Just because CA dropped the SAGA brand from Pharaoh, doesn't mean it hasn't gotten a similar level of budget and resource as one. It certainly looks like it doesn't have that same investment as previous major titles we've seen. And all this info, to me, just confirms that. This isn't the ultimate Bronze Age game, or the next "Major Historical" title we've been told it is, and I'm guessing the DLC support for this will be very similar to Troy's.
I honestly don't know if we'll ever get another major historical title that doesn't feel like a saga until they stop focusing on key central historical figures and trying to give them the Warhammer immortal treatment. Ever since Troy so many of these campaigns feel like one and done playthroughs and no reason to want to go back to the game after you've played through your character of interest. I know that is what happened to me with Troy and Odysseus, and the same will probably happen in Pharaoh with Rameses. And so while that is the case their only incentive is to get as much money up front instead of fostering long-term investment in the game. All the more reason that I feel CA needs more direct competition in this space or this will just continue.
I thought that Sofia was going to create their smaller games, whilst Horsham focused on larger brand titles. Looks like, extractly what you say, that they thought "times are tight, screw it" why not just call it a full large game and charge an extra £20 for it?
One of the key features of the Bronze Age is the massive trade networks for supplying tin to make bronze. Tin is relatively rare in the Earth's crust and pretty much all the tin in Bronze age Europe/western Asia came from Western Britain and Afghanistan. When the Sea People caused these trade networks to break down, that's probably the biggest reason for the Collapse. Having a Bronze Age game without emphasizing trade networks and the regions with the materials you are using to fund your economy tells me they entirely missed the point of the Bronze Age Collapse.
@@pachomiussinanicus1728 You don't need a "complicated" trade System, just a a simple but essential one that causes the game to become harder as they are disrupted and making your money run out forcing you to make tough decisions. Pharaoh does not even try.
I will totally buy Total War: Pharaoh - once it costs as much as Troy does right now: 8,99€. Maybe Id consider it for 15€ but certainly not 59€. Simply insane
This is so weird! Mesopotamia was probably THE MOST important Bronze Age region! I'd like to play this game so much, but with half of the Bronze Age regions/factions missing, it's a veeeery tough sell. I'll wait and see, but if the sales are as poor as we are predicting, I highly doubt they will add them. It's as if Medieval Total War was set only in the Western Europe with no Crusades, Muslims, or Byzantine Empire.
They were significantly less important to the story Pharoah is going over though; that of the Sea Peoples and the end of the New Kingdom (and Hattushas).
@@Nick-hi9gx What "story"? a generic hero saves kingdom from invaders? If Pharaoh was only interested in just Egypt and the Sea Peoples then they would not bother with the Hittites and the Canaanites, and the devs would not be calling it the "definitive Bronze Age game".
CA: We will make a Rome 3 but the map will be Italy and north África only. if you want Gaul, Hispania, Greece, Egypt and the Middle East you can buy the Dlcs for 15 dollars each and your map will be "expanded".
This is set during 1200 BC, a lot of the areas that you're talking about are not developed enough yet. Also, Turkey or Egypt are way bigger in Pharaoh. However, I agree that they could have included other places such as Mesopotamia.
Yeah thats what I mean, for bronze age they could include mesopotamia, Elam, crete and Greece at least. Is like not including gaul or Germania in Rome.
I think it would actually be great if they made a relatively bare-bones game with extreme modding resources available and leave the modders to add in what communities want.... so long as they are transparent and PRICE it accordingly. They make an excellent and flexible (and relatively CHEAPLY PRICED) foundation, and leave the community to make fill in the details for the niche audiences.
@@Fyrd_Productions Exactly. I cannot remember the last time I played a completely unmodded TW game. Even when the base game is CLOSE to what we want, there will always be people wanting more or less historical accuracy, harder/easier gameplay, more/less complexity, a completely different setting, etc. Just give us great and varied mechanics, lots of tools to easily modify things, and get out of the way.
No. I hate it that modders have to do all the work to be a decent game. They get paid and its their job. They should f***** to that. I hope that kind of studios get really bad reviews.
Agreed - I really only play vanilla versions so if there is even a suggestion that modding is needed to make a game effective, then I'm out. I'll reinstall CK3 and wait for Manor Lords I guess!@@akronym4439
Great Idea "financially" but I agree with @akronym4439, they should do their job. Mods are great I agree and your thoughts are interesting, but we shouldn't have to rely on modders who have given everything in terms of time due to their support and love of TW games. Original game creators have done nothing in recent years but disappoint on historic titles for "easy to please" fans, we are easy to please in my opinion, "give us what we want" and dnt fuck it up (empire 2, med 3). But i vote empire 2 first.. please, global adventure would be so cool, 10 diff theatres, just DO IT TW!!!!
After 15 hours in EA I found Pharaoh remarkably similar to Troy's "historical" mode. A few things have been changed but at its core the experience is stunningly similar. Exact same battles except forts, same economic and resource system, same diplomacy. For sure it's not a full TW title but that's only one of it's many problems.
Its crazy how medieval 2 is able to make me care more than any new game with 10x the budget. I was playing medieval 2 the other day, and I cannot stress how much I actually cared about my units in the campaign. You could look at any unit in my crusading army and go.. That unit took the walls at Acre, or that unit held the right flank in whatever battle. In new total war, you fight your meaningless 5 minute battle; then replenish all your losses back in a turn or two. In medieval 2, you would see the progression of your army take casualties, and have units get smaller and smaller. You would have to merge your units even to form decent sized units sometimes, but you would still care to some extent. Maybe that's just the roleplayer in me, but I look at Pharoah and see an arcadey soulless game. I could care less about any battle that happens in new total war games, and it feels washed.
Yea, the units would get smaller the more battles they fought in, but at the same time they gained experience chevrons as veterancy. However, once you retrained them they could lose some of their elite status since a bunch of recruits are essentially joining to replenish the unit. They essentially mattered.
Actually, battles in Total War: Pharaoh are not fast paced at all. Fights take a long time, just like the old school titles. And the campaign mechanics are quite interesting tbh. Edit: it's more than just 5% this or -10% that
Yeah that is true. I remember the sense of accomplishment having an army with veteran units full of chevrons and stuff. And indeed, I'd more or less remember where they fought because each battle really seemed meaningful. Each was a puzzle to solve, having to move units around like a chess game.
Seems like more nostalgic bullshit to me eh. I've played Medieval 2 and it's not some kind of greatest gaming experience that I was lead to believe. Back to EU4 it is
You have to imagine it: CA has already attracted so much criticism with previous titles that they thought "Yeah, why not? Instead of responding to one of the wishes of the players, we pimp a saga title into a regular title, copy various things from Troy into it and announce various DLC and bundles. What could possibly go wrong!"
I am guaranteeing you it was some McKinsey/Deloitte MBA prick that told them to do that. “You can probably save tons of costs by using your current engine. Yes it wont bring you tons of revenue but its not too much risk either because you are not spending much”. I know coz I work as a consultant myself and actively trying to get out because of bs like that.
I want Total war to be slow paced, physics based, and have detailed mechanics on the campaign map. Formations and positioning should win battles, not stats and buffs from units that I have to micromanage like I'm playing a moba and controlling every character on the team. If the battles were way more like Ultimate General with a budget the games would be 5 times better.
They should have done a Cyrus the Great game during the founding of the Persian Empire (559 BC) and could have added campaign packs for Alexander the Great and the Diadochi but they did Bronze Age instead with a secondary DLC studio in Warhammer engine with cartoony graphics. A complete missed opportunity 🤷♂️
That’s basically getting into Rome time period tho. Although I agree very need to do the Persian era that would include the famous wars with Greece and much more
@@tillercaesar-kq4ou It takes place quite a bit earlier (about 300 before start of Rome 2). That is well before the Roman Empire was a thing and even before the golden age of Greece. It would focus in the Middle East (same region as a Bronze Age map) but there were a bunch of large empires at the time so instead of small factions you would have large empires to choose from (e.g. Media, Lydia, Babylonia etc.). That would offer different gameplay mechanics that would have to focus on smaller wars to take smaller portions of these opposing empires over time. Perhaps introducing some war goals mechanic and making peace treaties more necessary. I think it would offer a unique gameplay experience we haven’t really seen yet (maybe some features from 3K could make their way over)
@@disillusioned8686 yea I know the history fairly well, the diadochoi and the time when the Rome total war game is set basically overlap is what I meant. I still think you’d need Greece there for the Ionian Greek presence plus the Persian wars. But yea you have a good idea with the diplomacy and smaller wars cuz I’m just thinking about how the Persian satrapies were kinda independent and what not. I feel like it needs to be viable to play a city state in Phoenicia or Greek area
@@tillercaesar-kq4ou Yes, I think Greece needs to be included. Athens and Sparta were still relevant city states when Persia was up and coming. I don’t think you need to include the Italian peninsula though so it could still be focused in the Middle East region with Greece as it’s Western limit. The idea of satrapies also offers some good unique play style options. For instance, there could be a system in place where you can only personally control a certain number of territories and then when you control too many have to place some of them under ai management of a satrap or else rebellions will be more likely to occur. Maybe you have less control over what forces are built in these satraps but can still call on military reinforcements from these regions. Also they could implement a recruitment feature like ToB where some turns for units to muster and the less territories you directly control, the faster and more units you can muster at once (this would make sense if starting as Cyrus with a small territory before attacking Media). Since Persia often faced rebellions in the empire, such a satrap system would make sense and be historically accurate
0:20 In three kindoms tW, they expanded the map in the south and also wanted to include step tribe fractions in the north (but because the dlcs were bad, sale numbers were bad and therefore expanding the map into the north did not happen) I personally think that they will add all of Greece but not Mesopotamia. 3:35 definitly. I remember a time where finished games were released. A time, where dlcs were actually dlcs. I mean extra content on top of the original one and not additions which make the original product feel a little bit more finished:D
They also expanded the map in Total Warhammer multiple times. Some examples were the addition of Crookback Mountain eastward, and extending Khatep's deserts westward to make room for Ostankya.
