I don't know what you mean by 'spun out of' as Troy is nothing like WH2 and if you are thinking game engine, then that hasn't really changed since Empire TW. Let's also not forget that the WH trilogy has been the most successful set of games is TW's history. The issue was cost to content disparity which they are dealing with. It's worth remembering that S" was also given away for free.
The fact that no empire 2 or medieval 3 is in the pipeline at all tells me everything I need to know. It's too late to course correct. We are 5-6 years away from seeing meaningful changes to the formula. RIP CA.
It really surprises me that there has been no Medieval 3 based on what we've been told on how much CA has chased short term profits. Everyone wants a Medieval 3 and it should make CA plenty of money. I've no idea why they keep doing nonsense like Pharoah instead.
I wouldn't want an empire 2 or medieval 3 made with the design philosophy they currently have. The issues in Three Kingdoms, Britannia and such are a logical extension of shogun2 and Rome 2 changes.
It really all comes down to this: The Total war series sells VERY well if the game is actually good or even amazing. However not all of those games meet that standard. And what has CA decided to do ? make shorter and worse games just to "sell, sell,sell!" and that business strategy is killing them.
And for Three Kingdoms, perhaps the most complex and fresh entry since the move to stats-based units, their first DLC (after the pre-order dlc) was a period of history that is considered disgraceful in China. Then they proceeded to release a handful of DLCs, somehow never once covering a time period in which the titular Three Kingdoms are already formed ready to undertake the most notable battles from the novel.
Well, not exactly. The old, nuanced combat TW sold well but was a niche genre. I as an old TW fan often joke to myself that for sure as hell CA is going to listen to those WH boys who post poll threads where 4 out 5 options say SOC is worth buying whereas I still pick my DLCs on sale for some of my most favorite TW games rather than blindly buying them all at once. The WH TW community is like something else, they buy DLCs like playing Gacha games. They defend WH1 when WH1 began with 5 factions while we worry about if M3 is going to put any major cultures in DLCs (like Greek states in R2TW). Warhammer and 3K is where TW exploded in popularity, and are much more financially successful for various reasons not related to the quality of the game. Of course they are going to listen to their money makers and exploit them.
Empire Total War was the biggest missed opportunity in my opinion. That's such an incredible and expansive era and they didn't stick with it long enough to reach it's full potential.
it needs a remastered. heck i would buy a empire total war europe. followed by asia and then north america if they did the samething as the warhammer series and then merge all of them.
Kinda hard to stick with something that's fundamentally broken on its core. The only saving grace of that game was the naval battles, that's it. Napoleon did things a bit better but it was yet another game and too little too late.
@gustavosanches3454 I really liked the three semi-seperate overworld maps. But yeah, Napoleon had some better mechanics. The way it handled units recovering after battles is the best example
@@gustavosanches3454napoleon improved on what was there, fixing the problems with AI and what not, but the scope and mechanics of the campaign are currently unmatched by any total war created since. Would best game had it had better AI and modding capability
The volume of DLC spam and pricing model are things what's kept me from even getting into the Total War Warhammer games and the recent historical games, the last Total War I've intentionally bought was Shogun 2, which is still my favourite vanilla game, Medieval 2 is great for mods.
My biggest issue is the cost of the DLCs. They should definitely get money for creating new things, but $10-15 for EVERY "new" lord or two is wild. Ogre race for WH3 is a prime example. If you pre-Ordered you got them for free, which means the Ogres were entirely finished for the game's release, yet now, you have to buy it SEPARETLY. there is NO justification in my eyes for making the Ogres cost money if you didn't pre-order, and is a slap in the face to the community.
It's a big part of why the quality has dropped so much. Since Rome 2 they have been pushing out such an absurd number of DLCs while still releasing almost a game per year. While not meaningfully expanding their studios. It's really no wonder the state TW is in.
Make sure to play with the Unofficial Shogun 2 Patch if you intend to play vanilla. It fixes the weird bugs like Hattori and Tokugawa Ninja being weaker than normal Kisho Ninja.
@@Th1sUsernameIsNotTaken : I have to disagree with the second part of your take. Don't get me wrong.. i get it where you are coming from but this is a take that was for most part valid 15 years ago.. not in todays enviroment where you get sales every two month with an ever growing cataloque of competition. And to top it off the amount of "lol your own fault wait for a sale" comment you usually get to read i would say its paramount that companys find a way to reward early adopters of their games. CA with TW is.. was doing it the right way in my Opinion. We get something if we buy it at release.. we don't have to preorder it because that early adopter bonus will be valid until 1 week after the release, giving us ample oppotunity to read reviews and watch other ppl play. and at the same time ppl who don't buy it at release have a chance to get it as well.. unlike.. oh i dunno.. what other companys are doing. to top it of we also get something with substance unlike.. with pharao or other companys where we are promised "future dlc" only to maybe just get some token dlc that barely fits the legal definition if the game isn't doing well. That was the perfect compromise between the needs of the customer and the needs of the company.... but nooo... everything we get now is promises.. good job ruining gaming even further.
I cannot fathom how Creative Assembly has fumbled this so hard. They came off of Warhammer, arguably a magnum opus moment, and just... Wow dude. Kuddos to the developers, so sorry your executives suck.
I dunno who makes decisions over there, whether it being after a meeting and a collection of people make a go-ahead on a project etc. Or if there is one person that the rest is just "yes-men". But either way, they needed to be fired a long time ago. Not only are they shown to be incompetent when it comes to games themselves, but their face towards the community as a whole has been like watching a blundering idiot. I have no idea where they need to start to fix things, but they need rapid changes if they are to still go anywhere. I am still baffled about games like Pharaoh. Wtf was the idea behind that?
Warhammer isn't a magnum opus moment. The games are big because it's Warhammer, not because they are Total War games. I think it's their biggest flop. They thought they had found a money making machine they can implement on all their titles but the games and DLC all sold because of someone else's IP, not theirs.
@@iwankazlow2268 And how that's different from historical games? Did they invented Rome republic out of their asses? Napoleon maybe? Japan? Do people play rome becuase they are CA fanboys or because they are into this specific cultures included? Such a stupid argument.
@diomedes7971 But you say that as if features were added on top. It simply isn't the case. Sure magic and dragons and all sort of beasts and fantastical beings being present is a great addition. But having all that, at least in the way it is implented currently, ruins the classical backbone of any TW game, and that's why I struggle to understand why people consider it to be of the same genre as any of their previous games. No formations, no guard mode, cav feels useless. Guns don't work like guns, missiles rule the field. Infantry combat is unrewarding. Insanely small maps. Why is it a bad thing to advocate for these sort of gameplay options to be available? "TW, but magic" shouldn't it mean the classical battlefields, just with chaotic magic and fantasy elements sprinkled everywhere? Pre-expansion Shogun 2 doesn't hammer any sort of problem, because it is intentionally built as a civil war TW. And even so I can find more creative uses of the small unit roster in it than I did when I played WH2. And even on the campaign map it is vastly different to play as say, the Chosokabe, as opposed to the Uesugi. Or the Takeda or Oda. They are organically different and not hardcoded to be so. The Warhammer trilogy got as much success as it did not because it captured the original audience, which by your logic would be amazed at the ammount of new features to mess with, but more so the Warhammer fans, as not really all that many WH games feature the battles like these ones do. They liked making these games because they were legally obliged to do so, and everytime a new TW was announced it they saw how badly these "features" worked out. I just don't see why we try to humanise a corporation when they are so obviously misguided as what makes their games great.
As a long time Total War enjoyer, this happens because the series keeps side-grading their games. The games do not feel like significant upgrades to the previous entries anymore. Every time they add cool new mechanics and gameplay, they remove old mechanics and gameplay that everybody loved. A few examples: Medieval 2 and Shogun 2 had much better siege maps than current titles. Medieval 2 had units that upgraded visually based on how much you improved their armor buff. Three Kingdoms had fantastic diplomacy systems that Warhammer 3 and Pharoah are missing. Troy (and Pharoah) have interesting economic resources instead of just Gold, but this system is missing in Three Kingdoms and Warhammer. Shogun 2 and Empire are the last entries to have naval combat. The list goes on and on ad infinitem.
Didn't Rome II have Naval combat? i didn't play a whole lot of it, because of how terrible it's release was. Otherwise, yeah, it's as you say. I started with Med I then MED II and played the crap out of Empire. Warhammer is my favourite, but it's missing so many cool features from the older games, it's crazy. Probably because of the different teams not communicating, and working independently.
@@Verdiumm Rome II did indeed have naval combat. Though I feel that it doesn't work as well as the naval combat in Empire or FotS with the majority of naval combat also boiling down to smashing boats together or watching arrows fly (maybe a few longer range boat actions), but that may just be my personal preference.
@Verdiumm Rome II had naval battles, they just weren't great. Historically accurate, I'd say, though. They basically consisted of both sides smashing their triremes into each other and trying to board, or just cleave the whole boat in half. That's ancient naval warfare for you. It's basically a land battle on less stable footing.
