Total War's Survival Demands a New Masterpiece
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 сен 2024
- Do what I do and get amazing discounts on the games you want on Instant Gaming, and use my link to support the channel: www.instant-ga...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't forget to like, comment, and subscribe to help me befriend the algorithm ;)
JOIN THE DISCORD: / discord
What does it take to bring the Total War series back in full? Does CA have a plan, does one even exist to bring the series back to what the original historical fans loved and supported the series for for over a decade? In my ways, Total War games continue to hold an immense quality and uniqueness compared to other series, but the problem arises when fans who have stuck with the games and expected not just more - but better - than what they had in the past, are let down. And in many ways, the Total War series since Attila and through the Warhammer series has not just stagnated, but taken steps away from the original depth and in certain cases simplicity of design, yet a design that was both straightforward and deep. That's not to say the current games aren't great in their own ways, but that's just the thing - for me, "in their own ways" isn't exactly good enough, and I want those deeper empire-managing mechanics and a sense of groundedness and realism back into the series.
In this video, we go through what Creative Assembly has to do to make the perfect Total War game, because I believe that CA can't afford too many future flops like Pharaoh and Troy were. And the sad part is, the company behind those games, CA Sofia, actually know what they're doing. It seems to me like Sofia just needs more time and funding to create the game they envisioned from the get-go instead of having to spend a year or two fixing the game they originally shipped, a game which if it had been given the time it needed, could've been a breakaway success from the start.
But what do you think about Total War's future, and does it need a masterpiece to succeed? Let me know in the comments, and make sure to leave a like and subscribe to the channel! :)
#totalwar #totalwarmasterpiece #totalwar2024 #totalwar2025
Participate in my giveaway on Instant Gaming to win ANY game of your choice! www.instant-gaming.com/en/giveaway/andystake
But if you don't win or don't wanna wait, you can still get amazing discounts on the games you want, and use my link to support the channel: www.instant-gaming.com/?igr=andysinstantgaming
Empire 2 or Medieval 3 are essential
when done right!
The former. There are more than enough melee combat games.
Empire 2 for sure. With DLC to take it out in directions undone yet, like pike and shotte and Victorian era
Nope. Wont save them.
Only a 30 years war can
They can start with a Medieval 2 remaster
and actually add a multiplayer campaign with it
Medieval 3 but made actually good? I know, its quite a lot to ask from any gaming corporate to make a new GOOD game these days, but who knows...
@@patrikmokos9864 WAY TOO MUCH to ask of Creative Assembly
@@Ryan-ed1lq yeah but I mean lately it seems it is too much to ask ANY corporation with legacy title on record for an actually good game.
@@patrikmokos9864 Tragically true.
Number 7: City viewer, i want to see might of my civilization. Huge cities with expensive buildings.
Pharaoh dynasties was supposed to have it but due to time and budget was cut
I never understand why people want this. I used this "feature" like three times when I was a child and since then it never interested me again.
I found Rome a city of bricks and left it a city of marbles… That’s why.
Now, every city in every region is reduced to the same buildings, represented by unattractive icons, which fails to reflect how cities actually developed.
City viewer could be implemented without a loading screen but CA would have to innovate for that not chipping away.
Andy one thing I would correct you on: Medieval 2 DID NOT have better modding support. The reason Medieval 2 was so moddable is not due to the modding support from CA but due to the fact that it's an old game, using old technologies that don't require high computing power.
The reasons why newer games are harder to mod are:
1. CA unwillingness to provide in-house tools as is (likely due to the way those tools are tied to their development processes and can't be easily decoupled)
2. Because modern games require much more effective computation. Processing text files and images is not as e efficient as processing binary files in a specific (RAM and game engine code friendly) format.
The takeaway is that don't attribute Medieval 2 modding capabilities to CA. They did less for that than they do currently for games like WH and Pharaoh. But they can do much more, that is true
@@victimized1 thanks for the clarification, you’re entirely correct! Forgot to indeed mention that games were simply easier to mod back in the day because they are so much more complex now with way more layers to get through and «crack». I just wish we had better official support, I don’t know why it’s so hard for them to give
@@AndysTake I can see at least three reasons why it's so hard for them:
1. Lack of desire to deal with legal issues in case LotR, GoT and other third party IPs appear in big numbers (especially on officially moderated platforms like Steam Workshop)
2. Imperfect workflow, where their in-house tools are too deeply integrated with other internal resources that they cannot share (simplest example is some in-house tools might require connection to a central server that collects bug reports. They obviously cannot provide access to that). It can also include documentation that contains sensitive information that they don't want to share.