They should have just given Feral a budget to remaster Medieval 2 and do just a little more than with the Rome 1 remaster. Which is very nice BTW, but could have been even more. In a Medieval 2 remaster's case they could have revamped Spain and the Holy Roman Empire and improved the AI even more than they did with Rome. And also have UI more akin to the original.
Just a few hours ago, I was playing as the Hittites on the Age of Bronze mod and I cannot tell you how much I am enjoying it (it took me more than 5 ragequits to finally succumb to play in easy mode rather than the recommended normal mod cuz I am a bad strategist haha but I digress). Playing that mod reminded me what made Total War Total War. A game of planning, strategy, and micro managment here and there. Now, all we get is some Warhammer-esque game and don't get me started with those damn cosmetic packs. I think I also said this in a previous video of yours that Age of Bronze is and will be the only bronze age related game I will pour my hours into even if its run on Rome II. Seriously CA, you changed and you don't give a damn anymore and I don't have any hope for future historical games even if Pharoah sells somewhat.
@TheTerminator A few things as usual to help clear things out : 1) All TW since Empire are copying-pasting to a degree what was previously there, this isn't inherently bad in itself it only becomes bad when this copy-pasting is done to extreme degrees (not enough effort resources come along side the copy-pasting) and when it is used to resell old tech, in Pharaoh's example it's the fact that CA selling a 60$ with graphic tech that they left back at 2017~ so they ask more for less. 2) The term 'Historical' popped out from the community, it wasn't something CA originally used to sell or seperate their games. And even within the community this term was born out of 'ignorace' of people simplifying the desire for sandbox-simulation games like the old games (Rome, Medieval 2) and the new arcady TW games (everything since Rome 2 which took a hard). They only used it for the first time now with Pharaoh to hype it up as they dropped the SAGA and hoped people will buy into it. It is a marketing 'lie' in a sense because CA knows what people look for in a 'mainline' title and they try to fake Pharaoh into one when it is a game that was very cheap to make (cheap labor force because of country, massive copy-pasting, barely any work on sagnificant aspects such as AI). 3) You brought up mods again in this video as well, so lets discuss it, developing tools to mod demands resources which can go directly into developing the game ... there is a balance that needs to exist and its hard to tell where it lies. While I am in favor of giving TW enough resources for modding (Dawnless Days looks incredible) I still wish way more resources will be poured into the core of the game to make we wanna play it and here lies the problem ... (next point). 4) Have you seen the AI video Jackie did? What does mod help or what does more factions help if the AI is still as usually in a horrible spot? I am not even talking about gate bugs, I am talking about the fact that Pharaoh had been marketed just like Troy as a game that features a mechanic of terrain types and the AI still doesn't work with those ! (AI in TW games is using hints on deployment and nothing more, it doesn't know even where the high ground is) So you have a 60$ game that doesn't have AI that works with the systems it sells ... modders will never be able to fix it and this means the AI will be boring easily manipulated and repetitive to play against ... even the promise of return to form with sieges and settlements looks bleak as the AI is so undercooked that it sallys out (and I am not saying it in a smart cool tactical manner) and just suicidal blob the moment its being shot at. 5) And all of this are plain to see issues, what about core elements of the game that people didn't focus on or forget how improtant they are such as the Autoresolve? from the few glimpses I have seen it seems to feature the same issues of previous (recent) TW games, where it lacks any simulation elements. I still remember that despite how good the sieges were in Attila/ToB 1 set of seige-towers was enough for the AR to count 8 breaches in the settlement walls ... god the stupidity, playing it manually the AI easily burned them before they reached the walls. p.s. I would suggest to drop the 'nobody asked for it' argumenet, I never liked it, there is always someone that wants something. Personally I am not into the bronze age but neither did I ask for Warhammer but many did and eventually it grew on me too. I guess like me there will be people who didn't ask for Bronze Age but if its good they will love it, the problem isn't the theme/age its the effort put into the game and the price tag.
I have proof. Saying it doesn't make it so of course but I'm willing to share on my discord with names redacted etc so I'm not throwing anyone under the bus. Beyond that though I have literally nothing to gain by lying. Really don't understand why people think I would risk my reputation for just a few thousand views.
Pretty much, the scope is the equivalent of a single campaign in the Medieval 2 Kingdoms expansion... which had 4 campaigns with separate maps/time periods/factions AND it was much cheaper than this.
Question: is it normal for a company to reveal the roadmap for a game's DLCs before its release? From what I remember from the most recent games I purchased, this kind of information was only released after the game was released. And I don't think the devs are waiting for the sales results to see what they're going to do, at least not for the first faction pack (which I'm 90% sure will be Sethnakh and the Lybians). That's not how game development works, it takes months to prepare DLCs and know what will be included. Just saying "yeah we'll wait until the game releases before seeing if we can add something as huge as a map expansion" would be an amateurish mistake on the part of Creativity Assemble (but they also approved Hyenas, so who knows?)
CA have made millions selling us unfinished games and then drip feeding the rest of content through 30 DLCs. The defence of not having the budget or resources is a joke, it's not the players problem if you can't manage your company and we won't buy poor products forever.
I think its possible if pre order sales are less than x figure they have a plan in the weeks following to release 1 DLC and announce they won’t be releasing anymore due to cutting costs or something. Refund the Dynasty edition buyers.
Oh wow, a Bronze Age experience.... With barely half of the Bronze Age empires! CA deserves what it's going to get. My kingdom for a proper Bronze Age.
As a TW player since the first Medieval Total War, I'm absolutely with you on this😌 👍🏻And I see it that way too 😏 CA won't see a cent from me again as long as there's A) no major historical total war title that the main dev team produces 😌 And B) it must have the same level of quality and size as one of the old Full Total War titles 🤬 point ❗
I mean, they're not wrong about prices going up. Video game prices ha e remained relatively static over the years. Shogun Total War came out in 2000. I believe it was $40-50. $50 in 2000 would be $85 now, for comparison.
@@davidstansbury9309 What ??? Excuse me ???🤷♂️You didn't really suggest that they should even increase the prices 🤦♂️ Well then there's a quick simplification as to why this calculation doesn't apply to the video games industry 😉 watch out❗ The market for Videogames has grown by at least 250% since 2000 and that is a very conservative estimate 😉 Now let's assume at that time they sold 100,000 copies of Shogun TW, with a 250% increase in the sales market it would be 350,000 copies at $50❗ 🤔isn't that significantly more than before? And that's purely exemplary fiction... Well, real numbers from the recent past. TW Rome II has sold more than 1.1 million copys and as far as I know without DLC's and was absolutely not the most popular TW game🤔 so what happened to the 2000s😉 so please don't even try to calculate inflation or defending them with it ❗ Because this cannot be applied specifically to the games industry and the sales market because it is making such drastic leaps in growth ❗❗❗
CA, I WANT to give you my money! I've spent thousands of hours playing Rome, Medieval 2, Empire, Shogun, and Rome 2. I'm literally begging you to give me a new game to love. Bronze age had so much potential.
I completely agree with all of your points on the business practices of CA, very weird and a scary step. One thing though, I think CA has always relied on modders to make their games better and even playable. It’s a massive shame because I personally have enjoyed the game over the early access weekend, even with its tiny scale. This was a massive surprise to me, after all I called it total war dung beetle after the first trailer lol. It’s even more of a shame when it could have been the definitive game for the period when now it’s half of what it could have been. My real question is how has CA got into this position when by all accounts they made a tonne of money off the massive success that was Warhammer? Where has all that money gone? Into the pockets of the boards and stakeholders? I don’t know but they must have made some bad decisions to be in this position now…
Its just greed rather than pump out good games, they want the staff and things as bare bones as possible so YOU buy it. They could give a fuck if its good or not.
I’m just sticking with the old historic games. If they can’t do it themselves, then they don’t deserve my money the mod to do because they do the job for them. Lotta game companies do this now where a lot of games are no good anymore plus there’s no variety.
CA HAS expanded the map through FLC though. They did it with 3K, adding in Liaodong Peninsula, and adding in more area in the north of the map that didn't get utilized unfortunately. They also reworked the south of the map (Nanyang specifically), extending it a tiny bit, and extrending Shi Xie's territory a tiny bit further into Vietnam. So while I think there is like 0.1% chance of a Mesopotamian expansion (that would be SO HARD in this period to make the different factions over there meaningfully different), a Greek expansion seems pretty possible.
True but that was the playable area I’m pretty sure as in it was all campaign map that was already there. They didn’t add to the structure, only added new regions. As I said its possible they’ll add regions to Western Anatolia
@@TheTerminatorGaming No they did add to the structure of the map, and also remade parts of the map (like moving Mt. Song to the right place...how did they get that wrong the first time, it is THE most important mountain in Chinese history!). But it was only a tiny bit, they probably added a total of like 3% new land or something. Mostly it was what you say, just adding playable area to a map that had unplayable area. But originally western Liaodong was all that was on the map, they extended it to the rest of the peninsula.
Bro, In my opinion, they will shut down the game before bigger expansions, I’m personally sure that purchases will not pretty good on this one , they will give up like 3K
Maybe this is just crazy. But I really think CA needs a more focused attitude about Total War. Like I think they should make one game, Medieval 3, then hire modders onto the company to make official total conversions. Like Medieval to Bronze Age, Victorian Age, etc. This is just crazy but maybe it would work.
Its not a Fertile Crescent, its a Fertile half-crescent ! The Bronze Age without Mesopotamia is like a medieval game set around the mediterranean, but without the Holy Land...
Let’s vote to fire the CA designers of the latest games! Shame! Bring back the early traditions of creating Total war games: Shogun2, Medieval, Empire, Attila!
I just think they are using a theory to make this like the warhammer series, where there are 3 games, but the 3rd one has the immortal empires dlc or something like that, that includes the maps from the previous two games
The Sea Peoples not being playable in the base game is baffling to me. If they were a late game event like the Mongols in Medieval 2 then fine, but from I've heard they are pretty much there from the start.