One more thing: CA was insane not to have Feral Interactive also done a remaster of Medieval 2. Insanely popular, same engine and actually near identical game, many popular mods waiting to be ported, reconciliation with the community etc. With a short developing time this could have been an instant cash grab.
@@toddblankenship7164 what're you talking about? 16 years after release it's still in the top 5 most played total war games up until this day. If they did a remaster of med 2, it would sell like crazy.
Given how they handled Rome, it'd just be a shiny coat of paint with a worse UI and no real improvements. Medieval is "sequel or bust" territory - it's the last Total War game without a lot of modern improvements (replenishing units, co-op campaign, etc)
CA really did land on something special with Warhammer. Their position of making the main game based on the smaller campaigns, while the general player base consider the full game to be the merging of it all into immortal empires, helps mask just how profoundly expensive they have managed to make this 'full game' (from the perspective of players). Yes, they made some shift towards allowing people to play immortal empires without owning the previous games, but if you want to actually play the factions you'll have to get all dlc, including base games. So that 'full' experience costs hundreds of pounds. It's nothing for the players who've been there all along, but pretty horrific how expensive it is for anyone new to the franchise to get that experience. It really has been a golden goose for CA
I wanted to get the game, but then i realized I'd have to buy 2 full priced games and a bunch of dlc just to get the full experience and noped the games into the bin.
Yup. My friend and I have enjoyed many hours in Warhammer 2, but it is just as you have said. After seeing lackluster reviews initially with the Warhammer 3 release, and then the prospect of having to do it all again, I just figured that I'd stay with Warhammer 2. It's just too expensive to keep going.
Absolutely! Also it's important to mention that a large chunk of audience which plays TW Warhammer are fans of the Warhammer IP, not Total War itself. Strip the IP, and it would be played much less. As one of the youtubers said: "Warhammer fans only want Warhammer"
EXACTLY. I am from that crowd. I find "regular" Historic Totalwar boring as F (not enough differences between factions IMO). I only played Medieval 2 due to the Third Age LotR and Warhammer mods. When the Total war Warhammer trilogy comes to an end, What I'll wait is another fantasy licence adapted through a Total War take : maybe LotR ? A song of Ice and Fire ? Warhammer 40k ? some more obscure fantasy license ?
@@arykaas The thing is, modern historic total war is largely boring to history fans as well. Med 2, Rome 2 and Attila have lineages and religious aspects and a more interesting campaign layer due to mechanics since abandoned to make Warhammer 1 a gateway into the genre. Pharaoh just feels like you're playing one of the more interesting DLC lords in Warhammer 3, you get to pick from several dozen +XX% buffs to your units.
my interest for total war games only goes up to warhammer 2 in terms of the WH franchise and shogun 2 in terms of historical , thrones of brittania is bugged beyond belief and so is rome2 , you could say just mod it , but thats just like that flextape commerical where he slaps it on the leaking water cistern but the water just leaks out of the edges , and even then i barely play shogun 2 because of how the realm divide was implemented even tho the idea itself is sound
About TW engine - I wonder what % of people would rather have: 1. Flashy animations in meele, with executions and cool looking individual swipes, or 2. Simplified single unit animation, but great unit cohesion, reaction to charges, morale breaking, turning under fire and so on. Obviously both is best, but I think 1 may be over emphasized by marketing. Twitch streamer shouting "OMG look at his head being lobbed off!" to a thousand people in the audience is something that gets noticed and put on Creative Assembly Slack to a round of applause and well earned satisfaction. Thousands of paying customers playing with a little more satisfaction and giving a +1% review average maybe not so much?
honestly they already did a great job blending both imo, its in med 2. Its got a good balance of simplified animations as well as exactions. On top of that I have noticed that the specific combination level of the 2 in med 2 as led to battle lines that develop eb and flow very organically.
Nick is a really cool guy. I had a lot of interactions with him on TWCenter when he was still in full swing developing the Darthmods. We added eachother on Steam and I see him pop online from time to time. I recieved a test build of Ultimate General: Gettysburg from him when that was new, and I've bought every single one of his games ever since. And I will definately get American Revolution as well. Empire was (and probably still is) my all-time favourite title, despite all of its jank, but he managed to make it into an amazing experience for people interested in that era. This guy really knows what he's doing, and it's quite obvious he really knows his history, and it shows he learned quite a lot from his modding experience. And I wish him all the best ^_^
Sorry doesn't fix things. I'm not going to line the same executive's pockets that made the problematic decisions in the first place without MAJOR changes to the business model. Specifically, until I see a new engine with new, actually important gameplay for both the AI and the player, they wont be getting a cent more out of me. Talk is big. Actions are louder.
The platform model is just very different, improving AI, improving the Engine, improving the gameplay, those are a lot more important if you are making a platform than if you just try to pump out new releases. Even when greedy, changing the model forces different behavior.
@@qlum this sounds pretty apologist mate. As I said, idgaf about their model at this point. The engine they've used has been said to be held together with duct tape by devs that have left or been fired from the studio, which has led to it being increasingly hard to effectively iterate on the previous titles. I'll say it again, until they get a new, updated engine that allows the dev team to effectively iterate on previous games, they wont be getting a cent from me. What you want to do with your money is your business tho, so if you want to support a studio that's too cheap to invest in a new engine after 15 years, that's your choice. A change in pricing model isn't going to suddenly cause the studio to invest in a new engine, and if anything would decentivize it since they wont be getting dividends on it until its developed, released, and used, and they lack the short term funding their model has earned em thus far.
"What if paradox published a total war game?" They did. It was called 'King Arthur the Roleplaying Wargame' it released in 2009 and had a sequel in 2011
One more thing I want CA do is to remove the building slot system. Imagine only one walled city in an entire province which is insane. I want the return of walled settlement like in Medieval2, Shogun2, and OG Rome
@@heygek2769 Influx of people back to Rome TW, Medieval 2 and Shogun 2 is a good indicator of what people wants, they want siege battles otherwise you can play Paradox two coloured bar battles....
@@heygek2769 man an endless slog of unwalled settlement battles is way better than an endless slog of walled settlement battles lmao. Maybe we remove the stupid every army need a general and garrsion system and we can have settlements with almost no garrison and some with loads. Honest to god there are more unwalled settlement battles you need to fight in rome 2 and atilla than sieges in rome 1 and med 2.
Rome remastered was also made by Feral, so that may factor in here as well. Makes me wonder, what a Medieval II remastered or a Shogun 2 remastered by them could do. I do think their work shows that they are more than just a porting house, even if business around porting to mac and i-devices is booming.
I really don't mind DLC farm games, I own literally all of Stellaris and don't regret it, and buy DLC who's content I won't play personally, just to add variety to the AI Empires that do use it. What I do mind is the regression of the combat models in the games - Modern Total Wars feel like stat sheets lined up against each other, rather than the units having strengths and weaknesses modeled in the game. Shield actually stopping arrows from the right directions and covering the right area for their size, rather than a big shield being +20 ranged defense on the unit card. They've improved the graphics, but the gameplay has regressed, and its not very fun to play. All the factions, beautiful maps, and detailed unit models in the world won't draw me in if the gameplay is still inferior to Rome 1.
I've got most of the ck2 and ey iv dlc, buying since hoi1. Paradox, despite their flaws, try to change things up. Victoria 3 bombed because they tried to turn vicky2 into ck3. Stellaris was a neat change because it was something they hadn't done yet. The thing about dlc is I don't have to buy it. If I get bored of a Paradox game I can go to any Paradox game. Total war? I played since Shogun 1. They used to innovate. They used to be cutting edge. We thought the maps were huge, they haven't grown. They've taken no risks, the Ai still can't play. They now rely on gimmicks just to keep people interested.
Yeah same, I'm a big fan of guns, so I was really disappointed when I saw that Warhammer has no proper firing lines (not to mention the anemic gunshot shounds, among many others). Guess what game has large scale battles and decent gunnery? Shogun FOTS.
I want my Empire 2 and it's sad that it isn't in the pipeline. Those ships were really something! When I was a boy playing it for the first time, the naval battles in Empire always took my breath away. The land combat was great too, but they really went the extra step with the naval stuff. Even going as far as to have separate maps when you'd use sea-lanes that you'd manually (on the campaign map) have to move your flotilla through
It's funny. I heard nothing about this, really. But it mirrors my own sentiments so very well. Like...I'm good. I've got a small library of previous titles that I enjoy playing. I loved Three Kingdoms, and am perfectly happy to keep playing it. Creative Assembly can take their time to figure out what the heck they're doing. I'll be playing older titles.
