Well, I was able to finally transfer over to this new site, and I'm wanting to get something that's been bugging me for a while now off my chest.

I know we were all kinda mad at the whole Shadows of Change cost debacle, but I've come to realize who's really to blame for the issues with Warhammer 3's condition.

And I'll just say it. It's Sega.

I say that because the more I thought about CA's relationship with Sega, as well as things like that silly Hyenas game, the more I realized that many of the issues CA has been having to deal with could easily be because Sega has interfered or what have you with CA's ability to focus on the Total War games that have made them so successful.

Now, I'm not just going to just hurl insults at Sega, even though I'm plenty mad at them for multiple things, but I'm just going to list off some of the more notable stuff I've heard that they've done or at least could've contributed to in some way..

Hopefully I can help give people a better outlook at all this stuff that's happening with CA, so that people might also realize that they may have had their hands tied in what they could or could not do.

1. Sega is CA's Boss company, so CA most likely doesn't always have the luxury to say no to them.

2. I've heard from several people that some people from Sega said that they wanted to raise the prices of the DLC for their games, and possibly all their games, by 10 dollars.

3. Sega may have made CA work on that Hyenas games instead of allowing them to focus more on their TW games, leaving only with only skeleton crews to update Warhammer 3 in this case.

But those are just the three biggest things I could think of off the top of my head.

I just think that it's kind of ridiculous that Sega has either had CA do or allowed them to do with things like Hyenas and so on, which have all hurt Warhammer 3. I personally think it's the former of the to be honest.

Because it just doesn't make any sense that CA would plan to just leave a skeleton crew on to keep updating Warhammer 3, which is the culmination of the very successful TW: Warhammer games, all for some ridiculous FPS game like Hyenas.

But I'm just hoping that this thread can at least help more people to realize that they were more than likely getting mad at the wrong people.

CA is. Full stop.

Sega didnt design all the failed regressions pushed on us with game 3.

No mate, this one is on CA management. Check out a few of the interviews and twitter/linkedin posts from employees and ex-employees, they will help you get the full picture.

Surge_2#1464 wrote:

CA is. Full stop.

Sega didnt design all the failed regressions pushed on us with game 3.

Are you kidding me?

Just look at all the stuff that's been going on in recent years with CA and you're trying to tell me that Sega, their bosses, can't possibly be involved with any of the problems?

And don't pretend they left out much of the stuff from Warhammer 2 in 3 Surge, nor act like they didn't add in new stuff as well.

Wood_Sprite#1284 wrote:

No mate, this one is on CA management. Check out a few of the interviews and twitter/linkedin posts from employees and ex-employees, they will help you get the full picture.

Maybe, but it's not exactly like CA can just point and say "Yeah, Sega did this, this, and that, and that's why we can't fix stuff in Warhammer 3 as quickly" or anything like that. It's just a tad more complicated than that.

VikingHuscal1066#5774 wrote:

Wood_Sprite#1284 wrote:

No mate, this one is on CA management. Check out a few of the interviews and twitter/linkedin posts from employees and ex-employees, they will help you get the full picture.

Maybe, but it's not exactly like CA can just point and say "Yeah, Sega did this, this, and that, and that's why we can't fix stuff in Warhammer 3 as quickly" or anything like that. It's just a tad more complicated than that.

CA is not saying anything, its the employees and ex-employees who are letting the cat out of the bag. Word is that CA actually proposed Hyenas to Sega, and continued to ignore employee concerns on the viability of the game.

Also, like Surge says, the poor game design decisions (such as RoC) are on CA as well, as Sega won't be micro-managing to that level.

Does it matter ? Whether it is CA or SEGA this is not my problem. 

Wood_Sprite#1284 wrote:

CA is not saying anything, its the employees and ex-employees who are letting the cat out of the bag. Word is that CA actually proposed Hyenas to Sega, and continued to ignore employee concerns on the viability of the game.

Also, like Surge says, the poor game design decisions (such as RoC) are on CA as well, as Sega won't be micro-managing to that level.

Well, I'm not too sure about all that myself, as trying to cover up their involvement with stuff like Hyenas and such is something that a company like Sega might do.

And like I said, it doesn't make much sense for CA's leadership to just up and leave Warhammer 3 in the hands of a skeleton crew when the TW: Warhammer games have been so successful and all.

And I didn't think the RoC campaign was all that bad, at least from what I played of it. And it's not exactly a super easy thing to make a giant campaign that is IE. That kind of stuff takes time to make.

Neodeinos#5871 wrote:

Does it matter ? Whether it is CA or SEGA this is not my problem. 

I guess, but I was just trying to bring this sort of stuff to people's attention, as some of the stuff that's been going on with CA in recent years does feel like it doesn't make all that much sense.

And other publishing companies have done stuff like have a dev studio work on some pet project of theirs, so I don't think Sega making CA work on that Hyenas games is too crazy to believe.

It’s a bit of both.  A lot of the things people are pissed about, like Hyenas, are board level decisions, and at the very least CA would have needed Sega’s input and approval.  

but it’s a mixed bag.  Maybe Sega mandated the price increase for the DLC, maybe they only asked a price increase.  Likewise, Sega might have mandated that CA try something new without specifying what, maybe Hyenas was CA’s idea and Sega only provided guidance.

we don’t know how much blame to assign to CA and how much to assign to Sega. 

