But beware the World’s Edge. They are without honor.
18 Likes
Wait, what broken medals? What’s that all about?
Check the medals in your campaigns in-game and you’ll find out
Alright you’re scaring me… I can’t check right now. What’s happened to the medals???
when the patch rolled out, all the internal validation droped by 1 level (so gold went to silver, sivler to bronze, so on). This isn’t just the medals themselves, its also reflected on the profile where completion of hard is now considered moderate, so on.
This likely occured because they were messing around with the code preparing for a new difficulty level, they’ve noted they are aware of it and its on the known issues page.
Oh nooooo, whata mess 
So now we go into quality posting?
Modders are never a good example of how fast something can be fixed because they don’t have the red tape for better or worse. Modders aren’t paid. They can do work whenever they are available and want to. They don’t have managers telling them what to prioritize. They have no quality control other than peer review. If the mod opens up additional problems, they have no obligation to fix it.
It’s very unfortunate, but at this point, these are just empty words and an attempt at “trying not to understand” the point I + many others have been making. Given what happened this patch, these words about red tapes and quality control are akin to gaslighting - the campaign medals bug is extremely evident when anyone launches their game, and there are several other scenarios, supposedly untouched, which got broken for no apparent reason, such as the diplomacy and its triggers in Barbarossa V or Tamar IV, and possibly other scenarios. What we meant was obvious: If you break something so bad without actually bothering to check first, then not attempting to fix it, or at least rollback it, within the next few days, is basically an insult to your customers - something we would have never done at my job. We either released hotfixes (for much less used and important apps) within hours, or even rollbacked some big changes after realizing something went wrong. It was expected of MS to do at least the same thing, and not just stay silent with apologists making up excuses why one of the richest companies in the world would have a setback to fix something that was working and had been unnecessarily broken. When we say “devs should do this and that”…it does not mean programmers in a literal way, it means those responsible for decisions - and that is clear. The mod I was referencing was done by a person who only had gold medals in their account, and for that reason they only fixed the gold medals (hence why silver → gold) and not everything else, because they would be unsure whether they would break something or do it correctly. I have no doubt that official developers would have a much better access to the game data than someone like the modder.
You know this is a more complex issue, why would you try to prove a point about development turnaround time with a mod that isn’t solving the issue? Even people who have dived into the API have pointed out there is a different functionallity with Art of War vs other campaigns and thats just what they can determine with the tools they have available.
You bothered to check my activity, thank you, so how come you are willing to screenshot a comment of mine, and then ignore the rest of that discussion? That’s a terrible approach, cherry picking just the tiny piece of information that it somehow convenient, and purposedly omitting the rest. For those interested, this is a quality reply i received in the aforementioned discussion [BUG] All Gold Medals Replaced with Silver Medals - #30 by cmfrydos . In fact, this post actually proves that I have no issues at being corrected or proven wrong, as the person of question more or less decoded a significant piece of the data, and completely erased my doubts about the possibility to actually fix the game. If it was me doing the work, and the fix would be so complex (in the worst case scenario) that would require timestamp and game-version checking, among others, I would still be able write an altering script within a few hours at most.
I’m just gonna call this one out as blatently hyperbolic but I didn’t bother to check it before. The entire month of April (as of this post) had 1472 reviews of which 176 are negative. Of those 176 negative reviews, I’ll generously say maybe 50% are related to campaign medals. 88 people are not Thousands.
You’re correct about this one, I was blatantly hyperbolic…but your screenshots actually prove the point I was making - The announcement came and the update released early on 10th april, and ever since then, the overall rating of the game dropped (which was the main point, not the absolute amoutns of negative reviews), despite the fact that a significant majority of players (me included) have not changed their reviews of this game yet - but the red (negative) reviews are somehow evident as higher compared to the period up till april the 10th.
Somehow, the 3 most helpful reviews in the past 30 days, are negative reviews complaining about the medal downgrade…and that is something to be wary of. (I did bother to insert the translation of the chinese review as well). On the 10th april, 6 out of 10 negative reviews were aimed at the campaign medal loss (I did bother to check and translate the handful of reviews, you can do so, too!). On april 11th, I could only see 10 negative reviews in total (out of 27…No idea how to display the other 17) and 5 of them had been aobut losing the campaign progess, with some other reviews directed at 3 kingdoms themselves (which is a yet another topic ignored by the MS), and the rest directed at the game not launching. On april the 12th just 1 negative review complained about losing the medals…but the point still stands - the most upvoted negative reviews, are about losing campaign progress. Therefore, it is a serious issue, and dismissing it has a negative impact on many players, especially given the fact that the majority of playerbase are actually campaign only players.
I purposedly posted this hours, if not moments, before we get the release of the 3 kingdoms DLC…just to see whether they bothered to fix the campaigns before then (nope…)…and we can only guess now whether they will be able to release the fix, or not. On the other hand…they did manage to release a preemptive “update” with regards to PS5…now why would we get that and literally no word about fixing the newly made mess?
2 Likes
I guess their value is money
Can’t wait to see the review and rating in steam.
5 Likes
They might not be that bad I reckon tbh.
There is selection bias and people don’t get to review if they don’t buy it in the first place.
1 Like
Woah google translate Chinese to English is pretty good
Oh look, its fixed, with a patch they knew they were going to have to update badges. Almost like theres some planning going on.
1 Like
Perfect! This should have been released the day they fixed it though. Nobody disputes the planning…Almost likey they purposedly stayed silent for prolonged periods given the backlash of this DLC.
4 Likes
58% so far. That’s too high, and maybe MS will think that they had delivered a good product. We shall see how the sales go, but so far it’s n 30 in top sellers. I don’t know what position the previous DLCs had upon release, but curently aoe2 de is n 18, Chronicles n 550, mountain royals n 584, ror n 725, and v&v n 891.
https://steamdb.info/app/813780/charts/
https://steamdb.info/app/3080080/charts/
https://steamdb.info/app/2805520/charts/
https://steamdb.info/app/2555420/charts/
https://steamdb.info/app/2141580/charts/
https://steamdb.info/app/2805510/charts/
3 Likes
It’s absolutely joever. We can only expect “surprises” and nonsensical additions to the game in the future, it’s identity is dead. And turns out Chronicles did worse than all the others, so who knows if that will get sequels. Even if it’s not part of the main game, it was very high quality.
13 Likes
58 positive out of 104 reviews… 
It is higher than expected honestly.
4 Likes
That’s just the Forgotten Empires devs all being told to write positive reviews for the game
1 Like
Never underestimate conformists
3 Likes
They didn’t address the controversion when people complained about the addition of Burgundians and Sicilians, they’re not gonna start now.
The closest thing they did to addressing fan complaints was trying to claim the Thirisadai was totally real when it was revealed to have been made up by some idiot on Wikipedia.
4 Likes
At least the Burgundians and Sicilians fit the game, and most of the controversial gameplay elements have been removed. The 3K civs are far worse, and the backlash is far greater, so hopefully the devs will pay attention.
11 Likes