Without the community and its crazy engagement in the modding space, CA would have been dead a long time ago... I have been playing Total War games for almost 20 years now, and I am at the point where I have kind of given up on CA as a company. I'm sure there are many competent and passionate people at CA who want to save the franchise and create the games people are asking for... I simply lack the confidence that they are even still able to produce a historic epic. The amount of work, time, and money that would have to go into such an endeavor... I just don't see it happening. So many features that they would have to add, the engine they would have to develop... Sorry, I am done with CA. Pharaoh for me was the last nail in the coffin. I welcome any competitors who try and take over and make this type of game now. CA for me is done and I won't be purchasing anything more from them. They have been such an awful company... insulting players, deceiving their community... they have shown excessive amounts of unjustified greed and contempt for its longterm playerbase... go away CA. Leave the stage and make space for someone else.
@@toddblankenship7164Warhammer is not a historical game And the single hero unit kina op so most of us pass on Warhammer total And why the empire did not get more dlc and support when they are the most play faction CA love to make anything that not a human faction
i never said it was a historical title, i was basically getting at that its the BEST title. and if both sides have a single hero its not OP it's balanced.@@hattorikenji7640
@diomedes7971 Warhammer total battle basically going to do much damage from you hero and high tier army as fast it can Definitely not my cup of tea I prefer the old game total Legend of total war also make a lot video about shogun 2 He also said that old total game actually have tactical and strategy to it
Yeah i agree, to the music the overlay, the ui it was a serious game, nowadays it feels like mods. Also if not mistaken after shogun it came ROME 2 with that trailer...the rest is history
it was downhill for people who dont like the fantasy titles , but for CA as a company it went uphill , what happened now was that CA made a steaming pile of shit
Shogun Total War is actually a complete product, I continue to play that one, it`s the most "fun" total war IMO. Didn`t like the Three Kingdoms' mechanics, army, and generals, all of that made the game braindead to play, on top of being really hard to maintain multiple armies. New interactions of total war are all lazy, everything is minimized, no ship combat, no settlement customization, lackluster siege battles, and siege engines, it`s a worse product that is more expensive.
Interestingly enough, apparently in the very early stages of the WH project, the plan really was just to make one massive game and it was only later on that they decided to split it off in to three separate ones. You could partially see this in WH1's map where at both sides you could see the inaccessible blank zones that had clearly been marked out for the content that would go on to be added in WH2, then ME genuinely was just taking that map over with those zone unlocked and developed. Although the IE map in WH3 did have to be made from scratch as they needed a lot more space than what they had allocated for in the ME map.
If they want DLC, they could take a lesson from these mods. The one shown for Rome Remastered looked great, more factions. I might give that one a try at some point. I honestly prefer buying official content from the actual developer, but they haven't gotten me interested in any of their games in years. I liked how clean the map looks in Rome, both the original and the remaster.
While I’m not questioning Darth’s contribution to Empire as well as the fact that CA clearly screwed him, I did think he was a bit of a drama queen as well as taking a bit too much credit to himself when Darth Mod clearly was a collective work of many modders. So I was genuinely surprised to learn how mature his comments are right now. I guess his experience of making games himself probably had made him appreciate a lot of things he probably hasn’t. Now, I wish nothing but the best and with CA doing whats its doing right now, he’s got real chance for going big. p.s. Here in Japan, all the older Total War games, M2 to Shogun 2 is region locked and is not purchasable. Its real shame that all the good games of Total War series aren’t even available!
@@DonutSquigyes, I confirm. It’s been the case since the launch (10-12 years ago?) The only solution was to buy CD version from Europe. Never understand why it was like this, complete non-sense. Warhammer series was the first to not be region block here.
I play the hell out of CK3, I would do anything for CK3 management and character interaction with TW battles cause Ck3 battles feel a bit lacking but combined holy hell that would be amazing.
Omg, imigine is able to log in and have an entire TW map, and like in CK3, you could pick any ruler from that time. Pick any ruler roll in and go, just perfection.
Listen man, its obvious. People watch man play shogun 2, then they think "Man i haven't played shogun 2 in a long time" and then they download the game and play a bit and say "Man this game is as fun as i remember" and play more. this will likely happen for months as people return to a game we all feel nostalgic about.
I've gone back to Attila. Probably no point in buying any Total War games until a historical game surpasses it without the superhero generals like Three Kingdoms. I don't like how they removed mechanics like Shield Wall and Phalanx in the newer games, and I start to miss the actual realistic historical strategy with no magic. Just good old fashion unit positioning and hammer and anvil. I wish they would just start working on a Medieval 3 or something with core improvements to what Attila brought to the table. I have played Medieval 1212 quite a bit and it is really good, but I got to a turn where the game crashed every time it got to a certain AI's turn and made it impossible to continue.
I have played a mod for Crusader Kings 3 that lets you play the battles in Total War Attila and it's just fantastic to be able to connect the rich roleplay and strategy of Crusader Kings with the tactical battles of Total War.
Did notice the amount of Shogun 2 vids coming from Legend, tho my personal interest in returning to Shogun 2 once again, was just coincidence. It'll remain as one of my fav total war games, truly goated. And I just have to return every so often. Currently going through Rome I remastered once again as well :)
As a RUclips creator focused on total war its frustrating that CA can’t seem to understand or listen to most of the peoples concerns. I really pray they get their act together. I really want a really good Med 3
Agreed. Total War fans deserve not just Medieval III, but a good Medieval III. Anything that's little more than the 1212 AD mod for Attila but with a $60 price tag won't cut it IMO. If you ask me, Medieval III needs to have a new engine that can support better AI and vastly improved modding capabilities.
They've been 'sorry' ever since they've pushed out Empire through the gates with corrupted saves, potentially PC-bricking bug, sea of cut content and paid unit DLCs right around the corner before any patches were made. That was the last time I bought any of their products. But I've seen them sorry about state of both Rome 2 and Atilla on release. About Thrones of Britannia. and Troy. Warhammer DLCs. Three Kingdoms being taken behind the shed and getting shot right after a major discount and shady talk about long-term support.
I wouldnt really consider TWW 3K as a "historical" title, the main appeal of the whole game is around the Romance of 3K fans and its a weird hybrid of historical and fantasy; it has a "realistic" mode but we all know where the main marketing appeal is.
I "dont care" about the era. I would be happy with Pharaoh, if done right (or rather bronze age TW) - I love Egypt era, so I would be super excited, if they released it 10 years ago as proper historical title - similarly Shogun is "small game". But it would have to be done right. The issue is - I want to get a new game. Not a reskin of Rome 2 for 10th time... And to be honest, every game feels like reskin of Rome 2 for last decade. Not province system, where you have 3-4 towns where you can build 3-4 buildings every single time. With generic paintings, of course. Not being forced to hire generals every single time to move units to disband generals turn later. Not building the empire over generations, but focus on one character. Not the same armies stances and generic bonuses for provinces. So yeah, even if they release Medieval 3, Rome 3, Empire 2 - I wont buy it unless it has a feeling of new game and I will keep playing Shogun 2, when I want to play TW game. I dont want to get another Rome2 reskin. I want them to step up, build new engine and take risks with development. So yeah, TW needs to innovate, they need to show serious commitment to develop BRAND NEW GAME, which will feel different from past decade. Even Saga games could have been an awesome idea - if they used them to innovate - make huge changes, take risks, develop completely new game, new systems and see what players like, dislike, what works, what does not and build on those the new game. Instead they just reskinned last game and used it as a cashcow. So yeah, unless they do something completely different, they are not seeing a dolar from me.
Considering the disappointing Crusader's King 3, Victoria 3, Europa 4 and now City Skylines 2 Paradox is having their own collapse if this keeps going.
Victoria 3 is actually pretty good, CK3 is also not bad. As far as I am concerned if you make a good game that is easy to mod you have a great game. And if you then update the engine every few years you can sell it again. I bought Skyrim 3 times (vanilla,SE,VR) Every good game needs at least a year until it's really good to fix bugs, extend features and improve mechanics. That's just inherent in it's complexity.
Looking at the numbers they tried to sell too many times snicker bars in different names and people got fed up. The only thing that worked is bringing in the fantasy genre but the waves got die down again. Nothing actual new on the horizon. You might enjoy it but most of the people who bought it left the series. The numbers do not lie. Belular missed the point. Missed the reason why people touched the old game, simple, nostalgy. Gamers do not analyze dlc structure or market.... from a very few individual most of them journalists. Simple people fed up the recent offerings.
Yeah a mistake I think he makes is assuming that player numbers won't shift. When a new DLC is released the numbers will shift again. The demographic of players that play both fantasy and history games is far larger than those that play just historical. If CA put in a dedicated effort they will win fans back to Warhammer 3. As for longer than that well that depends on CA.
Total war fan since 2009 here. I think you’re absolutely on the money. I actually commented a similar viewpoint on a volound video (I know he’s a divisive figure but that’s not the point) a few weeks ago, that shogun 2/fall of the samurai are the points of comparison for many players when a new game comes out. I can’t speak for everyone, but for me the maths is very simple. The time when CA make a game as good as shogun 2 I’ll buy it. But until then I won’t be touching the franchise again after the recent years of disappointment
CA aren't the same company that made Shogun and Rome. Average career length in video games in 4-5 years. CA are a bunch of young modders brought in to squeeze as much money out of an old engine as possible.