3. They might think that effort is not worth it. Making the tools community-ready requires allocation of programmers, meaning those programmers cannot be allocated to working on games and fixing bugs. The decision to release all tools also implies additional costs for paying developers involved in the process.
I have two questions:
1. Do we even think they still have the capability to produce a masterpiece?
2. Do we think they want to create a truly historical Total War?
My fear is that the decision makers at CA realized that the Warhammer IP made them so much cash, why even bother making anything else? You don't have to are about naval battles, a smart AI, complex settlement management, cultures, historic accuracy and all that other stuff... just paint some models, give them some cool spells and voila.
I will believe it when it happens - if it ever happens. I am not sure I trust CA enough to produce anything good anymore.
They would have to completely change every aspect of their games... the settlement management needs complete overhaul and added complexity, so does the building and province management. The AI needs a complete overhaul. There needs to be more long term motivation to play a campaign. Let's be honest, 90% of the time you have loads of fun for the first 50 turns until you have established yourself on the map and cannot be challenged by the AI anymore and then it just becomes a question of how many more provinces do you want before you quit the campaign that you've already won anyway.
The game just needs a lot more complexity. The buildings are way too few, too generic, every city has the same exact stuff. The battles are awful - especially sieges.
There is just so much wrong with these games... unless they do a complete reset - which they won't - I don't see how this gets fixed.
I mean, that's what players pay for. It's them who show the company that players want more no-brainer stuff in the fantasy setting over a well thought-out historical setting. It's not company's mistake they listen to what players pay for. You saw the stats yourself, people prefer WH3 over everything else.
What I'm saying is players should really higher their standards and not buy games just because it's their beloved setting or because it's wrapped in a shiny package
As the friend here says it depend a lot on the community. If you really look into it, newest games from legacy titles are mostly objectivly BAD just endorsed by whales and fanbois.
You could take the newes call of duty, assasins creed, battlefield, civilisation, etc. Change it title and nobody is gonna buy it. People just love to buy a piece of that brown thing thing from the bottom wrapped in a box with logo that used to be a real MASTERPIECE about 15 years ago. Amd they wont ever change it because they got enough people who will buy that box for 50, 60, 70 $/€ or more.
@@victimized1 I don't disagree, although I would say we don't know how high the demand for a truly historical TW actually is because it has been so long since we've had one. I mean the demand only really went down because they introduced all these weird fantasy elements like 3K an Troy. So the argument is kind of upside down in a way. I would argue a GOOD historical game could outcompete the fantasy stuff. But if they keep delivering trash historical games, then obviously people will go for Warhammer
@@patrikmokos9864 oh totally agree... I myself made an entire video on that topic hahaha.... it's just sad. Rome 1 was the game that got me into PC gaming...but since Shogun 2, I've really felt let down by CA
@@TiGGowich for me it was empire that got me. Im really into history stuff and mostly imperial era. If CA made a GOOD empire 2, I would buy it even for full price. But it would have to be Tatal war: Empire II, not Total War: Empire -1
What I don't get is that I can spend 10 minutes on Total War's Reddit or various community forums, and you will find so many amazing ideas for improving the game which wouldn't take a complete overhaul of their game engine... yet CA keeps impressing with not making any of those changes and instead reguarly dumbing down their games and removing complexity. It's so strange...
Welcome to modern gaming. You must be new.
Oh and the fact that if they do not get the aproval from GW then CA can not put anything into tveir games. They even have to send reports for their patches to them! 💀
Strangely enough, in the early CA games there are more online players, Empire, Napoleon, Medieval 2
CA can release a Empire 2 in the engine of Napoleon today, and it will sell as hot cakes at a fire sale at full price...... It is just total mismanagement at CA drive by short time revenue...... leaving Historical players behind ( that made the series) even as they said : no worry we now are doing War hammer and wil not forget our historical fans .....we can al see how that turned out .......this is not rocked science....
If CA released Med 3, crusades would be a UI screen mechanic where you click a button to appoint a crusade leader via another UI screen after spending 10 intensely boring minutes wading through meaningless 2% bonus traits. Then a few turns later you get a pop up notification " Successful Crusade!". Celebrate wildly as your faction receives +5% religious piety bonus for 10 turns.
City viewer was the most immersive feature seeing your city grow. Damn I miss this one
3 kingdoms is a historical game where a some parts of it's events are historical fiction but the main events are 100% historical. I would love to see a new expansion set in the date of 207 AD where the battle of red cliff started or simply a sequel set just before the Liu Bei entering the south of China.