No they are not placed on map at start, they are spawning in waves - first in turn nr.30 (Weshesh hordes), then second in turn nr. 50 Shekelesh faction emerges.
CA really screwed up with them, they could have recreated the Apocalypse hype Attila delivered with the Sea People, but from what I see they're very shallow compared to how Attila's Huns were presented.
More than anything else, I just hope they will make the Sea Peoples playable, maybe with a unique horde playstyle. Making a game about the Bronze Age Collapse without allowing us to play the iconic vikings of the mediterranean is just BS.
From what chsrobbie was saying it's hard to expand the map below or to the left since the map coordintes start at 0,0 - expanding to the right or just expanding and changing the coordinates wouldn't be difficult though.
Yeah, but you have to pay for an incomplet map. If you want a complete map you have to pay. No only you país 60 euros for an incomplete map, you need to pay more if you realli want it to be as you initally expected.
We should actually be very thankful now that they decided to make TW:Pharao, and that that's the game that is now being ruined by CA's policies and troubles. This way Empire 2 or Medieval 3 will hopefully get the love and attention they deserve, without the WH engine. I'd rather wait longer for Empire 2 or Medieval 3 then see it ruined by current state CA.
It’s not even a glorified saga. It’s just a saga without the name because it has negative connotations. I’m really worried about the future of Total War. CA seems to be in financial trouble.
Really don't understand why they won't include Assyria, Babylon as they were some of greatest powers of the Bronze Age, even Sumeria and Akkad. Ah well let's hope the Bronze Age mod scratches the itch.
A very insightful video, Terminator! Well done! Glad that you didn't blame the DEV Team as they probably did their best with the limited, scant resources they had AND are probably disappointed in the final game as well. Having just returned recently from a "bucket list" trip to Egypt (which was amazing btw), I was really excited and looking forward to getting my hands on "Pharaoh"! BUT given the high price tag and lack of important other Bronze Age civilization at release, I will probably wait for a future Steam sale to get the game at a more realistic price point. Thank god for the Age of Bronze mod which is awesome to play and more important, may be getting more factions to play in the future. Here's hoping in the future, the GREAT modding community out there will be able to develop faction mods for "Pharaoh" to enable it to become the Total War game we all expected! Cheers!
Yup. Lack of Mesopotamia and Greece is going to really hurt this game for me. Since the game was announced, I've never once believed that it's the next "MAJOR" historical. There has been ZERO marketing for this game too. EDIT: I haven't been in CA's creator program for a while, so I'm going in completely blind.
Have you heard any news that CA may be working on a new engine for Total War? I feel like that is what we need at this point but I don’t know if they have the resources for such an investment.
I like the game from what I’ve seen, but I will buy it and it’s 4 DLC for about 60€, not 100€ (Can’t get over how crazy it is to commit to 4 DLC on presale)
Good that you are pointing out the exclusion Mesopotamia But we have to rely on modders....what else can we do? CA SHOULD expand it into the Bronze Age. Not the modders in that way. But wait: 4:33 - To have 'full freedom what they would do' so that means that plans for CA Sofia to expand the game is restricted in some way and therefore they are relying on the modders. At one glance, I see this is as good news to expand the map. Just expand it. I will not settle with a half finished Bronze Age game. Modders do your magic please. At the same time, its a bit of a bad thing because then why are they creating the 'ultimate bronze age experience' IF THERE IS NO INTENTION TO EXPAND IT! It may be a red flag Termi...what else can I do? I'm no modder, and this would ironically be the total war game that has FULL modding tools, that allows for full scale modding. Very ironic. Shame we never got that with Empire, Rome II and Napoleon. Seriously. Just read the early access forums on steam the feedback is all: Add Mesopotamia! Look at me, I like Warhammer. I want Ind, Nippon, Korea etc. Never gonna happen. Modders HAD to step up and add it. CA Sofia is the most competent total war dev team out there and it needs more support and needs more budget/resources.
The only Total War I bought it was Rome 2 but only after 6 years from release when the game had upon it 21 patches. So it was not a half game like all total wars games on release time. I never understand why people preorder games
Besides that, the historical accuacy of the game is like if I explain a bunch of high schoolers what the bronze age was like and make a game about it. I posted this somewhere else and people just started shitting on me while they literaly knew nothing but about this time period. They were using historical data for their arguments about Egypte during the old and middle kingdom while this game is set about 1000 years after the hight of the old kingdom... It seems people just don't know anything about this time period, which I get, A LOT happens and it's mostly puzzled together so it can be confusing. So that doesnt help with the development since the love for the bronze age is already quite niche and most people that do care about it actually know too much about it to even look at a game like this in a historical sense. It's laughable how this game is setting up Tausret as a character and having the entire egyptian desert being inhabited with outposts and settlements (wtf were they thinking??). Baiting people into the game with having Rameses as a character, while Merneptah's FATHER was Rameses II, the most well known Egyptian pharaoh ISNT EVEN IN THE GAME....... Actually now that I think about it, the game is set during the fall of the bronze age, it isnt even a bronze age game. The game is actually set closer to the birth of Christ (year 0) than the time period in which the great piramids were build. The game is almost set in the iron age if you want to paint it in a REALLY bad light...
We'll probably never get another bronze age game from CA again so it's a shame this isn't seeming to be well made. I hope greece will be in it, it plays such a huge role in egypts future. This also has me worried this is the end of total war. The saga games failing and being abandoned within a year. With the backlash of WH3 and the disrespect to it's community. To CA cancelling games and jobs being lost. With modders having to add simple features to make the games fun. You can already see pharaoh won't sell well so total war could be the next cut game as every franchise comes to a end.
Totally this. And the last news are not encouraging: today we learned that the job cuts WILL indeed also affect Total War teams. Don't want to be a doomsayer, but I wouldn't be surprised - I mean, AT ALL - if they shut the doors on Total War in a few months, thus ending the series. They had a whole decade to turn things around, but they didn't, so perhaps it's game over.
The spatial scope of the game is a design and not a budget decision. Zoom out and let the same number of regions/provinces cover a larger part of the world. CAs decision to limit the games map to the eastern Mediterranean coast, Anatolia and Egypt is so baffling.
Thanks. Pre-ordered Dynasty Edition in May, didn't get to play the early access due to CA / Xsolla stuff up. So I haven't played the game yet but if this proves to be correct .. I'm gutted.
I can't believe they didn't just do "Total War: Bronze Age" with all of the relevant areas. It's a popular area of study. I think a true TW Bronze Age experience would be successful despite the extra resources it would need to achieve it.
Agree with all you have said snd again excellent review .I. used to look forward to new historical games from CA and was a passionate supporter of the Studio,sadly those days are gone😢
I’m still not entirely sure whether to buy it or not. I’m still on the fence. But I’m definitely going to wait until the reviews and stuff come out before deciding whether to get it or not. The game is 100% a Saga title and the £49.99 price tag is hefty for a game that is only set in one region. At least Troy wasn’t as expensive.
The only total war games I don't own are 3K, Troy, and soon to be Pharoah, lol. I have been playing Attila, Shogun 2, and Medieval 2 for years and years.. looks like I will continue to do so
Why not 3K? It's incredible. Actually narrative campaigns with intelligent campaign AI and good diplomacy. One of the better TW experiences. Records mode plays fine to get rid of the OP heroes, or you can use mods to nerf them so they can't kill literally hundreds of soldiers solo.@@TheOneTrueFett
@@SenpaiTorpidDOW I did actually buy 3k, I checked. I just forgot I refunded it within 2hrs, lol. It's not my style of total war, I'm a medieval / rome / attila / shogun/ empire, guy. The whole vibe with 3k , stuff like Troy, and now this Pharoah, aren't what I liked about total war at all. It's like they're trying to market to a different customer base than customers like me.. who first played total war from a rome tw pc gaming mag demo disk and fell in love with it.
So what im thinking is: why is no other company jumping in the gap that CA left? Like, there are thousands of us still playing the classic total wars made more than 10 years ago. Of course it is still difficult to make a total war like game from scratch, but with the stronger computers and better game making technology, it should be doable.
Things could have been so much different if they just kept Pharaoh in the Saga brand, charge it like one and tease the idea of a future Saga with Arabia and Mesopotamia in a future game and then merge all the maps like with Troy like the Warhammer games. But no, they ended up making a full historical that crearly doesnt have the scope of one at full price that basically no one was asking instead of making Med3/Rome3/Emp2/WW1 that would have sell tons of copies because thats what the community has been asking for years. With Pharaoh, the DLC policy of TWWH3 and Hyenas there clearly is some really poor decision making in CA/Sega
Haha yep, and still built in Warhammer 2 engine. Don’t most mainline Total War games get an updates engine made for it? Oh ya, I forgot these are saga titles trying to be sold at AAA game prices built on old engines. $60 DLC for Troy. Any takers??
"ca has never expanded the physical map of a total war threw a dlc before" fall of the samurai had its map size increased a lot compared to shogun 2 default map its night and day either way this game is gonna be sad
I suppose the lack of a DLC roadmap pre-launch is to be expected, as they want people to feel the dynasty edition is a deal or feel some FOMO, but man is it shady. If it's just unlocking a few factions from the base game, like Troy, peeps gonna be pissed.
Pharaoh is going to be CA's EA Anthem. And all of the "effective" financial managers will blob about "strategy games are in the past now" because they can't see anything except their financial statements... pathetic. That's what you get when you don't listen to your customers and fans.... for 8 years.
I think that using moders like this is disgusting, also i know that lot of people don't care about warhammer but it was game that brought me to the total war games and i hope that next games isn't going to be just money printing
Perfectly acceptable to advertise an ultimate Bronze Age ‘experience’ as long as you are fighting in the Bronze Age. Any game could offer the ultimate WW2 experience while staying in the European theatre. There’s enough drama around at the moment without piling it on.