To be fair to CA, I don’t think this model would have worked for them until quite recently. Paradox games age more gracefully over time just by them being map painters. Whereas TW have the real time system that shows its age a lot faster. I think graphics have reached the point of diminishing returns now where any long term game is going to look reasonably good 10 years from now. But Rome 2 would not have been able to last for 10 years, even if it was similar in scope to something like EU4.
Still playing Shogun 2 today, only 600+ hours on steam (half my time may have been without steam). Edit - we never got the shogun 2 China/koria DLC, at that time they must have already been looking at the market in china. A China DLC for Shogun will have blacklisted them.
I'm not so sure about that. It really depends on exactly how China teaches the history of the Opium Wars and the First Sino-Japanese War, particularly the part about Taiwan. China is not at all shy about Japanese atrocities, and it's not the least bit of an exaggeration to say the Japanese are to the Chinese what Germany was to Jews (Unit 731 was magnitudes worse than anything Mengele devised), especially since they literally have "Anti-Japanese" museums. It cannot be understated how terrifying Japan's rapid industrialisation was. Japan's sinking of the Russian fleet at the Battle of Tsushima caused the European powers to collectively shit themselves because this upstart Asian country had gone from pre-industrial feudalism to an industrial powerhouse capable of defeating one of the great European powers in only a couple of generations. That was Europe, though. Europe's nightmares were Asia's reality. For more than half a century, Japan turned their fully modern military on their Asian neighbours, ultimately going on to invade half a dozen countries at the same time as they bombed Pearl Harbor (incidentally including the invasion of the Philippines, then a US territory, which therefore represents the US's greatest military defeat), conquering some of them in a matter of hours. The thing you (and perhaps the CCP) have to remember is that TW games are an ALTERNATE HISTORY. For all the earnest bleating from fans about historical accuracy, history goes out the window the first time you press the End Turn button. Any China/Korea DLC for Shogun 2 (the Boxer Rebellion would be the perfect end-date, giving us a nice round 50 years from 1866 to 1901) would mean a chance for Chinese players to re-write the history of the latter 19th century. Rather than a decrepit empire rife with internal division, beset by foreigners on all sides, and on the verge of collapse, they could build a mighty China that crushed the English, French, and Japanese, at the height of their power. None of what I mentioned above would ever have happened if the Chinese had invaded Japan in the 1860s. Again, though, it all comes down to how they teach the relevant history because Japan's belligerence was a, if not ultimately the, direct cause of the eventual Communist Revolution. Given how fractured China was at the time, there would probably have to be a lot of, mostly Rebel, factions representing multiple real-life factions combined into one. The Communists were still a long way off, so it could be as simple as combining the right IRL factions to make something acceptable for the CCP. I don't know Chinese history well enough to say but surely the Communist Manifesto was, at least in secret, known about around the European enclaves at the time, and that some of the groups that sprang up were at least partially inspired by it. And that's just China's beef with Japan at the time. Korea went from a couple of hundred years of peace to, more or less, half a century of Japanese aggression and oppression, which again included some of the worst atrocities of the 20th century. What if the Joseon had invaded Japan in the 1860s? You know what I just realised after typing all of this? China and the CCP isn't the problem here, Japan is. While I can't say how the CCP frames the end of thousands of years of glorious empire, I can say that Japan is notorious for teaching outright lies about the early 20th century to it's citizens. While most of what we tend to think about happened in the 1930s and '40s, it all started in the 1860s and '70s. A Shogun 2 DLC set from 1866-1901 is a chance for Chinese and Korean players to re-write history and drive out the spiteful, racist, evil, Japanese of the period, while giving the Europeans a black eye. For a Japanese player? It's a chance for Japanese kids to learn about things the Japanese government spent much of the last 75 years pretending didn't happen... and for those Japanese aware of what happened, there's the whole 'glorifying evil' aspect of it.
As a Warhammer fan, I can say Total war Warhammer is a great Warhammer game but a poor total war. The winner here is a good ole Game Workshop, they made a bank from the IP and they got so many people interested in fantasy total war that they are making a remake of Warhammer Fantasy battle, a tabletop game where they get all the profit.
honestly i never saw warhammer 1 and 2 (i dont care about 3) as poor total war games i simply saw them as the ˝new˝˝ kids on the block , similar to how wow cataclysm was the beggining of ˝new˝ wow , it barely bothered to be like its predecessors , certain groups of morons (particulary volound and his minions) like to bitch and moan about how warhammer isnt realisrtic or some shit but why does he assume that these games had any desire to be realistic in the first place , if i want realistic gunpowder battles ill just play napoleon or empire , not warhammer lol
You can play the battles from Field of Glory: Empires in Field of Glory 2. They are also making Field of Glory: Kingdoms which will have the same cross game function.
Im all about older games and especially mods these days, besides the occasional new gem like Baldurs Gate 3. It's really awesome to be able to tweak all aspects of a game to your personal liking instead of eating up what the developers cooked up. Right now I'm obsessed with the Stalker series, but Imperium Surrectum is definitely on my list once it's further in development. I loved Roma Surrectum 2 so much back in the day but that old rome engine runs like absolutely jank even on the best modern computers.
i have over 1000 hours in m2tw, i had to uninstall from my pc because i couldn't help myself but I even bought it on iPad and I'm on turn 92 of a map domination as HRE, I just cannot explain how much I love this game
You are also kinda missing the elephant in the room. Look at steam's most wishlisted games. Right in second place (atm) you can find Manor Lords. A strategy game set in medieval times with Total War style combat.
Greed is a killer to any business. Gamers lose again to the suits. As an artist, this pisses me off more than anything. I like art in gaming and i like good games.
I like shogun 2 over the other Total wars so I get why it's so popular such a good game, Warhammer was ok but a friend bought that one for me so meh combat is kind of sketchy though and doesn't function properly compared to older Total wars so yeah have not even consider buying another Total war since. Shogun 2 and fall of the samurai was the last time I opened my wallet personally.
I got hooked on the entire series since the first Medieval, but since shogun2 my interest in their games just plummeted. I don't even look at anything they're developing anymore. Even if they don't make anything else their older games still hold up really well and anyone who worked on them should be very proud.
i wasn't playing any total war games for a while now, i think even before shadows of change release after i quitted over bugs and awful communication with ca, i don't really feel like coming back rn. maybe one day. but i certainly have fun watching legend's videos, i don't need to currently play the game to enjoy them. and also the frustration is always a bit lesser when it's someone else experiencing some bs bugs or bad game mechanics, not me. i'm really short on patience rn so even the small inconveniences would impact my fun more negatively than they should, and when the game crashes after i just won a very difficult battle... yk i'm not picking this game up for months.
The fatal mistake actually didn't cause any immediate fluctuation as behind the scenes design philosophy change isn't immediately noticeable besides having "something's off and it's not good despite X Y and Z elements being better" vibe in the next game the studio produces. It was easy for people to dogpile on the minor settlement or city construction systems of Rome 2 and such, but the way games treat single units (or units in general), morale or the way it counts stuff is not going to be immediately visually noticeable and even then it will be hard to pinpoint. Btw the funniest aspect of the nu total war issues is that in warhammer and all further games they doubled down on what's wrong with the nu-TW, while ditching every improvement to the formula they made in Nu-TW, including stuff as relatively simple to implement as dismounting lmao
SEGA was also driving them down this road as a publisher. That said CA could have also made a passionate last stand and say about the Japanese what you want, but its a country in which you can buy near ancient games and consoles. Pitching in-depth hisorical TW games was not impossible vs. the slim-downed, console friendly, healthbar fights we have today. Last TW game: 3 Kingdoms Last TW game I really enjoyed: Shogun2 FOTS
Its CK3 that has the integration to fight out battles within Atilla, and then transfer those reaults directly back into CK3. This is done through either the LOTR mods (Dawnless Days and CK3s LOTR mod), or through Crusader Wars CK3 mod and the MK1212 AD Atilla mod. Its awesome.
What are they doing? They're attempting to save Warhammer 3, now and for the foreseeable future... nothing else... CA is a just shadow of it's former self, and that won't change...
My personal take on this is thus: You dont need to release a new game to add a new campaign with reskined units. A new campaign with it's own map and units and factions can all be made for a single game as a DLC. You should be able to boot the game, select the era in which you want to play, select a faction and play. Now i would only make the warhammer as an exception, as it is a different universe and so is acceptable to be as a separate game.
Currently playing Alien Isolation... Also done by CA. It's hard to think it's the same company behind the shtstorm that is Total War CA needs to realise that if you sell the same game that 10 years ago... half price... but with 10 years of DLC, you still make more than one big full release. Right now they are trying to eat the cake and have it too (what a surprise! /s)
Total war as a franchise is like the dayz of game franchises. You grow up playing it, you go through highschool, colledge, get married have a kid. You change in your entirety and TTW is frozen in time.