Probably too late. They realised too long ago they could release unfinished games and that modders would do all the balancing and finishing touches for free, while their loyal customer base still paid up. Took a while but people are on to them now. I was disgusted when they did fake claims against a youtuber putting time and money into shutting people up instead of doing what they used to do and just make decent games.
Even to this day volound is hated by the modern total war community, and he's right about total war.
To me it just shows that players want depth. I repeat "depth". Not accessibility, or dumb down mechanics : depth.
I would start with the remasters of Medieval 2 and Empire. Then making sequels. What needs to be done:
-better battles
-everything you said in your list
-actually good AI
-more paradox like diplomacy
-being able to move the army without general, and being able to have as many armies as we want. We all know this limit was because CA didn't want to mess with AI, but this limit is bad for gameplay.
-CA needs to add features to their games while kepping the mechanics from the past, not changing the "highlight" feature every game ( diplomacy in 3k, materials in Troy, etc.)
I would personally try to experiment with "real-time" ( the system that is in PDX games) strategies, instead of turn-based games, but I know it can be controversial topic for many long-lasting fans.
But given the SEGA survey, I don't have a much hope for a big historical game. CA seems to be too much focused to making fans of IPs playing their games on license, rather than making the games that made the initial success for a studio.
I like your thinking, but Im afraid of that irritation and frustration an AI one-unit-armies raidings would bring me in real time...
I know I'm probably in a minority here, but I like the idea of army size being tied to population. Many ask for 40+ units in their armies, but I think it's about right at 20. Your units will be more valuable to you.
Just go ahead and put Andy in as Creative Director for CA
I think total war could take a lot from ck3, and creating a large scale ‘Total War: 1066” etc, simplifying the boring micro-mechanics, and expanding on the macros that are fun and exciting such as diplomacy, combat and troop. This would define the genre
Or a 30 years war
Here is my take Andy. I think some one high up in CA is waiting until he/she is about to retire and thus wanting to have more money in their bank account, they will release Med 3 or Empire 2. If CA doesn't release Med 3 or Empire 2 they are dumb.
The restriction on construction in cities should be removed and returned as in Medieval 2
And also the use of diplomats is a must for me, not just magically contacting everyone in one turn.
I like how in EU4 you have to take forts in order to even enter certain regions. That is very realistic and something that would be interesting to implement like having total control of which areas you can build forts and extend the range they protect or block a certain region that can be invested in to get bigger or with bonuses with mountains, rivers, etc.
Yeah, gameplaywise its also much better if there is need to acctually siege stuff and you can't just assault and take everything instantly like in TW.
If you only focus on Warhammer, then this is the result. Not to say nothing new has come in historicals, but it’s been so minimal I can’t even remember the last time we had something major historically. (Excluding Pharaoh)
Announce something CA!
And total war mods ability is not I think going to be any easy in the future. Getting full mod overhauls is impossible now anyway.
Empire 2, Napoleon 2 Rome 3 and Atila 2... Yes please lol
30 years war when?!?
Even of they make an medieval III, empire 2 or a Rome III, I don't trust them to do it right, im pretty sure there will be Witchers and dragons for the crusades
I would like to see Empire 2 as a next historical game. As for the fantasy section, I really, really need Lord of the Rings Total War, although I don't think they can afford that one.
The diplomacy system is bang on. I remember Napoleon, which is the darling of good total war games. In NTW, as Britain, I destroyed and liberated Spain. Not to my surprise they declared war on me two turns later, why?!? I have destroyed your armies and economy, what in the name of Grouchy did Spains AI think that declaring war again would have been a good idea.
I like how fighting in medieval 2 was always a bit slow . Units disnt evaporate with 2x hits , so Medieval 2 remake for me
Creative Assembly: victorian era ? medieval period ?... all i hear is warhammer total war 4, with a $50 DLC "sh1t for the sh1t god"
Enough of Shogun, Britannia and Napoleonic Italy or Spain - we need a game with a world map in hundreds of regions.
CA is mentally incapable of thinking of a world map for total war as money is money because hey why make an unique game with new mechanics, better ai, naval battles and the removing of the retarded province system from Rome II that still pisses me off as the Ai loves back capping and breaks emersion (Also for the love of Christ CA fix Atilla for god sake!)
Honestly, I'm kind of over wanting a medieval 3. I'm not sure I trust CA not to mess it up.
Just give me an M2 with updated graphics and I'll be good to go.