I think that Pharaoh is an interesting game, both in terms of campaign mechanics and historical setting. It's just not worth 60 euros/dollars, or whatever your currency is. I decided to preorder it nonetheless, because I want to support the work of Sofia's team. These guys seem legit and passionate, and this is unfortunate that their game is getting released in the heat of SoC (I boycotted this one) and Hyenas debacle.
Do whatever you want, but I wouldn't encourage with money bad business practices, greediness, bad designed games with lack of freedom of choice to the player, etc... Encouraging all that is the reason TW became so disappointing.
@@Chtigga That's something nice to say, thank you. I also respect your opinion and I hope you enjoy your pharaoh with whatever it has that I can't see how could I ever enjoy (or not get tired, for lack of content, in a couple of campaigns). Take care 🙂👍🏼
CA being scummy is something I'm not surprised about given the fiasco that was Warhammer 3's launch not to mention the recent price hike with Shadow And Change. That will the recent cancelation of Hyenas which was a massive money sink means that CA Sofia is a company that is functionally a sacrificial lamb subcompany that was not given the money they needed to build the game they wanted and thus we get an overpriced subpar project as the consumers. Despicable this is the kind of behavior I expect from EA and Activision not from CA; Pharoah is a game that will likely go down as the worst in the series which considering Thrones of Britannia exists made that a hard thing. The number one concern I have is that this may deny us a proper Bronze Age Total War entirely, also the fact that they functionally shifting responsibility to the modders... In the words of the Shogun II battle announcer: SHAMEFUL DISPLAY! That said while this game definitely is a hard pass on my part I hope that CA learns from this chain of failures, or Sega notices that surge of mistakes and fires the bad upper management for their own bottom-line, either option would do. My primary concern is what is going to get cut financially from the cancelation of Hyenas and the bomb that is going to be Pharoah its not looking good. That said while CA's side is looking horrible the modders still continue to impress, I again don't think they should have to be doing all of CA's work for them but that isn't going to stop me using their content and giving it the due respect it deserves, if it was an option I'd pay the modders instead of CA at this point because honestly they are doing the hard work for them.
I am going to be sitting on the sidelines before making a purchasing decision on this one. I love the Egyptian theme but doubt the quality of the game will be what I am looking for. Troy did not give me the Ancient Greek fix I was looking for either and was disappointed. I might be better off looking at the old city builder from Impressions Games.
As a 20 years old historical TW fan starting with Shogun and Medieval I, what I find really unbelievable is how little these people can learn from past mistakes. And not even very old mistakes. Let's take Thrones of Britannia, something like "we're gonna remove Agents, de-power all religious aspects and completely cut off SCANDINAVIA from campaign map. What could possibly go wrong with that ? Fans don't realize it yet, but they're gonna love it". SURPRISE, SURPRISE. ToS was a F**** huge failure, even if it was something RE-CALLED by the fan base for years (as somekind of Viking Invasion TW 2 we were waiting for since decads). I mean, you have to be a F genius to f up something like that. Now, and I WONDER why, speaking about Age of Bronze, I'm getting quite a flashback about it.
I cannot believe I supported this company all the way since Shogun 1... I spent thousands of hours in Total War games... especially Rome 1, Shogun 2, and Empire... but my god this company will not get a single penny from me anymore. I don't understand why eventually all big studios seem to decline once they reach a certain size and just stop making good games. But my pain limit has been reached and my patience has run out. Since Rome 2 it has been painfully obvious how broken their games are, how poorly even the most basic game mechanics like battles, AI, settlement management, diplomacy etc. are designed and how they haven't been improved for well over a decade now. It's shameful behavior to ask people to buy their products even though they know it's bad quality. I will never forget when that statement was made "buy this dlc or we will stop supporting the game" ... I don't recognize CA anymore honestly. There was a time when it was obvious they had very passionate and capable developers who wanted to make a good game and this was when they got financially rewarded for it... but what they are doing nowadays with their low quality and broken games, the horrible dlc policies and pricing ... it's enough. Luckily, the older I get the more serious I get about these things. I've stopped buying games from Bethesda, EA, Ubisoft, and Activision/Blizzard years ago and it seems CA and SEGA have now joined the club of greedy and shallow studios/publishers. I am so angry... I was really hoping after Warhammer 3 they would announce that they have been working on a major historic title for well over 3 years... but turns out there was nothing after all. Bye CA. I was their biggest fan for so many years... but no thank you. I will not spend any more money on a broken and boring game.
We cant really say this hasn't happened before, afterall there was that sleezeball trying to sell the advances they've had with AI during the Rome 2 launch. This is just another justified reason why I have serious Trust issues tho. There's been way too many marketing maneuvers trying to sell a shit sandwich over the years, and CA is capitalizing on their loyal consumers to not have a flop... Meanwhile, RUclipsr's like yourself will guarantee that Flop because we cant let it slide.
Sad to say, maybe CA realized they have failed when a Rome 2-modder made a better Bronze age TW than they did... Seeing how important modders have been for the continued popularity of TW-games, its a bit disheartening that CA apparently are jealous and antagonistic towards modders, rather than embrace and support them. Its like they barely tolerate modding, rather than welcome it. Why?? So about the future of TW... Back in the days before Shogun 2 and Rome 2 came out, I remember speculating about the "next TW-titles"... Already then I wanted late medieval/Pike&Shot and Victorian era TW, even though we just had gotten Empire and Napoleon. Empire was so undercooked and Napoleon was very narrow in scope. I was so disappointed when I went on forums to see that majority of fans predicted they would do Rome 2 and maybe Shogun 2 first. (S2 did give us a tease for that Victorian era TW though, which only proved to me that rail roads, rapid-firing guns and long range-fire support can fit quite easily into the "Total war-formula") So back in 2010-ish I accepted that those games would probably come out first. But then I was hopeful that afterwards, surely, CA would make games for the settings I wanted. Like, what else could they possibly do? I read in forums that CA could go for China and east-Asia, Indian sub-continent (in an era were there were several factions in that area), and bronze age-Egypt and Mesopotamia (though they messed that one up lol). I discounted all of those as "lame" options which surely would not make for cooler TW-games than Pike&Shot or Victorian TW! I didn't know a lot about history in those parts of the world back then, so I had a misconception that there were not a lot of material to take from in terms of factions and unit-variety. Just a bunch of half-naked dudes hacking at each other with khopeshes. Why would CA even go for that? The only reason I could think of was that CA wanted to be "boring and reasonable adults" and therefore wanted to avoid just making the game people wanted! (I was like 17, gimme a break :D) Now, many years later, we still have no Victorian or Pike&Shot-game. I am almost bemused that CA has actually been making almost all the options I took for "worst case-scenarios". Unlikely, almost convulsive, options for TW-titles which I thought CA would only choose if they for some reason were desperate to avoid making Pike&SHow/Victorian-TW. Guess that showed me, eh? Now CA has almost scraped the barrel for all those other options which I didn't think they would go for. So what is next? Pre-colonial america? Indian sub-continent? Scandinavian middle ages...? Will they finally make the hugest, most epic historical campaign map ever, and then use it to make Mongolian empire-TW...? How long can CA realistically postpone making either Pike&Shot or Victorian era game?? Now I feel like more important questions are: Do we even want CA to make those games..? Will they drive themselves into the ditch before they get a chance to do so?
They only had to make Medieval 3/Empire 2 and it would be selling like crazzzzy, instead they decided to f around these Saga games that doesn't satisfy anyone's need
Just because CA dropped the SAGA brand from Pharaoh, doesn't mean it hasn't gotten a similar level of budget and resource as one. It certainly looks like it doesn't have that same investment as previous major titles we've seen. And all this info, to me, just confirms that. This isn't the ultimate Bronze Age game, or the next "Major Historical" title we've been told it is, and I'm guessing the DLC support for this will be very similar to Troy's.
Joe has a surprise for you .... THREADS
I honestly don't know if we'll ever get another major historical title that doesn't feel like a saga until they stop focusing on key central historical figures and trying to give them the Warhammer immortal treatment. Ever since Troy so many of these campaigns feel like one and done playthroughs and no reason to want to go back to the game after you've played through your character of interest. I know that is what happened to me with Troy and Odysseus, and the same will probably happen in Pharaoh with Rameses. And so while that is the case their only incentive is to get as much money up front instead of fostering long-term investment in the game. All the more reason that I feel CA needs more direct competition in this space or this will just continue.
Hey Terminator will you play it and make a review once it's out?
I’ve played over 40 hours so far so yep I will be releasing a review of the game day before launch
I thought that Sofia was going to create their smaller games, whilst Horsham focused on larger brand titles.
Looks like, extractly what you say, that they thought "times are tight, screw it" why not just call it a full large game and charge an extra £20 for it?
One of the key features of the Bronze Age is the massive trade networks for supplying tin to make bronze. Tin is relatively rare in the Earth's crust and pretty much all the tin in Bronze age Europe/western Asia came from Western Britain and Afghanistan. When the Sea People caused these trade networks to break down, that's probably the biggest reason for the Collapse.
Having a Bronze Age game without emphasizing trade networks and the regions with the materials you are using to fund your economy tells me they entirely missed the point of the Bronze Age Collapse.
But hey, you have a invincible Pharaoh!
The complicated trade system is hardly represented in total war series, a Bronze Age mod of Victoria 3 would be more promising 😂
@@pachomiussinanicus1728 You don't need a "complicated" trade System, just a a simple but essential one that causes the game to become harder as they are disrupted and making your money run out forcing you to make tough decisions. Pharaoh does not even try.
I will totally buy Total War: Pharaoh - once it costs as much as Troy does right now: 8,99€. Maybe Id consider it for 15€ but certainly not 59€. Simply insane
It doesnt cost 8,99 bc it isn't a full game
THREADS
Stop being poor
@@connorsantonocito6015 fun fact trends indicate the poor spend more than the rich
@@connorsantonocito6015Stop consuming garbage
This is so weird! Mesopotamia was probably THE MOST important Bronze Age region! I'd like to play this game so much, but with half of the Bronze Age regions/factions missing, it's a veeeery tough sell. I'll wait and see, but if the sales are as poor as we are predicting, I highly doubt they will add them. It's as if Medieval Total War was set only in the Western Europe with no Crusades, Muslims, or Byzantine Empire.