Exactly. Rome 1 and Rome 2 aren’t significantly different. Both have broken diplomacy. Rome 2 has arguably worse gameplay. The games just don’t change. It’s why I don’t support them.
Total War players would riot if Paradox tried to sell them a game given how much they charge for dlc that adds only a couple of mechanical updates to their game a comparable total war style dlc would get charged easily $30+. Don't forget how bare bones those games are at launch either, it would take several dlcs to get a paradox game comparable to a decent total war game. And lets be real, it would look like an old total war game, so who would buy into it? And the thing is, saga style games are nothing new. Creative Assembly made Napoleon which was an updated Empire, they made Fall of the Samurai which was an update of Shogun 2, they made Attila, which was an updated Rome II. You could even argue Shogun 2 was close to a saga game in map size and unit variety, it was just balanced well and a massive improvement visually to shogun. The problem is more the warhammer influence on gameplay for historical titles, like legendary lords. I never play Three Kingdoms in Romance Mode for example.
Ca created the very thing they wanted to prevent. Rather than partnering with modders. Rather then facilitating 3rd party contactors. Rather than make improvements around the current model. No, they instead, decided to make the warscape engine as a way to deter ease of access for mod capabilities. Because they couldnt profit off mods, and b, mods were implementing mechanics for free...ca determined those mechanics were worth money for dlc. Basically greed and child like tactics.
I think if they want to rebuild trust with the community they need to fix up their core engine with a dedicated engine team so that each historical title feels better than the last. They also need to diversify. I do not think the current team can handle it but Med3 is the win they need if they deliver. It could be a stepping stone towards a bigger more complex sequel to Empire, as many of the same nations with the same histories are involved. They could be 4 years apart and have dozens of dlc factions each because their massive theatre.
I started playing Shogun 2, Rome 1, and Medieval 2 around that period, but that was because of the drama and I started realising how much better the old Total Wars were and needed my fix.
The whole "community is making the games better and more playable" by making mods is also something that scares me. Look at Bethesda and their payed mods. There will be a time where A. Games will be made so that modding is very difficult or B, which will propaply more likely happen, they will monetise Mods so hard, there wont be free Mods anymore. I am willingly pay for a mod when it is made well and does not cost like 20 bucks. But then it must also deliver. I wont pay for a mod that fixes something or alters some gameplay stuff. You know, those little things in order to change the game to your liking.
yeah the imperial collection costs 253 euros , but at the very least you can get the 4 euro subscription for a month , but still their dlc policy is pure hell and i dont give a shit how good the games are i aint paying hundreds of euros for dlc and games which are over a decade old
Total War died when the UI was changed to this simplified crap they have today. They dumbed down a game which was famous for being a complex experience.
There is a mod that lets you play the Grand Strategy of Crusader Kings 3, and then lets you do the fights in Mount and Blade 2: Bannerlord. It's good, but I only ever saw the early game, and the units are all very much the same at that stage. I never saw the late game of it. The tricky bit was also balancing Knights, as they have huge power swings from good, to extremely strong depending on how you play.
Field of Glory: Empires allows playing the battle in Field of Glory II. Furthermore, the mod CRUSADER WARS for Crusader Kings III allows you playing battles in Total War Attila
19:55 Crusader Wars is a total conversion mod that allows you to play your CK3 battles in Total War: Attila with scaled units matching your Men-at-Arms and Knights etc. It just gives you a button that launches Attila and translates the results of the battle back and forth
Ultimate General Civil War is actually a great game and I recommend it for TW fans, at least in terms of the battles. There's no campaign map that you move around and develop, but army management is more in depth.
I hope CA manages to make it through this. Empire 2 would be extremely popular, I have many friends that play empire (without mods) from time to time, and that casual market is where CA need to look to make profit. An empire 2 would surely sell well the problem would be how to monetize it further. Expansions based on different starting dates could be possible. A 30 years war campaign comes to mind.
I think the best large-scale historical game they could make now is Empire II, but set in the 1800s. Specifically post-napolean/concert of europe through the 1890s or so. Historically, technology shifted massively over this time period, countries grew into world-spanning empires, but combat was still mostly based in company/regiment-based tactics. The standard total war gameplay would fit all of this very well. The closest competitor at the moment is Victoria 3, but that's far less focused on warfare and combat, which is where Total War shines.
You should also look into 'The Last Alliance' for Shogun 2. It's also a Middle Earth mod where they have a campaign map they are working on. Right now my two go-to titles are Shogun 2 and Attila. Don't need any others methinks...
Join us at bellular.ghost.io for early access content, 20 editions of 'Loading Screen' a month and more!
I don't know what you mean by 'spun out of' as Troy is nothing like WH2 and if you are thinking game engine, then that hasn't really changed since Empire TW. Let's also not forget that the WH trilogy has been the most successful set of games is TW's history. The issue was cost to content disparity which they are dealing with. It's worth remembering that S" was also given away for free.
Shogun 2 is the last great Total War game
@@christiandauz3742 Shogun 2 is not a great game, the issue is people have rose tinted spectacles for the older games.
Mods from other games such as Bannerlord which is Shohoku is also right round the corner that is why it's also spiking for shogun 2
The fact that no empire 2 or medieval 3 is in the pipeline at all tells me everything I need to know. It's too late to course correct. We are 5-6 years away from seeing meaningful changes to the formula. RIP CA.
there is a joke in one of Volound's video, that CA will release any historical based video game as long as it doesnt have naval combat lol
@@aleksandrmikhail3803 check volound's twatter feed guy's not right in the head
@@aleksandrmikhail3803 So Neanderthal Total War is a go!
It really surprises me that there has been no Medieval 3 based on what we've been told on how much CA has chased short term profits. Everyone wants a Medieval 3 and it should make CA plenty of money. I've no idea why they keep doing nonsense like Pharoah instead.
I wouldn't want an empire 2 or medieval 3 made with the design philosophy they currently have. The issues in Three Kingdoms, Britannia and such are a logical extension of shogun2 and Rome 2 changes.
It really all comes down to this: The Total war series sells VERY well if the game is actually good or even amazing. However not all of those games meet that standard.
And what has CA decided to do ? make shorter and worse games just to "sell, sell,sell!" and that business strategy is killing them.
And for Three Kingdoms, perhaps the most complex and fresh entry since the move to stats-based units, their first DLC (after the pre-order dlc) was a period of history that is considered disgraceful in China. Then they proceeded to release a handful of DLCs, somehow never once covering a time period in which the titular Three Kingdoms are already formed ready to undertake the most notable battles from the novel.
@@McHadiesthat will happen when you abandon projects :/
@@McHadies are you speaking about the 8 princes DLC?
Well, not exactly. The old, nuanced combat TW sold well but was a niche genre. I as an old TW fan often joke to myself that for sure as hell CA is going to listen to those WH boys who post poll threads where 4 out 5 options say SOC is worth buying whereas I still pick my DLCs on sale for some of my most favorite TW games rather than blindly buying them all at once. The WH TW community is like something else, they buy DLCs like playing Gacha games. They defend WH1 when WH1 began with 5 factions while we worry about if M3 is going to put any major cultures in DLCs (like Greek states in R2TW).
Warhammer and 3K is where TW exploded in popularity, and are much more financially successful for various reasons not related to the quality of the game. Of course they are going to listen to their money makers and exploit them.
Empire Total War was the biggest missed opportunity in my opinion. That's such an incredible and expansive era and they didn't stick with it long enough to reach it's full potential.
it needs a remastered. heck i would buy a empire total war europe. followed by asia and then north america if they did the samething as the warhammer series and then merge all of them.
Kinda hard to stick with something that's fundamentally broken on its core. The only saving grace of that game was the naval battles, that's it. Napoleon did things a bit better but it was yet another game and too little too late.
The battle A.I. is the dumbest in the series. Plenty of potential for an Empire II.
@gustavosanches3454 I really liked the three semi-seperate overworld maps.
But yeah, Napoleon had some better mechanics. The way it handled units recovering after battles is the best example
@@gustavosanches3454napoleon improved on what was there, fixing the problems with AI and what not, but the scope and mechanics of the campaign are currently unmatched by any total war created since. Would best game had it had better AI and modding capability
The volume of DLC spam and pricing model are things what's kept me from even getting into the Total War Warhammer games and the recent historical games, the last Total War I've intentionally bought was Shogun 2, which is still my favourite vanilla game, Medieval 2 is great for mods.
My biggest issue is the cost of the DLCs. They should definitely get money for creating new things, but $10-15 for EVERY "new" lord or two is wild.
Ogre race for WH3 is a prime example. If you pre-Ordered you got them for free, which means the Ogres were entirely finished for the game's release, yet now, you have to buy it SEPARETLY. there is NO justification in my eyes for making the Ogres cost money if you didn't pre-order, and is a slap in the face to the community.