Medieval 3 with some abilities from pharaoh would be amazing
It’ll either be Med 3, ww1
/Victoria or 40k, either options I’m both worried but excited
With what they said could be a star wars game or 40k could be released could be amazing with the current engine as it works well with large units and ranged units.
I would actually argue that the future of the Total War series lies in the fantasy, because the biggest selling point of the series is the battles, which calls for a more arcady/streamlined approach, especially on the campaign map. Reason why Paradox titles don't have huge real time battles is because they are for the spreadsheet (autoresolve) people and CA know that if they made the campaign map stuff too complex, they'd scare away the battle people! However, they can compete in fantastical spectacle of the battles - hence why Warhammer was such a success. Imo, they'd have much more success with something like Lord of the Rings/Game of Thrones Total War than really deep Empire 2 or perhaps even Medieval 3.
I disagree completely, there's no reason why you need to make arcady and shallow battles for fantasy games for TW to be good. Look at the Divide and Conquer mod for Med 2 which is LOTR. Those battles are not arcady and do not involve magic and yet are incredible because of the depth and realism they provide which is weird to say but true. Don't lower standards for CA, they can do both and succeed or they can continue on as they are and fail. If you lower standards CA will meet them.
@@brendanfeely7390 Arcady doesn't have to mean dumbed down and I meant it more in terms of heightening the spectacle for which the titles with a fantasy slant, like mythological Troy, Three Kingdoms, Warhammer are naturally more accommodating towards. You know, "gamifying" the realism. Like, do I really want to think about marrying out Arwen to the Tooks to save my economically failing Rivendell? That kind of depth is best left to the Paradox titles:)
We need something like "Feudal Total War"
Thank you for you hard work
İ must say this Total War disappionted to historical game fans but this team maked so big historical games and you know these games
total war need to bring back general speeches before battle
Empire II.
Im so excited for Roads to Power. Crusader Kings has been my top game for the last few years. Paradox has been doing a great job.
With CA on the other hand I just can't get into the newer TW games. We NEED a Medieval 3 or some other historical title on the newer engines. I just can't understand why they ignore the fans and come up with the most random, niche and disappointing projects to work on. They have the manpower, budget, tech and the talent to make something great but they choose to forsake their fans and put all their eggs in the Warhammer basket. Honestly, after over 2500hrs between the 3 Warhammer games I am completely over the fantasy stuff. Bring back what the fans want!
I agree. I mean, paradox still has that terrible dlc policy of releasing basically a mobile game and then making it into a pc game with 3729729 dlcs for 20€ each. But thats probably the only thing worth of criticising. I espetially have to shout out to the paradox's stance to its community. They actually listen to the people and try to improve, dont ingore or even asaault for an objective critique.
Ck franchises are all times favorite for me, I only knew that ck existed in 2012 but addicted to me like daily play, on the other hand, I played TW since 2004 but yeah, when they became more arcade and no naval, I quickly bored for later games, but for Ck or EU franchises, I even still have saves from 2016 , over 8 yrs saves 😂,
I was against warhammer 3 but over the years and with modding scene I started to appreciate it. I do agree that Total War genre needs to return to historical age. Those were the only games I played. I think their new title should be Medieval 3 TW. Bring back crusades becase that period was wild
I think the most importantly any new TW game should aim to resolve the tension between "battle"- and "campaign"-gameplay. Right now you essentially have two opposing game systems working against each other instead of being complementary. What do I mean by this? Well, if you play “good” on the campaign map you probably won't have to play any "cool" battles since your superior manoeuvring of forces, your effective diplomacy, your efficient army built-up and all that stuff will put you in a position where most fights are auto-resolvable. On the other hand any mistake, challenge or difficulty on the campaign side of things can be easily mitigated by just playing the battles yourself. We all know how cool it is to defend a small city with a tiny garrison…for the first time, but when you have to repeat it like 20ty times over the cause of one campaign its much less exciting ( - even ignoring cheese strats). This often leads to campaigns culminating after to first 20-40 turns and after that it’s just a mob-up duty for a vaguely experienced player.
I also believe TW would really profit from a province/ movement system like seen in most Paradox games. It wouldn’t even need to be real time to already greatly help to improve the scope of the map while also leading to more focused battles (with larger forces involved).
Anyhow, if they make anything named Medieval 3 it will probably a success - even if nothing is changed from current TW games.
THEY HAAAVE TO and i mean HAAAVE TO.send out medieval 3 first.