Waiting to sell you those in dlc's
They were significantly less important to the story Pharoah is going over though; that of the Sea Peoples and the end of the New Kingdom (and Hattushas).
This is like Rome without Rome.
still bullshit, because they start the period AFTER the death of Rameses II... THE MOST WELL KNOWN PHARAOH (of the new kingdom)....@@Nick-hi9gx
@@Nick-hi9gx What "story"? a generic hero saves kingdom from invaders? If Pharaoh was only interested in just Egypt and the Sea Peoples then they would not bother with the Hittites and the Canaanites, and the devs would not be calling it the "definitive Bronze Age game".
CA: We will make a Rome 3 but the map will be Italy and north África only. if you want Gaul, Hispania, Greece, Egypt and the Middle East you can buy the Dlcs for 15 dollars each and your map will be "expanded".
This is set during 1200 BC, a lot of the areas that you're talking about are not developed enough yet. Also, Turkey or Egypt are way bigger in Pharaoh. However, I agree that they could have included other places such as Mesopotamia.
Yeah thats what I mean, for bronze age they could include mesopotamia, Elam, crete and Greece at least. Is like not including gaul or Germania in Rome.
Or at least leave the map as it is but at lower price. I would mind to pay 20-25 euros for that game as it is but 60 is too expensive.
I think it would actually be great if they made a relatively bare-bones game with extreme modding resources available and leave the modders to add in what communities want.... so long as they are transparent and PRICE it accordingly. They make an excellent and flexible (and relatively CHEAPLY PRICED) foundation, and leave the community to make fill in the details for the niche audiences.
Either that or just make a game that people want. But tbh the budget wont cut it and modders will always do a better job for free.
@@Fyrd_Productions Exactly. I cannot remember the last time I played a completely unmodded TW game. Even when the base game is CLOSE to what we want, there will always be people wanting more or less historical accuracy, harder/easier gameplay, more/less complexity, a completely different setting, etc. Just give us great and varied mechanics, lots of tools to easily modify things, and get out of the way.
No. I hate it that modders have to do all the work to be a decent game. They get paid and its their job. They should f***** to that.
I hope that kind of studios get really bad reviews.
Agreed - I really only play vanilla versions so if there is even a suggestion that modding is needed to make a game effective, then I'm out. I'll reinstall CK3 and wait for Manor Lords I guess!@@akronym4439
Great Idea "financially" but I agree with @akronym4439, they should do their job. Mods are great I agree and your thoughts are interesting, but we shouldn't have to rely on modders who have given everything in terms of time due to their support and love of TW games. Original game creators have done nothing in recent years but disappoint on historic titles for "easy to please" fans, we are easy to please in my opinion, "give us what we want" and dnt fuck it up (empire 2, med 3). But i vote empire 2 first.. please, global adventure would be so cool, 10 diff theatres, just DO IT TW!!!!
After 15 hours in EA I found Pharaoh remarkably similar to Troy's "historical" mode. A few things have been changed but at its core the experience is stunningly similar. Exact same battles except forts, same economic and resource system, same diplomacy. For sure it's not a full TW title but that's only one of it's many problems.
Its crazy how medieval 2 is able to make me care more than any new game with 10x the budget. I was playing medieval 2 the other day, and I cannot stress how much I actually cared about my units in the campaign. You could look at any unit in my crusading army and go.. That unit took the walls at Acre, or that unit held the right flank in whatever battle. In new total war, you fight your meaningless 5 minute battle; then replenish all your losses back in a turn or two. In medieval 2, you would see the progression of your army take casualties, and have units get smaller and smaller. You would have to merge your units even to form decent sized units sometimes, but you would still care to some extent. Maybe that's just the roleplayer in me, but I look at Pharoah and see an arcadey soulless game. I could care less about any battle that happens in new total war games, and it feels washed.
Yea, the units would get smaller the more battles they fought in, but at the same time they gained experience chevrons as veterancy. However, once you retrained them they could lose some of their elite status since a bunch of recruits are essentially joining to replenish the unit. They essentially mattered.
Actually, battles in Total War: Pharaoh are not fast paced at all. Fights take a long time, just like the old school titles. And the campaign mechanics are quite interesting tbh.
Edit: it's more than just 5% this or -10% that
@@Chtigga +5% this -10% that. Chose which button to press to get this bonus for 10 turns, that's what most Pharaoh mechanics amount to.
Yeah that is true. I remember the sense of accomplishment having an army with veteran units full of chevrons and stuff. And indeed, I'd more or less remember where they fought because each battle really seemed meaningful. Each was a puzzle to solve, having to move units around like a chess game.
Seems like more nostalgic bullshit to me eh. I've played Medieval 2 and it's not some kind of greatest gaming experience that I was lead to believe. Back to EU4 it is
Total war has turned interest cash grab now gone the good old days
You have to imagine it: CA has already attracted so much criticism with previous titles that they thought "Yeah, why not? Instead of responding to one of the wishes of the players, we pimp a saga title into a regular title, copy various things from Troy into it and announce various DLC and bundles. What could possibly go wrong!"
I am guaranteeing you it was some McKinsey/Deloitte MBA prick that told them to do that.
“You can probably save tons of costs by using your current engine. Yes it wont bring you tons of revenue but its not too much risk either because you are not spending much”. I know coz I work as a consultant myself and actively trying to get out because of bs like that.
I want Total war to be slow paced, physics based, and have detailed mechanics on the campaign map. Formations and positioning should win battles, not stats and buffs from units that I have to micromanage like I'm playing a moba and controlling every character on the team. If the battles were way more like Ultimate General with a budget the games would be 5 times better.
They should have done a Cyrus the Great game during the founding of the Persian Empire (559 BC) and could have added campaign packs for Alexander the Great and the Diadochi but they did Bronze Age instead with a secondary DLC studio in Warhammer engine with cartoony graphics. A complete missed opportunity 🤷♂️
That’s basically getting into Rome time period tho. Although I agree very need to do the Persian era that would include the famous wars with Greece and much more
@@tillercaesar-kq4ou It takes place quite a bit earlier (about 300 before start of Rome 2). That is well before the Roman Empire was a thing and even before the golden age of Greece. It would focus in the Middle East (same region as a Bronze Age map) but there were a bunch of large empires at the time so instead of small factions you would have large empires to choose from (e.g. Media, Lydia, Babylonia etc.). That would offer different gameplay mechanics that would have to focus on smaller wars to take smaller portions of these opposing empires over time. Perhaps introducing some war goals mechanic and making peace treaties more necessary. I think it would offer a unique gameplay experience we haven’t really seen yet (maybe some features from 3K could make their way over)
@@disillusioned8686 yea I know the history fairly well, the diadochoi and the time when the Rome total war game is set basically overlap is what I meant. I still think you’d need Greece there for the Ionian Greek presence plus the Persian wars. But yea you have a good idea with the diplomacy and smaller wars cuz I’m just thinking about how the Persian satrapies were kinda independent and what not. I feel like it needs to be viable to play a city state in Phoenicia or Greek area
@@tillercaesar-kq4ou Yes, I think Greece needs to be included. Athens and Sparta were still relevant city states when Persia was up and coming. I don’t think you need to include the Italian peninsula though so it could still be focused in the Middle East region with Greece as it’s Western limit.
The idea of satrapies also offers some good unique play style options. For instance, there could be a system in place where you can only personally control a certain number of territories and then when you control too many have to place some of them under ai management of a satrap or else rebellions will be more likely to occur. Maybe you have less control over what forces are built in these satraps but can still call on military reinforcements from these regions. Also they could implement a recruitment feature like ToB where some turns for units to muster and the less territories you directly control, the faster and more units you can muster at once (this would make sense if starting as Cyrus with a small territory before attacking Media). Since Persia often faced rebellions in the empire, such a satrap system would make sense and be historically accurate
I think that the Bronze Age is also an interesting setting for a Total War. But to each his own, I guess.
0:20 In three kindoms tW, they expanded the map in the south and also wanted to include step tribe fractions in the north (but because the dlcs were bad, sale numbers were bad and therefore expanding the map into the north did not happen)
I personally think that they will add all of Greece but not Mesopotamia.
3:35 definitly. I remember a time where finished games were released. A time, where dlcs were actually dlcs. I mean extra content on top of the original one and not additions which make the original product feel a little bit more finished:D
They also expanded the map in Total Warhammer multiple times. Some examples were the addition of Crookback Mountain eastward, and extending Khatep's deserts westward to make room for Ostankya.
No way I'm going to pay 60$ for 50% reused assets OF A SAGA GAME!!!
They should have just given Feral a budget to remaster Medieval 2 and do just a little more than with the Rome 1 remaster. Which is very nice BTW, but could have been even more. In a Medieval 2 remaster's case they could have revamped Spain and the Holy Roman Empire and improved the AI even more than they did with Rome. And also have UI more akin to the original.
I feel so bad for ca Sofia, their being really screwed up by the higher ups
Just a few hours ago, I was playing as the Hittites on the Age of Bronze mod and I cannot tell you how much I am enjoying it (it took me more than 5 ragequits to finally succumb to play in easy mode rather than the recommended normal mod cuz I am a bad strategist haha but I digress). Playing that mod reminded me what made Total War Total War. A game of planning, strategy, and micro managment here and there. Now, all we get is some Warhammer-esque game and don't get me started with those damn cosmetic packs. I think I also said this in a previous video of yours that Age of Bronze is and will be the only bronze age related game I will pour my hours into even if its run on Rome II. Seriously CA, you changed and you don't give a damn anymore and I don't have any hope for future historical games even if Pharoah sells somewhat.
CA has been like this for 20 years; except now you can buy a blood and gore mod four months after release.