It's a big part of why the quality has dropped so much. Since Rome 2 they have been pushing out such an absurd number of DLCs while still releasing almost a game per year. While not meaningfully expanding their studios. It's really no wonder the state TW is in.
Yes, yes and yes.
I agree on all points. Though I did buy and play Attila and quite liked it.
Make sure to play with the Unofficial Shogun 2 Patch if you intend to play vanilla. It fixes the weird bugs like Hattori and Tokugawa Ninja being weaker than normal Kisho Ninja.
@@Th1sUsernameIsNotTaken : I have to disagree with the second part of your take. Don't get me wrong.. i get it where you are coming from but this is a take that was for most part valid 15 years ago.. not in todays enviroment where you get sales every two month with an ever growing cataloque of competition. And to top it off the amount of "lol your own fault wait for a sale" comment you usually get to read i would say its paramount that companys find a way to reward early adopters of their games.
CA with TW is.. was doing it the right way in my Opinion. We get something if we buy it at release.. we don't have to preorder it because that early adopter bonus will be valid until 1 week after the release, giving us ample oppotunity to read reviews and watch other ppl play. and at the same time ppl who don't buy it at release have a chance to get it as well.. unlike.. oh i dunno.. what other companys are doing.
to top it of we also get something with substance unlike.. with pharao or other companys where we are promised "future dlc" only to maybe just get some token dlc that barely fits the legal definition if the game isn't doing well.
That was the perfect compromise between the needs of the customer and the needs of the company.... but nooo... everything we get now is promises.. good job ruining gaming even further.
I cannot fathom how Creative Assembly has fumbled this so hard.
They came off of Warhammer, arguably a magnum opus moment, and just...
Wow dude.
Kuddos to the developers, so sorry your executives suck.
I dunno who makes decisions over there, whether it being after a meeting and a collection of people make a go-ahead on a project etc. Or if there is one person that the rest is just "yes-men".
But either way, they needed to be fired a long time ago. Not only are they shown to be incompetent when it comes to games themselves, but their face towards the community as a whole has been like watching a blundering idiot. I have no idea where they need to start to fix things, but they need rapid changes if they are to still go anywhere.
I am still baffled about games like Pharaoh. Wtf was the idea behind that?
Warhammer isn't a magnum opus moment. The games are big because it's Warhammer, not because they are Total War games. I think it's their biggest flop. They thought they had found a money making machine they can implement on all their titles but the games and DLC all sold because of someone else's IP, not theirs.
@@iwankazlow2268 They did find a money printing machine. They just didn't take good care of it.
@@iwankazlow2268 And how that's different from historical games? Did they invented Rome republic out of their asses? Napoleon maybe? Japan? Do people play rome becuase they are CA fanboys or because they are into this specific cultures included? Such a stupid argument.
@diomedes7971 But you say that as if features were added on top. It simply isn't the case. Sure magic and dragons and all sort of beasts and fantastical beings being present is a great addition. But having all that, at least in the way it is implented currently, ruins the classical backbone of any TW game, and that's why I struggle to understand why people consider it to be of the same genre as any of their previous games. No formations, no guard mode, cav feels useless. Guns don't work like guns, missiles rule the field. Infantry combat is unrewarding. Insanely small maps. Why is it a bad thing to advocate for these sort of gameplay options to be available? "TW, but magic" shouldn't it mean the classical battlefields, just with chaotic magic and fantasy elements sprinkled everywhere? Pre-expansion Shogun 2 doesn't hammer any sort of problem, because it is intentionally built as a civil war TW. And even so I can find more creative uses of the small unit roster in it than I did when I played WH2. And even on the campaign map it is vastly different to play as say, the Chosokabe, as opposed to the Uesugi. Or the Takeda or Oda. They are organically different and not hardcoded to be so. The Warhammer trilogy got as much success as it did not because it captured the original audience, which by your logic would be amazed at the ammount of new features to mess with, but more so the Warhammer fans, as not really all that many WH games feature the battles like these ones do. They liked making these games because they were legally obliged to do so, and everytime a new TW was announced it they saw how badly these "features" worked out. I just don't see why we try to humanise a corporation when they are so obviously misguided as what makes their games great.
As a long time Total War enjoyer, this happens because the series keeps side-grading their games. The games do not feel like significant upgrades to the previous entries anymore. Every time they add cool new mechanics and gameplay, they remove old mechanics and gameplay that everybody loved. A few examples: Medieval 2 and Shogun 2 had much better siege maps than current titles. Medieval 2 had units that upgraded visually based on how much you improved their armor buff. Three Kingdoms had fantastic diplomacy systems that Warhammer 3 and Pharoah are missing. Troy (and Pharoah) have interesting economic resources instead of just Gold, but this system is missing in Three Kingdoms and Warhammer. Shogun 2 and Empire are the last entries to have naval combat. The list goes on and on ad infinitem.
Didn't Rome II have Naval combat? i didn't play a whole lot of it, because of how terrible it's release was.
Otherwise, yeah, it's as you say.
I started with Med I then MED II and played the crap out of Empire.
Warhammer is my favourite, but it's missing so many cool features from the older games, it's crazy.
Probably because of the different teams not communicating, and working independently.
@@Verdiumm Rome II did indeed have naval combat. Though I feel that it doesn't work as well as the naval combat in Empire or FotS with the majority of naval combat also boiling down to smashing boats together or watching arrows fly (maybe a few longer range boat actions), but that may just be my personal preference.
Thats the actual problem with total war for me, lack of keeping things that work from tittle to tittle.
@Verdiumm Rome II had naval battles, they just weren't great. Historically accurate, I'd say, though. They basically consisted of both sides smashing their triremes into each other and trying to board, or just cleave the whole boat in half. That's ancient naval warfare for you. It's basically a land battle on less stable footing.
One more thing: CA was insane not to have Feral Interactive also done a remaster of Medieval 2.
Insanely popular, same engine and actually near identical game, many popular mods waiting to be ported, reconciliation with the community etc.
With a short developing time this could have been an instant cash grab.
its not really popular anymore and hasnt been in ages.
@@toddblankenship7164 what're you talking about? 16 years after release it's still in the top 5 most played total war games up until this day. If they did a remaster of med 2, it would sell like crazy.
it's weekly numbers are terribly low@@Lucifer_26
@@toddblankenship7164Bro, pretty sure Medieval 2 is more popular than Rome 1. It has more famous mods like Third Age mod
Given how they handled Rome, it'd just be a shiny coat of paint with a worse UI and no real improvements. Medieval is "sequel or bust" territory - it's the last Total War game without a lot of modern improvements (replenishing units, co-op campaign, etc)
The community: " CA is running from the battlefield ! Shameful display ! "
CA really did land on something special with Warhammer. Their position of making the main game based on the smaller campaigns, while the general player base consider the full game to be the merging of it all into immortal empires, helps mask just how profoundly expensive they have managed to make this 'full game' (from the perspective of players). Yes, they made some shift towards allowing people to play immortal empires without owning the previous games, but if you want to actually play the factions you'll have to get all dlc, including base games. So that 'full' experience costs hundreds of pounds. It's nothing for the players who've been there all along, but pretty horrific how expensive it is for anyone new to the franchise to get that experience. It really has been a golden goose for CA
Yes. They have adopted the Paradox pricing strategy.
A shame really.
I never have/will buy a Paradox game for this reason.
I wanted to get the game, but then i realized I'd have to buy 2 full priced games and a bunch of dlc just to get the full experience and noped the games into the bin.
@@dyslexicmyasre688 Yo Ho Ho, a sailing we will go, see you on the high seas.
Yup. My friend and I have enjoyed many hours in Warhammer 2, but it is just as you have said. After seeing lackluster reviews initially with the Warhammer 3 release, and then the prospect of having to do it all again, I just figured that I'd stay with Warhammer 2. It's just too expensive to keep going.
The trick to this is just buying the main game, and then going to those sites and unlocking the DLC's. 😎
Absolutely!
Also it's important to mention that a large chunk of audience which plays TW Warhammer are fans of the Warhammer IP, not Total War itself.
Strip the IP, and it would be played much less. As one of the youtubers said: "Warhammer fans only want Warhammer"
EXACTLY. I am from that crowd.
I find "regular" Historic Totalwar boring as F (not enough differences between factions IMO). I only played Medieval 2 due to the Third Age LotR and Warhammer mods.
When the Total war Warhammer trilogy comes to an end, What I'll wait is another fantasy licence adapted through a Total War take : maybe LotR ? A song of Ice and Fire ? Warhammer 40k ? some more obscure fantasy license ?
@@arykaas that's fine.
My point is that that's a different audience.
I enjoy both sides, although I do prefer the older gameplay formula
I am only paying for warhammer. I could not care less about historical!
