bother me all that much...

I strongly disagree, it's like saying I am entitled if I want a car with air bags, despite them not being "mandatory". Even if it's extra developement time, then it might have been accepted if the regular product was acceptable in quality but it seems AAA games get worse technically and are shorter with each passing year.

Have you never actually tried buying a car? They come with all sorts of options and addons that some people would consider important (Higher-quality seats, air conditioning, onboard computer interfaces, etc), when they're really not part of the base product.

In the past, before DLC, we did get games with massive chunks cut out due to time/budget constraints. We just had to deal with it, instead of pay extra for the extra dev work.

Yeah, turning it from paid to free probably wont hurt, but turning from DLC to actual on disk main game content while the main game has been sent for certification might.

Doesn't that strike you as kind of dishonest?

Doesn't that happen anyway at the moment, Capcom especially iirc have taken a lot of flak for shipping disks with 'dlc' on them? Hell. wasn't the Prothean DLC also found to use substantial on disk assets? Besides, I assume certification boards are also told about day 1 dlc, what I am proposing does not change that system in the slightest.

That's a completely different issue. You're talking about publishers selling you a few KB of data to unlock content already present on the disk.

I'm talking about the devs submitting one version of their game for certification from the big three, and then shipping and selling a different version with new content that wasn't present for the certification build.

Nowhere does selling on disk DLC come into play, it's an example to show you that your idea of "just bundle it and sell it for a higher price" doesn't work.

Then how does dlc get by the certification boards now? My proposition does not change anything other than the pricing system.

Because DLC is much faster to get through certification boards if it's ever sent at all (Which it may not be). It can take over a month for a game to get certified.

I'll try one more time. I don't know where you're getting either this 'bundle content B with Game A if Content B is still being developed' or 'certification boards wouldn't stand for it' ideas. All I'm saying is 'do exactly what you're doing now, but charge a bit more up front and make the new content (which, as publisher, you know is being made) available without additional payment'. Esentially, it's sort of like an automatic, limited Season Pass (which seem to exist no trouble now), so you get the early DLC, which carries the greatest 'nickel and diming' stigma atm included with your initial purchase.

Because you're proving the game works without the DLC - why force people to buy something they won't be getting immediately?

 

[Johnny Thunder]

I am very positive about Attila TW, but three more Germanic tribes in addition to the ten German factions already? No thanks. The Visigoths already feel very similar to the Saxons, I won't be needing even more groups of big hairy axe swingers. I will be looking forward to see what other DLC packs have to offer though...

 

[Soviet Heavy]

Games go Gold (ready for sale) weeks before release, that means everything for the base game is complete and the distribution cycle starts to warm up. DLC like this is worked on by developers while distribution and manufacturing takes over to get the damn game out to shelves. It keeps the developers busy and provides more content in a timely manner.

 

[Randoman01]

Probably will tet Attila when they fix the bugs

 

[Bat Vader]

Huh, I didn't know about this. That actually sounds incredibly interesting, and I just might buy it.

I bought it. I plan on playing it when it unlocks and if you want I can let you know how it is.

 

[irishda]

Huh, I didn't know about this. That actually sounds incredibly interesting, and I just might buy it.

I bought it. I plan on playing it when it unlocks and if you want I can let you know how it is.

I thought it was a separate thing entirely wherein you did some minor rpg mini-sections as this Germanic hero who would become a general for you at the end. After some research it would appear instead to be a series of choices you make concerning this hero, who then becomes a general at the end with traits determined by your choices. I would've preferred the first, but this is still a cool step for Total War in being able to groom future generals rather than just luck.

 

[irishda]

Games go Gold (ready for sale) weeks before release, that means everything for the base game is complete and the distribution cycle starts to warm up. DLC like this is worked on by developers while distribution and manufacturing takes over to get the damn game out to shelves. It keeps the developers busy and provides more content in a timely manner.

Nonsense, it's obviously an evil anti-consumer conspiracy meant to pry us all from our hard earned money by in no way forcing us to purchase something extra for a product.

 

[Gladion]

snip

I think the system you propose is really unfriendly for consumers. Sure, it might work for games whose DLC you would buy anyway, but what if you're not particularly interested in some or even any of the DLC a game is going to provide later on in its lifecycle? I happily bought the GOTY of Saint's 4, but had I bought the game day 1, I would have really been pissed if I had been forced to pay an additional 20% of the regular price for all the costumes that I think aren't that great anyway they added later on.

I suppose it could be made an option for people who really want it, like digital special editions that already exist (which are really just season passes plus maybe a soundtrack), but integrating that into the base price would not help the customers at all.

 

[BarryMcCociner]

I am very positive about Attila TW, but three more Germanic tribes in addition to the ten German factions already? No thanks. The Visigoths already feel very similar to the Saxons, I won't be needing even more groups of big hairy axe swingers. I will be looking forward to see what other DLC packs have to offer though...

You have to understand that from a historical perspective "Germanic" is an incredibly vague term though, especially in this time period. Infact from a historical perspective the word "Germanic" would only be helpful geographically and give a couple hints toward the language and certain overarching cultural practices.

I do agree though, about the Longbeards being a poor foot to set forward. I mean, we only have one far-eastern non-nomadic faction to play and they're full-on easy mode.

 

[Johnny Thunder]

You have to understand that from a historical perspective "Germanic" is an incredibly vague term though, especially in this time period. Infact from a historical perspective the word "Germanic" would only be helpful geographically and give a couple hints toward the language and certain overarching cultural practices.

I'm a student of history my dear fellow, I know what you mean. But on a board like this it's better to speak in terms that everyone understands.