What if they make "Bronze Empires" if you own Troy and Pharaoh you unlock a new sandbox mode on a combined-game-map
@TheTerminator A few things as usual to help clear things out :
1) All TW since Empire are copying-pasting to a degree what was previously there, this isn't inherently bad in itself it only becomes bad when this copy-pasting is done to extreme degrees (not enough effort resources come along side the copy-pasting) and when it is used to resell old tech, in Pharaoh's example it's the fact that CA selling a 60$ with graphic tech that they left back at 2017~ so they ask more for less.
2) The term 'Historical' popped out from the community, it wasn't something CA originally used to sell or seperate their games. And even within the community this term was born out of 'ignorace' of people simplifying the desire for sandbox-simulation games like the old games (Rome, Medieval 2) and the new arcady TW games (everything since Rome 2 which took a hard). They only used it for the first time now with Pharaoh to hype it up as they dropped the SAGA and hoped people will buy into it. It is a marketing 'lie' in a sense because CA knows what people look for in a 'mainline' title and they try to fake Pharaoh into one when it is a game that was very cheap to make (cheap labor force because of country, massive copy-pasting, barely any work on sagnificant aspects such as AI).
3) You brought up mods again in this video as well, so lets discuss it, developing tools to mod demands resources which can go directly into developing the game ... there is a balance that needs to exist and its hard to tell where it lies. While I am in favor of giving TW enough resources for modding (Dawnless Days looks incredible) I still wish way more resources will be poured into the core of the game to make we wanna play it and here lies the problem ... (next point).
4) Have you seen the AI video Jackie did? What does mod help or what does more factions help if the AI is still as usually in a horrible spot? I am not even talking about gate bugs, I am talking about the fact that Pharaoh had been marketed just like Troy as a game that features a mechanic of terrain types and the AI still doesn't work with those ! (AI in TW games is using hints on deployment and nothing more, it doesn't know even where the high ground is) So you have a 60$ game that doesn't have AI that works with the systems it sells ... modders will never be able to fix it and this means the AI will be boring easily manipulated and repetitive to play against ... even the promise of return to form with sieges and settlements looks bleak as the AI is so undercooked that it sallys out (and I am not saying it in a smart cool tactical manner) and just suicidal blob the moment its being shot at.
5) And all of this are plain to see issues, what about core elements of the game that people didn't focus on or forget how improtant they are such as the Autoresolve? from the few glimpses I have seen it seems to feature the same issues of previous (recent) TW games, where it lacks any simulation elements. I still remember that despite how good the sieges were in Attila/ToB 1 set of seige-towers was enough for the AR to count 8 breaches in the settlement walls ... god the stupidity, playing it manually the AI easily burned them before they reached the walls.
p.s. I would suggest to drop the 'nobody asked for it' argumenet, I never liked it, there is always someone that wants something. Personally I am not into the bronze age but neither did I ask for Warhammer but many did and eventually it grew on me too. I guess like me there will be people who didn't ask for Bronze Age but if its good they will love it, the problem isn't the theme/age its the effort put into the game and the price tag.
What if modders got together and made a new franchise? Looks like CA's best days are behind them
4:17 Proof please. Stating that you know something for a fact doesn't make it a fact.
I have proof. Saying it doesn't make it so of course but I'm willing to share on my discord with names redacted etc so I'm not throwing anyone under the bus. Beyond that though I have literally nothing to gain by lying. Really don't understand why people think I would risk my reputation for just a few thousand views.
My first thought when I saw this campaign map was literally:
What the F.. is this???
Pretty much, the scope is the equivalent of a single campaign in the Medieval 2 Kingdoms expansion... which had 4 campaigns with separate maps/time periods/factions AND it was much cheaper than this.
Maybe the dung beetle in the first trailer was really a sign of things to come?
Question: is it normal for a company to reveal the roadmap for a game's DLCs before its release? From what I remember from the most recent games I purchased, this kind of information was only released after the game was released.
And I don't think the devs are waiting for the sales results to see what they're going to do, at least not for the first faction pack (which I'm 90% sure will be Sethnakh and the Lybians).
That's not how game development works, it takes months to prepare DLCs and know what will be included. Just saying "yeah we'll wait until the game releases before seeing if we can add something as huge as a map expansion" would be an amateurish mistake on the part of Creativity Assemble (but they also approved Hyenas, so who knows?)
It's a shame bc the CA Sofia dev team seems competent and passionate - I hope they get a chance to make something better
Agreed.
CA have made millions selling us unfinished games and then drip feeding the rest of content through 30 DLCs. The defence of not having the budget or resources is a joke, it's not the players problem if you can't manage your company and we won't buy poor products forever.
Is it possible that CA could break their DLC plans, and end up not releasing all the packs they promised when they announced the game?
I think its possible if pre order sales are less than x figure they have a plan in the weeks following to release 1 DLC and announce they won’t be releasing anymore due to cutting costs or something. Refund the Dynasty edition buyers.
Oh wow, a Bronze Age experience....
With barely half of the Bronze Age empires!
CA deserves what it's going to get. My kingdom for a proper Bronze Age.
You have 100% hit the nail on the head!
As a TW player since the first Medieval Total War, I'm absolutely with you on this😌 👍🏻And I see it that way too 😏 CA won't see a cent from me again as long as there's A) no major historical total war title that the main dev team produces 😌 And B) it must have the same level of quality and size as one of the old Full Total War titles 🤬 point ❗
Same I will continue playing the better titles. MTW2 Rome and Shogun
I feel cheated
I mean, they're not wrong about prices going up. Video game prices ha e remained relatively static over the years. Shogun Total War came out in 2000. I believe it was $40-50. $50 in 2000 would be $85 now, for comparison.
@@davidstansbury9309 What ??? Excuse me ???🤷♂️You didn't really suggest that they should even increase the prices 🤦♂️ Well then there's a quick simplification as to why this calculation doesn't apply to the video games industry 😉 watch out❗ The market for Videogames has grown by at least 250% since 2000 and that is a very conservative estimate 😉 Now let's assume at that time they sold 100,000 copies of Shogun TW, with a 250% increase in the sales market it would be 350,000 copies at $50❗ 🤔isn't that significantly more than before? And that's purely exemplary fiction... Well, real numbers from the recent past. TW Rome II has sold more than 1.1 million copys and as far as I know without DLC's and was absolutely not the most popular TW game🤔 so what happened to the 2000s😉 so please don't even try to calculate inflation or defending them with it ❗ Because this cannot be applied specifically to the games industry and the sales market because it is making such drastic leaps in growth ❗❗❗
CA, I WANT to give you my money! I've spent thousands of hours playing Rome, Medieval 2, Empire, Shogun, and Rome 2. I'm literally begging you to give me a new game to love. Bronze age had so much potential.
Didn’t 3k not have any Nanman and they expanded the map with the dlc?
You’re totally right, that’s the only time its happened. But the physical map was there already, they added regions to the play area essentially
I completely agree with all of your points on the business practices of CA, very weird and a scary step. One thing though, I think CA has always relied on modders to make their games better and even playable.
It’s a massive shame because I personally have enjoyed the game over the early access weekend, even with its tiny scale. This was a massive surprise to me, after all I called it total war dung beetle after the first trailer lol. It’s even more of a shame when it could have been the definitive game for the period when now it’s half of what it could have been.
My real question is how has CA got into this position when by all accounts they made a tonne of money off the massive success that was Warhammer? Where has all that money gone? Into the pockets of the boards and stakeholders? I don’t know but they must have made some bad decisions to be in this position now…
Its just greed rather than pump out good games, they want the staff and things as bare bones as possible so YOU buy it. They could give a fuck if its good or not.
I’m just sticking with the old historic games. If they can’t do it themselves, then they don’t deserve my money the mod to do because they do the job for them.
Lotta game companies do this now where a lot of games are no good anymore plus there’s no variety.
CA HAS expanded the map through FLC though. They did it with 3K, adding in Liaodong Peninsula, and adding in more area in the north of the map that didn't get utilized unfortunately. They also reworked the south of the map (Nanyang specifically), extending it a tiny bit, and extrending Shi Xie's territory a tiny bit further into Vietnam.
So while I think there is like 0.1% chance of a Mesopotamian expansion (that would be SO HARD in this period to make the different factions over there meaningfully different), a Greek expansion seems pretty possible.
True but that was the playable area I’m pretty sure as in it was all campaign map that was already there. They didn’t add to the structure, only added new regions. As I said its possible they’ll add regions to Western Anatolia
@@TheTerminatorGaming No they did add to the structure of the map, and also remade parts of the map (like moving Mt. Song to the right place...how did they get that wrong the first time, it is THE most important mountain in Chinese history!). But it was only a tiny bit, they probably added a total of like 3% new land or something. Mostly it was what you say, just adding playable area to a map that had unplayable area. But originally western Liaodong was all that was on the map, they extended it to the rest of the peninsula.
Bro, In my opinion, they will shut down the game before bigger expansions, I’m personally sure that purchases will not pretty good on this one , they will give up like 3K
@@emperoroak7331 Oh that is definitely a possibility. I am not saying they are GOING to expand it.
Maybe this is just crazy. But I really think CA needs a more focused attitude about Total War. Like I think they should make one game, Medieval 3, then hire modders onto the company to make official total conversions. Like Medieval to Bronze Age, Victorian Age, etc. This is just crazy but maybe it would work.
Its not a Fertile Crescent, its a Fertile half-crescent !
The Bronze Age without Mesopotamia is like a medieval game set around the mediterranean, but without the Holy Land...
been playing total war for 20 years...all good things come to an end. Lets hope another company picks up where CA left off
Let’s vote to fire the CA designers of the latest games! Shame! Bring back the early traditions of creating Total war games: Shogun2, Medieval, Empire, Attila!
I just think they are using a theory to make this like the warhammer series, where there are 3 games, but the 3rd one has the immortal empires dlc or something like that, that includes the maps from the previous two games
The Sea Peoples not being playable in the base game is baffling to me. If they were a late game event like the Mongols in Medieval 2 then fine, but from I've heard they are pretty much there from the start.