@@arykaas The thing is, modern historic total war is largely boring to history fans as well. Med 2, Rome 2 and Attila have lineages and religious aspects and a more interesting campaign layer due to mechanics since abandoned to make Warhammer 1 a gateway into the genre. Pharaoh just feels like you're playing one of the more interesting DLC lords in Warhammer 3, you get to pick from several dozen +XX% buffs to your units.
my interest for total war games only goes up to warhammer 2 in terms of the WH franchise and shogun 2 in terms of historical , thrones of brittania is bugged beyond belief and so is rome2 , you could say just mod it , but thats just like that flextape commerical where he slaps it on the leaking water cistern but the water just leaks out of the edges , and even then i barely play shogun 2 because of how the realm divide was implemented even tho the idea itself is sound
About TW engine - I wonder what % of people would rather have:
1. Flashy animations in meele, with executions and cool looking individual swipes, or
2. Simplified single unit animation, but great unit cohesion, reaction to charges, morale breaking, turning under fire and so on.
Obviously both is best, but I think 1 may be over emphasized by marketing. Twitch streamer shouting "OMG look at his head being lobbed off!" to a thousand people in the audience is something that gets noticed and put on Creative Assembly Slack to a round of applause and well earned satisfaction. Thousands of paying customers playing with a little more satisfaction and giving a +1% review average maybe not so much?
Tons of games sacrifice good mechanics for spectacle, very unfortunate
So 2. So so so 2.
If we can't have both, then we can compromise with having 90% of no.2 with 10% of no.1 happening in the middle of combat.
2. Obviously.
honestly they already did a great job blending both imo, its in med 2. Its got a good balance of simplified animations as well as exactions. On top of that I have noticed that the specific combination level of the 2 in med 2 as led to battle lines that develop eb and flow very organically.
Nick is a really cool guy. I had a lot of interactions with him on TWCenter when he was still in full swing developing the Darthmods. We added eachother on Steam and I see him pop online from time to time. I recieved a test build of Ultimate General: Gettysburg from him when that was new, and I've bought every single one of his games ever since. And I will definately get American Revolution as well. Empire was (and probably still is) my all-time favourite title, despite all of its jank, but he managed to make it into an amazing experience for people interested in that era. This guy really knows what he's doing, and it's quite obvious he really knows his history, and it shows he learned quite a lot from his modding experience. And I wish him all the best ^_^
Sorry doesn't fix things. I'm not going to line the same executive's pockets that made the problematic decisions in the first place without MAJOR changes to the business model. Specifically, until I see a new engine with new, actually important gameplay for both the AI and the player, they wont be getting a cent more out of me. Talk is big. Actions are louder.
The platform model is just very different, improving AI, improving the Engine, improving the gameplay, those are a lot more important if you are making a platform than if you just try to pump out new releases.
Even when greedy, changing the model forces different behavior.
@@qlum this sounds pretty apologist mate. As I said, idgaf about their model at this point. The engine they've used has been said to be held together with duct tape by devs that have left or been fired from the studio, which has led to it being increasingly hard to effectively iterate on the previous titles. I'll say it again, until they get a new, updated engine that allows the dev team to effectively iterate on previous games, they wont be getting a cent from me. What you want to do with your money is your business tho, so if you want to support a studio that's too cheap to invest in a new engine after 15 years, that's your choice. A change in pricing model isn't going to suddenly cause the studio to invest in a new engine, and if anything would decentivize it since they wont be getting dividends on it until its developed, released, and used, and they lack the short term funding their model has earned em thus far.
"What if paradox published a total war game?"
They did. It was called 'King Arthur the Roleplaying Wargame' it released in 2009 and had a sequel in 2011
One more thing I want CA do is to remove the building slot system. Imagine only one walled city in an entire province which is insane. I want the return of walled settlement like in Medieval2, Shogun2, and OG Rome
It's done to reduce the slog of endless siege battles.
@@heygek2769
While that might is true and quite a good point, the arbitrary limitation of only 4 and 6 building slot for an entire region is dumb.
@@heygek2769 Influx of people back to Rome TW, Medieval 2 and Shogun 2 is a good indicator of what people wants, they want siege battles otherwise you can play Paradox two coloured bar battles....
@@heygek2769 man an endless slog of unwalled settlement battles is way better than an endless slog of walled settlement battles lmao. Maybe we remove the stupid every army need a general and garrsion system and we can have settlements with almost no garrison and some with loads. Honest to god there are more unwalled settlement battles you need to fight in rome 2 and atilla than sieges in rome 1 and med 2.
i miss og romes wall system where you could have for instance a huge city with a wooden wall
Nice to see Legend getting some love
Rome remastered was also made by Feral, so that may factor in here as well.
Makes me wonder, what a Medieval II remastered or a Shogun 2 remastered by them could do.
I do think their work shows that they are more than just a porting house, even if business around porting to mac and i-devices is booming.
I really don't mind DLC farm games, I own literally all of Stellaris and don't regret it, and buy DLC who's content I won't play personally, just to add variety to the AI Empires that do use it. What I do mind is the regression of the combat models in the games - Modern Total Wars feel like stat sheets lined up against each other, rather than the units having strengths and weaknesses modeled in the game. Shield actually stopping arrows from the right directions and covering the right area for their size, rather than a big shield being +20 ranged defense on the unit card. They've improved the graphics, but the gameplay has regressed, and its not very fun to play. All the factions, beautiful maps, and detailed unit models in the world won't draw me in if the gameplay is still inferior to Rome 1.
I've got most of the ck2 and ey iv dlc, buying since hoi1. Paradox, despite their flaws, try to change things up. Victoria 3 bombed because they tried to turn vicky2 into ck3.
Stellaris was a neat change because it was something they hadn't done yet. The thing about dlc is I don't have to buy it. If I get bored of a Paradox game I can go to any Paradox game.
Total war? I played since Shogun 1. They used to innovate. They used to be cutting edge. We thought the maps were huge, they haven't grown. They've taken no risks, the Ai still can't play. They now rely on gimmicks just to keep people interested.
Yeah same, I'm a big fan of guns, so I was really disappointed when I saw that Warhammer has no proper firing lines (not to mention the anemic gunshot shounds, among many others). Guess what game has large scale battles and decent gunnery? Shogun FOTS.
This !!
There is a mod for Crusader Kings 3 and Attila Crusader Wars. Lets you fight the battles in CK3 in Attila. Its pretty awesome
That's great to hear. I heard about the one that mocks up battles in Mount&Blade, didn't know there was a Total War variant.
Great video!
I want my Empire 2 and it's sad that it isn't in the pipeline. Those ships were really something! When I was a boy playing it for the first time, the naval battles in Empire always took my breath away. The land combat was great too, but they really went the extra step with the naval stuff. Even going as far as to have separate maps when you'd use sea-lanes that you'd manually (on the campaign map) have to move your flotilla through
It's funny. I heard nothing about this, really. But it mirrors my own sentiments so very well.
Like...I'm good. I've got a small library of previous titles that I enjoy playing. I loved Three Kingdoms, and am perfectly happy to keep playing it. Creative Assembly can take their time to figure out what the heck they're doing. I'll be playing older titles.
Manor Lords this April, the most wishlisted (2nd now*) game on steam, citybuilder/strategy battler.
So looking forward it.
Without the community and its crazy engagement in the modding space, CA would have been dead a long time ago...
I have been playing Total War games for almost 20 years now, and I am at the point where I have kind of given up on CA as a company. I'm sure there are many competent and passionate people at CA who want to save the franchise and create the games people are asking for... I simply lack the confidence that they are even still able to produce a historic epic. The amount of work, time, and money that would have to go into such an endeavor... I just don't see it happening. So many features that they would have to add, the engine they would have to develop...
Sorry, I am done with CA. Pharaoh for me was the last nail in the coffin. I welcome any competitors who try and take over and make this type of game now. CA for me is done and I won't be purchasing anything more from them. They have been such an awful company... insulting players, deceiving their community... they have shown excessive amounts of unjustified greed and contempt for its longterm playerbase... go away CA. Leave the stage and make space for someone else.
are you the crusty that also never played warhammer?
@@toddblankenship7164Warhammer is not a historical game
And the single hero unit kina op so most of us pass on Warhammer total
And why the empire did not get more dlc and support when they are the most play faction
CA love to make anything that not a human faction
i never said it was a historical title, i was basically getting at that its the BEST title. and if both sides have a single hero its not OP it's balanced.@@hattorikenji7640
@diomedes7971 most of us historical fan
Don't group us up with you fantasy theme mate
@diomedes7971
Warhammer total battle basically going to do much damage from you hero and high tier army as fast it can
Definitely not my cup of tea
I prefer the old game total
Legend of total war also make a lot video about shogun 2
He also said that old total game actually have tactical and strategy to it
Fall of the Samurai was pretty much the high point of the series, everything since then has been downhill from then.
War hammer and three kingdom are pretty good
Yeah i agree, to the music the overlay, the ui it was a serious game, nowadays it feels like mods. Also if not mistaken after shogun it came ROME 2 with that trailer...the rest is history
I feel that as well.