They seriously lack a bit of brain power considering there is a serious damand for medieval games,it arguably being the most known part of history to us humans and the most favorite,i think that will be quite a beneficial scheme to work for in terms of revenue .after that i want Empire 2,you dont have to be a gunpowder era fan to enjoy this era.
Serious demand = not even half as high as your average TWW dlc demand.
Sad but true
I would consider napoleon to essentially be Empire 2.
We need a Victoria game that actually works. Make it great and you'll win over all of the disenfranchised paradox players. Include a comprehensive expansion that focuses on the US civil war. It's a great opportunity. Don't be afraid of optics and political correctness. Make it good and not cartoonish. They can keep most of the general/army system but allow for individual units with lower-level officers as well. Allow us to manage the army organization similar to Grand Tactician and CA wins. Do it!
Looks more like fantasy is the way to go with total war. It was the biggest success for the company
MTW-3 or Empire 2 must be the next two game to develop.
Can’t agree more. They have lost their way a bit, hopefully they can return to form. I’m sure they will be rewarded with players returning to the series if they return to what made it popular in the first place!
I think the biggest issues for total war are its continued use on this particular engine, how they moved towards "unit health" all the way back in rome II but especially in new titles, unit health i feel makes the game feel so arcady, like watching my matchlocks in warhammer fire volly after volly at another humanoid race and watch them soak up ammo and yet nobody actually dies because unit health high. the combat system in earlier titles was so much better where they have 1 hp and the thing that kept the unit alive was their armor, shield and defense skills. I want a volly of longbowmen to kill a good number of unarmored peasents on the FIRST VOLLY, it shouldnt take 3 vollies against lightly armored troops to start seeing their unit numer go down (even rome and attila had this issue), also the campaigns are just arcadey, paradox games thrive because they attempt to bring a sense of realism, CA abanonded realism in favor of "flair"
Attila and shogun 2 have the best ost
I always thought that creative assembly will make medieval 3 when they are in need of success. But if they do mw2 i hope they dont just copy paste medieval 2 with the same factions and time period, the medieval era was so big, there is plenty of room for being creative. In general they are not giving the fan base what they want for years now, no wonder player numbers are declining.
A wishlist from an old player who has been playing all TW games since Shogun 1.
Sequel: Three kingdoms 2, Shogun 3, Medieval 3
New historical: Warring states of Ancient China (Spring-Autumn, seven kingdoms)
Fantasy: Game of the throne, Conan the barbarian, The Knights of the round table
Improve game mechanism: Smaller (yes, smaller) but meaningful map so that late game would be less tedious. Quicker mannual battle in campaign (honestly, how often do you play it mannually and how often do you press the auto-battle button?). Saved setting of deployment. I don't want to mannually deploy a checkerbox formation every single time.
They should go back to a medieval, empire, or mongol total war.
#1 thing that needs to change is the building system. I absolutely hate the 6 buildings to a major city mechanic. Outposts and settlements are cool but due to the loss of the whole building tree means the most fun aspect of city building is gone. Instead replaced by something that feels arcade-y and unnecessarily restricting. I tried the new Pharaoh version and it's just my preference but I was so annoyed by the building system that I just stopped playing, the system does not add anything to the game it just takes away and that's a bad way of making building choices feel important and strategic. It was not only the building system that made me stop but It was in my top 3, alongside bad battles and lack of enthusiasm for the game. I'm probably an outlier but for those who disagree the point I'm making overall is that TW has lost it's sense of empire building and progression in favor of maintinence and dark ages which worked for Attila & Pharaoh but feels overdone at this point.
How about more unit count on real time battle?
More units on battlefield means more epic battles
Less players with low end pcs to play it. I have a very good pc now but I remember playing on the low end one.
More like possibility to choose a prefered number of units in the army and battles in campaign options menu. On a larger scale
@@patrikmokos9864 there is Options menu in settings
Must be a bug rome 2 magic siege weapon I don't remember at all
The missle trails ever since Rome 2 break realism. The new unit models look plastic, combat looks more arcade style in recent games . They toned down the "simulation" feel of Battles ever since Napoleon . Unit health bars look ugly compared to Unit count health as well. Cavalry still charges units and 15% of the unit doesn't even track an enemy .
Missiles always looked ugly. Models were never great tbh. combat looks good, even compared to older ones. And unit health bars are the greates improvement
4:19
The 3 Warhammer games were planned before the release of Total War Warhammer 1 to connect the various races and factions and expand the world map into a bigger sandbox. As long as the series remained successful of course.