No they are not placed on map at start, they are spawning in waves - first in turn nr.30 (Weshesh hordes), then second in turn nr. 50 Shekelesh faction emerges.
@@ja3044 30 turns in is not a lot. It feels like Warhammer 1 Chaos Warriors all over again, except this time they are not even a pre-order DLC.
@@ja3044 It's turn 15 for weshesh. Turn 30 for shekelesh. More waves until 140. Think Lukka turn up turn45.
CA really screwed up with them, they could have recreated the Apocalypse hype Attila delivered with the Sea People, but from what I see they're very shallow compared to how Attila's Huns were presented.
More than anything else, I just hope they will make the Sea Peoples playable, maybe with a unique horde playstyle. Making a game about the Bronze Age Collapse without allowing us to play the iconic vikings of the mediterranean is just BS.
From what chsrobbie was saying it's hard to expand the map below or to the left since the map coordintes start at 0,0 - expanding to the right or just expanding and changing the coordinates wouldn't be difficult though.
Namman dlc for Tw three kingdoms was an map expansion dlc
Yeah, but you have to pay for an incomplet map. If you want a complete map you have to pay. No only you país 60 euros for an incomplete map, you need to pay more if you realli want it to be as you initally expected.
The bronze age without Greece or the Babylonians is a husk of the Bronze Age
I'm waiting for a bronze age mod for medieval II. That's what we need.
We should actually be very thankful now that they decided to make TW:Pharao, and that that's the game that is now being ruined by CA's policies and troubles.
This way Empire 2 or Medieval 3 will hopefully get the love and attention they deserve, without the WH engine. I'd rather wait longer for Empire 2 or Medieval 3 then see it ruined by current state CA.
It’s not even a glorified saga. It’s just a saga without the name because it has negative connotations.
I’m really worried about the future of Total War. CA seems to be in financial trouble.
Really don't understand why they won't include Assyria, Babylon as they were some of greatest powers of the Bronze Age, even Sumeria and Akkad. Ah well let's hope the Bronze Age mod scratches the itch.
I may miss remember but didnt Total War Warhammer 2 expanded the map? I rember them adding parts of the Badlands in the east after 2 years or so.
I will probably buy it in two years and just use some mods
A very insightful video, Terminator! Well done! Glad that you didn't blame the DEV Team as they probably did their best with the limited, scant resources they had AND are probably disappointed in the final game as well. Having just returned recently from a "bucket list" trip to Egypt (which was amazing btw), I was really excited and looking forward to getting my hands on "Pharaoh"! BUT given the high price tag and lack of important other Bronze Age civilization at release, I will probably wait for a future Steam sale to get the game at a more realistic price point. Thank god for the Age of Bronze mod which is awesome to play and more important, may be getting more factions to play in the future. Here's hoping in the future, the GREAT modding community out there will be able to develop faction mods for "Pharaoh" to enable it to become the Total War game we all expected! Cheers!
Thank you for bringing up the point about moders doing all the work that should’ve been in the bace game for free.
Yup. Lack of Mesopotamia and Greece is going to really hurt this game for me. Since the game was announced, I've never once believed that it's the next "MAJOR" historical. There has been ZERO marketing for this game too.
EDIT: I haven't been in CA's creator program for a while, so I'm going in completely blind.
Have you heard any news that CA may be working on a new engine for Total War? I feel like that is what we need at this point but I don’t know if they have the resources for such an investment.
I’ve heard rumors yep that the next big game will be on a new engine
I like the game from what I’ve seen, but I will buy it and it’s 4 DLC for about 60€, not 100€ (Can’t get over how crazy it is to commit to 4 DLC on presale)
Good that you are pointing out the exclusion Mesopotamia
But we have to rely on modders....what else can we do? CA SHOULD expand it into the Bronze Age. Not the modders in that way.
But wait: 4:33 - To have 'full freedom what they would do' so that means that plans for CA Sofia to expand the game is restricted in some way and therefore they are relying on the modders. At one glance, I see this is as good news to expand the map. Just expand it. I will not settle with a half finished Bronze Age game. Modders do your magic please. At the same time, its a bit of a bad thing because then why are they creating the 'ultimate bronze age experience' IF THERE IS NO INTENTION TO EXPAND IT!
It may be a red flag Termi...what else can I do? I'm no modder, and this would ironically be the total war game that has FULL modding tools, that allows for full scale modding. Very ironic.
Shame we never got that with Empire, Rome II and Napoleon.
Seriously. Just read the early access forums on steam the feedback is all: Add Mesopotamia!
Look at me, I like Warhammer. I want Ind, Nippon, Korea etc. Never gonna happen. Modders HAD to step up and add it.
CA Sofia is the most competent total war dev team out there and it needs more support and needs more budget/resources.
Its OK guys, there is Bronze Age TW mod for Rome ❤
It incluides Mesopotamia, and is for free.
That mod is a thousand times better than all these saga BS. It would be cool to have another bronze age for medieval ii 😎
Didn't they expand the map in 3k with the furious wild DLC?
The only Total War I bought it was Rome 2 but only after 6 years from release when the game had upon it 21 patches. So it was not a half game like all total wars games on release time. I never understand why people preorder games
Besides that, the historical accuacy of the game is like if I explain a bunch of high schoolers what the bronze age was like and make a game about it. I posted this somewhere else and people just started shitting on me while they literaly knew nothing but about this time period. They were using historical data for their arguments about Egypte during the old and middle kingdom while this game is set about 1000 years after the hight of the old kingdom... It seems people just don't know anything about this time period, which I get, A LOT happens and it's mostly puzzled together so it can be confusing. So that doesnt help with the development since the love for the bronze age is already quite niche and most people that do care about it actually know too much about it to even look at a game like this in a historical sense. It's laughable how this game is setting up Tausret as a character and having the entire egyptian desert being inhabited with outposts and settlements (wtf were they thinking??). Baiting people into the game with having Rameses as a character, while Merneptah's FATHER was Rameses II, the most well known Egyptian pharaoh ISNT EVEN IN THE GAME....... Actually now that I think about it, the game is set during the fall of the bronze age, it isnt even a bronze age game. The game is actually set closer to the birth of Christ (year 0) than the time period in which the great piramids were build. The game is almost set in the iron age if you want to paint it in a REALLY bad light...
I mean the Games Map ends were Troys Map ends. I hope they will "fuse" them together like WH.
We'll probably never get another bronze age game from CA again so it's a shame this isn't seeming to be well made. I hope greece will be in it, it plays such a huge role in egypts future. This also has me worried this is the end of total war. The saga games failing and being abandoned within a year. With the backlash of WH3 and the disrespect to it's community. To CA cancelling games and jobs being lost. With modders having to add simple features to make the games fun. You can already see pharaoh won't sell well so total war could be the next cut game as every franchise comes to a end.
Drop base down to 29.99. Each DLC costing 14.99. Total spending 89.95 which is around what the dynasty edition costs. Wait and the 2.99 blood dlc
Totally this. And the last news are not encouraging: today we learned that the job cuts WILL indeed also affect Total War teams. Don't want to be a doomsayer, but I wouldn't be surprised - I mean, AT ALL - if they shut the doors on Total War in a few months, thus ending the series. They had a whole decade to turn things around, but they didn't, so perhaps it's game over.
I had a feeling we were getting a video today.
The spatial scope of the game is a design and not a budget decision. Zoom out and let the same number of regions/provinces cover a larger part of the world. CAs decision to limit the games map to the eastern Mediterranean coast, Anatolia and Egypt is so baffling.
I wonder if they will resort to stealing assets from the mods.
It has become an "industry standart" for big companies in other areas.
Thanks. Pre-ordered Dynasty Edition in May, didn't get to play the early access due to CA / Xsolla stuff up. So I haven't played the game yet but if this proves to be correct .. I'm gutted.
I can't believe they didn't just do "Total War: Bronze Age" with all of the relevant areas. It's a popular area of study. I think a true TW Bronze Age experience would be successful despite the extra resources it would need to achieve it.
Agree with all you have said snd again excellent review .I. used to look forward to new historical games from CA and was a passionate supporter of the Studio,sadly those days are gone😢
GREAT VIDEO. Boo. Guess I'll continue playing Shogun 2.
I’m still not entirely sure whether to buy it or not. I’m still on the fence. But I’m definitely going to wait until the reviews and stuff come out before deciding whether to get it or not.
The game is 100% a Saga title and the £49.99 price tag is hefty for a game that is only set in one region. At least Troy wasn’t as expensive.
This is the first game where I’m weary of buying within the Total War realm.
The only total war games I don't own are 3K, Troy, and soon to be Pharoah, lol. I have been playing Attila, Shogun 2, and Medieval 2 for years and years.. looks like I will continue to do so
Why not 3K? It's incredible. Actually narrative campaigns with intelligent campaign AI and good diplomacy. One of the better TW experiences. Records mode plays fine to get rid of the OP heroes, or you can use mods to nerf them so they can't kill literally hundreds of soldiers solo.@@TheOneTrueFett
@@SenpaiTorpidDOW I did actually buy 3k, I checked. I just forgot I refunded it within 2hrs, lol. It's not my style of total war, I'm a medieval / rome / attila / shogun/ empire, guy. The whole vibe with 3k , stuff like Troy, and now this Pharoah, aren't what I liked about total war at all. It's like they're trying to market to a different customer base than customers like me.. who first played total war from a rome tw pc gaming mag demo disk and fell in love with it.
So what im thinking is: why is no other company jumping in the gap that CA left? Like, there are thousands of us still playing the classic total wars made more than 10 years ago. Of course it is still difficult to make a total war like game from scratch, but with the stronger computers and better game making technology, it should be doable.
There will be no ships in the game? Not even a simple canoe crossing the Nile?