VikingHuscal1066#5774 wrote:
And don't pretend they left out much of the stuff from Warhammer 2 in 3 Surge, nor act like they didn't add in new stuff as well.

I'm not pretending anything?

They added a bunch of stuff that was a net regression on the game, and then took months back tracking to remove it.

They did this, despite early feedback, and internal expectation, that what they were doing was flawed.

WH3 on release, was the result.

This was CA design.

dingbat#5498 wrote:

It’s a bit of both.  A lot of the things people are pissed about, like Hyenas, are board level decisions, and at the very least CA would have needed Sega’s input and approval.  

but it’s a mixed bag.  Maybe Sega mandated the price increase for the DLC, maybe they only asked a price increase.  Likewise, Sega might have mandated that CA try something new without specifying what, maybe Hyenas was CA’s idea and Sega only provided guidance.

we don’t know how much blame to assign to CA and how much to assign to Sega. 

Yeah, that's understandable.

The whole thing just really frustrates me to no end, because some idiots at the top lost their common sense, we're the ones who suffer because of it.

The only reason I lean a little more toward Sega is because of how much Sega stuff was littered throughout that Hyenas game. All you have to do is look at the trailers and some of the screenshots for it.

Seems like a pointless discussion. I don’t care whose fault it is, I just want a fixed game and well-priced content. It doesn’t matter if it’s Sega or CA, the difference is the same and the course of action is the same: not buying product if the situation doesn’t improve.

Surge_2#1464 wrote:

I'm not pretending anything?

They added a bunch of stuff that was a net regression on the game, and then took months back tracking to remove it.

They did this, despite early feedback, and internal expectation, that what they were doing was flawed.

WH3 on release, was the result.

This was CA design.

Maybe, but I still doubt that Sega had absolutely nothing to do with any of such things either, as they ARE in fact CA's bosses.

VikingHuscal1066#5774 wrote:
Maybe, but I still doubt that Sega had absolutely nothing to do with any of such things either, as they ARE in fact CA's bosses.

RoC?

Rift Spam?

Siege Update?

Minor Settlement Hell?

All the worst aspects of WH3 are due to CA.

Passthechips#4366 wrote:

Seems like a pointless discussion. I don’t care whose fault it is, I just want a fixed game and well-priced content. It doesn’t matter if it’s Sega or CA, the difference is the same and the course of action is the same: not buying product if the situation doesn’t improve.

Well, I'm more so just venting my frustrations at all this with this thread.

And only lean more toward the Sega side of things because of the things I mentioned in the OP, mainly because it doesn't make too much sense for CA to just up and leave Warhammer 3 in the state it's in for the sake of some ridiculous FPS game, especially with how much Sega stuff was in that Hyenas game, as shown through the trailers and screenshots.

Because we do need to remember that CA didn't just start work on Hyenas last week or something, but probably a couple years ago at least.

Like I said, it just doesn't make all that much sense that CA would go laxed with their work on Warhammer 3, when Warhammer 1 and 2 were so successful and all. 

That's why I tend to think Sega had something to do with it.

Surge_2#1464 wrote:

RoC?

Rift Spam?

Siege Update?

Minor Settlement Hell?

All the worst aspects of WH3 are due to CA.

I'm not saying those things are perfect Surge, but I found that some of them weren't nearly as big of problems as you make them out to be.

I don't know why everyone like to complain so damn much about CA needing to have a base campaign in Warhammer 3? As it still took some time to implement IE.

And while I don't think the siege maps are perfect, I thought they were a hell of a lot better than the ones in Warhammer 1 and 2. Kind of the same for me when it comes to minor settlements. Though I will agree they should've handled the buildable defenses differently.

But I honestly liked the minor settlement battles, though I do wish there was just a little more variety to them. But then again, I do love siege battles.

Yeah, maybe limit it down to a single capture point or something like before, and boom, a huge problem with sieges would be fixed.

Ca leadership even if its bad release look at cp 2077 they turned that ship around.

Wh 3 there just not been putting money there and wasting it on other projects.

Now there gonna fire random devs instead of the high paid leadership who made those decisions first place.

Surge_2#1464 wrote:

CA is. Full stop.

Sega didnt design all the failed regressions pushed on us with game 3.

That's my thought. Even ignoring the bugs, some of the decisions are just straight downgrades (corruption and public order being completely irrelevant)

saweendra#3399 wrote:

Ca leadership even if its bad release look at cp 2077 they turned that ship around.

Wh 3 there just not been putting money there and wasting it on other projects.

Now there gonna fire random devs instead of the high paid leadership who made those decisions first place.

Yeah, that is pretty stupid.

I honestly think that the higher ups, be it CA executives or Sega shouldn't have messed around with stupid things like that Hyenas game.

The main reason I tend to lean toward thinking it was Sega is because of how much Sega stuff was in the trailers and such for that game, and I wouldn't be surprised if Sega canceled it because they knew people were already mad about it and all, and just leave it to look like it was all just CA's doing alone.

Because there have been times where some companies have done stuff like that before, and just thrown one lesser company under the bus to save face.