I feel better now for the direction of CA than I did a year ago. Before Pharaoh Dynasties, I really asked myself if I want a Medieval 3 or Empire 2, because if those games released in the state CA had been releasing games, then they'd flop and we'd not get a Medieval 4 or Empire 3 for another two decades, or ever.
Now, maybe it could work. I have grown rather tired of this engine however. It's finnicky, unresponsive, and bland in melee combat. I think CA is on the right track in improving their game development, but a new (and working) engine could really go a long way to solidify future development, even streamline it. Perhaps we can get *more* games if the engine is easy to work with.
i might be in the minority here but i would be most excited about a new three kingdoms game ! 🤩
Now, if only they watched these and cared. They clearly have gotten cheaper on everything, and its only going to get worse because the bottom line is all the matters.
Maybe that if Historical Community was not killing each game since Thrones of Britannia before the release, we would have it ?
I mean... Are people aware that ROME II was a complete mess at the release ? WARHAMMER II too ? And so... What people are saying about it today ?
Yeah... Come at me with your hard comments people...
Andy - You are talking about CA - company that has lost creativity decade ago and ask them to make wonder game when they can't even mske decent copy of their own game.
I agree many of your points like all but Attila are just mindless map painting and there is just not anything other interesting hapoenin and politics are better when they are removed for being just horrible. They should consentrate what works these games and it is interesting battles with easy looking but really complex mechanics. Campaign side should remake almost fully. Realtime style movement with turn base building and governing should work (like in Terra Invicta) and they should really make new engine etc. But asking for that feels just naive.
It is still good to try shake dinosaurs leg even we see the meteorite coming. It is a good gesture.
guys i have an idea...rome total war 76
You ask for many games of quality and yet many features. In fairness to Total war we do need to set realistic expectations.
I’d prefer they spend time developing a good Empire 2 than rushing it
Yes. The soundtrack really lost its soul after the Van Dycks left. The games have not been great in themselves since Shogun 2, although Rome 2 does it for me with DEI.
There is no saving total war. It's all spreadsheeting and map-painting. Making a good simulator game would require money and effort that CA don't want to spend when they could just shit out another warhammer game and make bank.
That's also why all of the recent "historical" (from 3K to pharaoh) titles have been dogshit. They're warhammer games with shitty historical facades.
they should stop selling rome 2 mods at full game prices
We need TW Renaissance !!!
Agreed on all accounts.
We need Three Kingdoms 2...
NO ONE EVER SAID
@@lopezlirio4004 I just said it
They stopped the development of the first installment just because they wanted a sequel, which is not coming any time soon sadly.
3k is really famous in Asia, not only china, Southeast Asia and korea too, but you know, problem is most of Asian players just download pirate and play, so yeah concurrent players will low but if you ask players in Asia , they only say Shogun or Three kingdoms,they don’t really know about Rome or warhammer, funny thing is they just only know about warhammer is WH 40k😅
Ya know they could release a total war warhammer 40k
I mean star wars total war would be nice...
Star Trek. You'd have more factions for a start.
Warhammer ruined TW as they alienated their original costumer base and went for the easy money from the geeks who will buy a turd if you put a WH stamp on it.
Shogun 3
Folks gonna buy it anyway becouse no other company make the the same... Plz paradox do a Tw:m3 ;) Manor lord looks good though
Grand Tactician The civil war. I've bought that. It gives me the same feel as older total war. I will never buy a total war game again because CA will never make a game like they used to again.
do nothing right but try everything kinda explain why i havent bought the last 5 or 6 game ...
the new engine introduced in 2013 with rome2 remains garbage .... the older titles have smarter AI, better UI and more unique units... the units have weight and cohesion, something the never titles completely lack ... it needs either a new engine or a revived one and a historical setting like either Rome or Empire if it wants to stand a chance... otherwise ... i will not care what they do with the franchise, i'm still playing Rome1 more often on an old XP, than i do Rome 2 ... the never titles are nothing more than Cossacks with fancier animations... and i don't care about those... real strategist want to reenact real battles ...and not fake dumb hollywood movies
oh boi another empire 2, med 3 propaganda.
Saying that Attila is basically a stand-alone expansion to Rome II completely invalidates anything else you have to say.
No it doesn't. They should've added the improvements of Attila to Rome 2, and made Attila an expansion like Fall of the Samurai is for Shogun 2; same with Empire and Napoleon.
I can not stand the warhammer slander, those games are masterpieces just in a different way
Agreed, a childish way 😂
@@jamesgilhooly7488 explain?
Shogun 3