Things could have been so much different if they just kept Pharaoh in the Saga brand, charge it like one and tease the idea of a future Saga with Arabia and Mesopotamia in a future game and then merge all the maps like with Troy like the Warhammer games. But no, they ended up making a full historical that crearly doesnt have the scope of one at full price that basically no one was asking instead of making Med3/Rome3/Emp2/WW1 that would have sell tons of copies because thats what the community has been asking for years. With Pharaoh, the DLC policy of TWWH3 and Hyenas there clearly is some really poor decision making in CA/Sega
make this game 60$ troy 60$ and make one saga game for mezapotamia and us players WILL HAVE BRONZE AGE TOTAL WAR FOR 180$
Haha yep, and still built in Warhammer 2 engine. Don’t most mainline Total War games get an updates engine made for it? Oh ya, I forgot these are saga titles trying to be sold at AAA game prices built on old engines. $60 DLC for Troy. Any takers??
I just hope that the "big" total war will be what we want but my hopes are not high right now
"ca has never expanded the physical map of a total war threw a dlc before" fall of the samurai had its map size increased a lot compared to shogun 2 default map its night and day either way this game is gonna be sad
I am glad they gave us the pre-order early access weekend so I was 100% sure I was correct to refund my pre-order.
I suppose the lack of a DLC roadmap pre-launch is to be expected, as they want people to feel the dynasty edition is a deal or feel some FOMO, but man is it shady. If it's just unlocking a few factions from the base game, like Troy, peeps gonna be pissed.
Pharaoh is going to be CA's EA Anthem.
And all of the "effective" financial managers will blob about "strategy games are in the past now" because they can't see anything except their financial statements...
pathetic. That's what you get when you don't listen to your customers and fans.... for 8 years.
Well, Korean peninsula was depicted in Three Kingdoms, but that meant nothing. We all knew this will be the fact, simply could not let go of the hope.
because they planned to fill that region with dlcs. But that didnt happen
CA sure seems to like stepping on rakes. The hell is going on with upper management over there?
I think that using moders like this is disgusting, also i know that lot of people don't care about warhammer but it was game that brought me to the total war games and i hope that next games isn't going to be just money printing
Perfectly acceptable to advertise an ultimate Bronze Age ‘experience’ as long as you are fighting in the Bronze Age. Any game could offer the ultimate WW2 experience while staying in the European theatre.
There’s enough drama around at the moment without piling it on.
Yeah, well said brother. 100% agree.
I think that Pharaoh is an interesting game, both in terms of campaign mechanics and historical setting.
It's just not worth 60 euros/dollars, or whatever your currency is.
I decided to preorder it nonetheless, because I want to support the work of Sofia's team. These guys seem legit and passionate, and this is unfortunate that their game is getting released in the heat of SoC (I boycotted this one) and Hyenas debacle.
Do whatever you want, but I wouldn't encourage with money bad business practices, greediness, bad designed games with lack of freedom of choice to the player, etc... Encouraging all that is the reason TW became so disappointing.
@@mkNf-uk8py I completely respect your opinion.
@@Chtigga That's something nice to say, thank you. I also respect your opinion and I hope you enjoy your pharaoh with whatever it has that I can't see how could I ever enjoy (or not get tired, for lack of content, in a couple of campaigns).
Take care 🙂👍🏼
CA being scummy is something I'm not surprised about given the fiasco that was Warhammer 3's launch not to mention the recent price hike with Shadow And Change. That will the recent cancelation of Hyenas which was a massive money sink means that CA Sofia is a company that is functionally a sacrificial lamb subcompany that was not given the money they needed to build the game they wanted and thus we get an overpriced subpar project as the consumers.
Despicable this is the kind of behavior I expect from EA and Activision not from CA; Pharoah is a game that will likely go down as the worst in the series which considering Thrones of Britannia exists made that a hard thing. The number one concern I have is that this may deny us a proper Bronze Age Total War entirely, also the fact that they functionally shifting responsibility to the modders... In the words of the Shogun II battle announcer: SHAMEFUL DISPLAY!
That said while this game definitely is a hard pass on my part I hope that CA learns from this chain of failures, or Sega notices that surge of mistakes and fires the bad upper management for their own bottom-line, either option would do. My primary concern is what is going to get cut financially from the cancelation of Hyenas and the bomb that is going to be Pharoah its not looking good. That said while CA's side is looking horrible the modders still continue to impress, I again don't think they should have to be doing all of CA's work for them but that isn't going to stop me using their content and giving it the due respect it deserves, if it was an option I'd pay the modders instead of CA at this point because honestly they are doing the hard work for them.
Kinda why I was hesitant on buying not much factions and limited map size
I am going to be sitting on the sidelines before making a purchasing decision on this one. I love the Egyptian theme but doubt the quality of the game will be what I am looking for. Troy did not give me the Ancient Greek fix I was looking for either and was disappointed. I might be better off looking at the old city builder from Impressions Games.
As a 20 years old historical TW fan starting with Shogun and Medieval I, what I find really unbelievable is how little these people can learn from past mistakes. And not even very old mistakes. Let's take Thrones of Britannia, something like "we're gonna remove Agents, de-power all religious aspects and completely cut off SCANDINAVIA from campaign map. What could possibly go wrong with that ? Fans don't realize it yet, but they're gonna love it". SURPRISE, SURPRISE. ToS was a F**** huge failure, even if it was something RE-CALLED by the fan base for years (as somekind of Viking Invasion TW 2 we were waiting for since decads). I mean, you have to be a F genius to f up something like that. Now, and I WONDER why, speaking about Age of Bronze, I'm getting quite a flashback about it.
I cannot believe I supported this company all the way since Shogun 1... I spent thousands of hours in Total War games... especially Rome 1, Shogun 2, and Empire... but my god this company will not get a single penny from me anymore. I don't understand why eventually all big studios seem to decline once they reach a certain size and just stop making good games. But my pain limit has been reached and my patience has run out.
Since Rome 2 it has been painfully obvious how broken their games are, how poorly even the most basic game mechanics like battles, AI, settlement management, diplomacy etc. are designed and how they haven't been improved for well over a decade now. It's shameful behavior to ask people to buy their products even though they know it's bad quality. I will never forget when that statement was made "buy this dlc or we will stop supporting the game" ...
I don't recognize CA anymore honestly. There was a time when it was obvious they had very passionate and capable developers who wanted to make a good game and this was when they got financially rewarded for it... but what they are doing nowadays with their low quality and broken games, the horrible dlc policies and pricing ... it's enough.
Luckily, the older I get the more serious I get about these things. I've stopped buying games from Bethesda, EA, Ubisoft, and Activision/Blizzard years ago and it seems CA and SEGA have now joined the club of greedy and shallow studios/publishers.
I am so angry... I was really hoping after Warhammer 3 they would announce that they have been working on a major historic title for well over 3 years... but turns out there was nothing after all.
Bye CA. I was their biggest fan for so many years... but no thank you. I will not spend any more money on a broken and boring game.
i have been waiting for an awesome historical total war for 10 years now. Now we get this fml
We cant really say this hasn't happened before, afterall there was that sleezeball trying to sell the advances they've had with AI during the Rome 2 launch.
This is just another justified reason why I have serious Trust issues tho. There's been way too many marketing maneuvers trying to sell a shit sandwich over the years, and CA is capitalizing on their loyal consumers to not have a flop...
Meanwhile, RUclipsr's like yourself will guarantee that Flop because we cant let it slide.
Can we get a total war Rome mod to this and and simply enjoy the updated look and feel.
Sad to say, maybe CA realized they have failed when a Rome 2-modder made a better Bronze age TW than they did...
Seeing how important modders have been for the continued popularity of TW-games, its a bit disheartening that CA apparently are jealous and antagonistic towards modders, rather than embrace and support them. Its like they barely tolerate modding, rather than welcome it. Why??
So about the future of TW...
Back in the days before Shogun 2 and Rome 2 came out, I remember speculating about the "next TW-titles"...
Already then I wanted late medieval/Pike&Shot and Victorian era TW, even though we just had gotten Empire and Napoleon. Empire was so undercooked and Napoleon was very narrow in scope.
I was so disappointed when I went on forums to see that majority of fans predicted they would do Rome 2 and maybe Shogun 2 first. (S2 did give us a tease for that Victorian era TW though, which only proved to me that rail roads, rapid-firing guns and long range-fire support can fit quite easily into the "Total war-formula")
So back in 2010-ish I accepted that those games would probably come out first. But then I was hopeful that afterwards, surely, CA would make games for the settings I wanted. Like, what else could they possibly do? I read in forums that CA could go for China and east-Asia, Indian sub-continent (in an era were there were several factions in that area), and bronze age-Egypt and Mesopotamia (though they messed that one up lol).
I discounted all of those as "lame" options which surely would not make for cooler TW-games than Pike&Shot or Victorian TW! I didn't know a lot about history in those parts of the world back then, so I had a misconception that there were not a lot of material to take from in terms of factions and unit-variety. Just a bunch of half-naked dudes hacking at each other with khopeshes. Why would CA even go for that?
The only reason I could think of was that CA wanted to be "boring and reasonable adults" and therefore wanted to avoid just making the game people wanted! (I was like 17, gimme a break :D)
Now, many years later, we still have no Victorian or Pike&Shot-game. I am almost bemused that CA has actually been making almost all the options I took for "worst case-scenarios". Unlikely, almost convulsive, options for TW-titles which I thought CA would only choose if they for some reason were desperate to avoid making Pike&SHow/Victorian-TW. Guess that showed me, eh?
Now CA has almost scraped the barrel for all those other options which I didn't think they would go for. So what is next? Pre-colonial america? Indian sub-continent? Scandinavian middle ages...? Will they finally make the hugest, most epic historical campaign map ever, and then use it to make Mongolian empire-TW...?
How long can CA realistically postpone making either Pike&Shot or Victorian era game??
Now I feel like more important questions are: Do we even want CA to make those games..? Will they drive themselves into the ditch before they get a chance to do so?
They only had to make Medieval 3/Empire 2 and it would be selling like crazzzzy, instead they decided to f around these Saga games that doesn't satisfy anyone's need