The series fell off with Empire. Shogun 2 was a peak then it was right off the cliff with Rome 2 right down into the abyss.
it was downhill for people who dont like the fantasy titles , but for CA as a company it went uphill , what happened now was that CA made a steaming pile of shit
Shogun Total War is actually a complete product, I continue to play that one, it`s the most "fun" total war IMO.
Didn`t like the Three Kingdoms' mechanics, army, and generals, all of that made the game braindead to play, on top of being really hard to maintain multiple armies.
New interactions of total war are all lazy, everything is minimized, no ship combat, no settlement customization, lackluster siege battles, and siege engines, it`s a worse product that is more expensive.
Interestingly enough, apparently in the very early stages of the WH project, the plan really was just to make one massive game and it was only later on that they decided to split it off in to three separate ones. You could partially see this in WH1's map where at both sides you could see the inaccessible blank zones that had clearly been marked out for the content that would go on to be added in WH2, then ME genuinely was just taking that map over with those zone unlocked and developed. Although the IE map in WH3 did have to be made from scratch as they needed a lot more space than what they had allocated for in the ME map.
I really want to see them make Empire 2. If not them, maybe the former creator of Darthmod Empire and his studio.
That is the plan, at least a napoleon Ultimate general
If they want DLC, they could take a lesson from these mods. The one shown for Rome Remastered looked great, more factions. I might give that one a try at some point. I honestly prefer buying official content from the actual developer, but they haven't gotten me interested in any of their games in years. I liked how clean the map looks in Rome, both the original and the remaster.
While I’m not questioning Darth’s contribution to Empire as well as the fact that CA clearly screwed him, I did think he was a bit of a drama queen as well as taking a bit too much credit to himself when Darth Mod clearly was a collective work of many modders.
So I was genuinely surprised to learn how mature his comments are right now. I guess his experience of making games himself probably had made him appreciate a lot of things he probably hasn’t.
Now, I wish nothing but the best and with CA doing whats its doing right now, he’s got real chance for going big.
p.s.
Here in Japan, all the older Total War games, M2 to Shogun 2 is region locked and is not purchasable. Its real shame that all the good games of Total War series aren’t even available!
Torrent it.
You're kidding. Region locking Shogun 2 in Japan?
@@DonutSquigyes, I confirm. It’s been the case since the launch (10-12 years ago?)
The only solution was to buy CD version from Europe. Never understand why it was like this, complete non-sense.
Warhammer series was the first to not be region block here.
@@lucteboul5555 why would anyone think that's a good idea, wtf
@@lucteboul5555 hey we made this awesome game about your culture. Now we made it so you can't buy it
I play the hell out of CK3, I would do anything for CK3 management and character interaction with TW battles cause Ck3 battles feel a bit lacking but combined holy hell that would be amazing.
Omg, imigine is able to log in and have an entire TW map, and like in CK3, you could pick any ruler from that time. Pick any ruler roll in and go, just perfection.
Then search out Crusader Wars. A mod that combines CK3 campaing with modded Attila Total War battles.
I wish Pharoah's scope had been the true bronze age experience. From Greece to Babylon from Egypt to the Assyrians.
Your hair looks good at this length. It looks good short too, just wanted to show some appreciation. Hope the new year is good to ya
It was Crusader Kings with the mod to play battles in Total War.
Listen man, its obvious. People watch man play shogun 2, then they think "Man i haven't played shogun 2 in a long time" and then they download the game and play a bit and say "Man this game is as fun as i remember" and play more. this will likely happen for months as people return to a game we all feel nostalgic about.
I've gone back to Attila. Probably no point in buying any Total War games until a historical game surpasses it without the superhero generals like Three Kingdoms. I don't like how they removed mechanics like Shield Wall and Phalanx in the newer games, and I start to miss the actual realistic historical strategy with no magic. Just good old fashion unit positioning and hammer and anvil. I wish they would just start working on a Medieval 3 or something with core improvements to what Attila brought to the table.
I have played Medieval 1212 quite a bit and it is really good, but I got to a turn where the game crashed every time it got to a certain AI's turn and made it impossible to continue.
I have played a mod for Crusader Kings 3 that lets you play the battles in Total War Attila and it's just fantastic to be able to connect the rich roleplay and strategy of Crusader Kings with the tactical battles of Total War.
Did notice the amount of Shogun 2 vids coming from Legend, tho my personal interest in returning to Shogun 2 once again, was just coincidence.
It'll remain as one of my fav total war games, truly goated.
And I just have to return every so often.
Currently going through Rome I remastered once again as well :)
As a RUclips creator focused on total war its frustrating that CA can’t seem to understand or listen to most of the peoples concerns. I really pray they get their act together. I really want a really good Med 3
Agreed. Total War fans deserve not just Medieval III, but a good Medieval III. Anything that's little more than the 1212 AD mod for Attila but with a $60 price tag won't cut it IMO. If you ask me, Medieval III needs to have a new engine that can support better AI and vastly improved modding capabilities.
It has to look completely new and have great mechanics too
@@Latinkon
@@DaGamingNeighborand they need to improve the intelligence of the enemies in battle
They've been 'sorry' ever since they've pushed out Empire through the gates with corrupted saves, potentially PC-bricking bug, sea of cut content and paid unit DLCs right around the corner before any patches were made. That was the last time I bought any of their products. But I've seen them sorry about state of both Rome 2 and Atilla on release. About Thrones of Britannia. and Troy. Warhammer DLCs. Three Kingdoms being taken behind the shed and getting shot right after a major discount and shady talk about long-term support.
I wouldnt really consider TWW 3K as a "historical" title, the main appeal of the whole game is around the Romance of 3K fans and its a weird hybrid of historical and fantasy; it has a "realistic" mode but we all know where the main marketing appeal is.
Pharaoh could be a Bronze age, early classical age platform, if they had a plan and good announcements.
I "dont care" about the era. I would be happy with Pharaoh, if done right (or rather bronze age TW) - I love Egypt era, so I would be super excited, if they released it 10 years ago as proper historical title - similarly Shogun is "small game". But it would have to be done right.
The issue is - I want to get a new game. Not a reskin of Rome 2 for 10th time... And to be honest, every game feels like reskin of Rome 2 for last decade.
Not province system, where you have 3-4 towns where you can build 3-4 buildings every single time. With generic paintings, of course.
Not being forced to hire generals every single time to move units to disband generals turn later.
Not building the empire over generations, but focus on one character.
Not the same armies stances and generic bonuses for provinces.
So yeah, even if they release Medieval 3, Rome 3, Empire 2 - I wont buy it unless it has a feeling of new game and I will keep playing Shogun 2, when I want to play TW game. I dont want to get another Rome2 reskin. I want them to step up, build new engine and take risks with development.
So yeah, TW needs to innovate, they need to show serious commitment to develop BRAND NEW GAME, which will feel different from past decade.
Even Saga games could have been an awesome idea - if they used them to innovate - make huge changes, take risks, develop completely new game, new systems and see what players like, dislike, what works, what does not and build on those the new game. Instead they just reskinned last game and used it as a cashcow.
So yeah, unless they do something completely different, they are not seeing a dolar from me.
Considering the disappointing Crusader's King 3, Victoria 3, Europa 4 and now City Skylines 2 Paradox is having their own collapse if this keeps going.
Victoria 3 is actually pretty good, CK3 is also not bad.
As far as I am concerned if you make a good game that is easy to mod you have a great game. And if you then update the engine every few years you can sell it again. I bought Skyrim 3 times (vanilla,SE,VR)
Every good game needs at least a year until it's really good to fix bugs, extend features and improve mechanics. That's just inherent in it's complexity.
Not to mention how "The Old World" mod resurrected TWWH3......
I have one word to say about Total War/Creative Assembly: Volound
Looking at the numbers they tried to sell too many times snicker bars in different names and people got fed up. The only thing that worked is bringing in the fantasy genre but the waves got die down again. Nothing actual new on the horizon. You might enjoy it but most of the people who bought it left the series. The numbers do not lie. Belular missed the point. Missed the reason why people touched the old game, simple, nostalgy. Gamers do not analyze dlc structure or market.... from a very few individual most of them journalists. Simple people fed up the recent offerings.
Yeah a mistake I think he makes is assuming that player numbers won't shift. When a new DLC is released the numbers will shift again.
The demographic of players that play both fantasy and history games is far larger than those that play just historical.
If CA put in a dedicated effort they will win fans back to Warhammer 3. As for longer than that well that depends on CA.
I haven't played one of these games in years. In part because every time I consider it, I can't justify the price.
Total war fan since 2009 here. I think you’re absolutely on the money. I actually commented a similar viewpoint on a volound video (I know he’s a divisive figure but that’s not the point) a few weeks ago, that shogun 2/fall of the samurai are the points of comparison for many players when a new game comes out.
I can’t speak for everyone, but for me the maths is very simple. The time when CA make a game as good as shogun 2 I’ll buy it. But until then I won’t be touching the franchise again after the recent years of disappointment
blood dlc
CA aren't the same company that made Shogun and Rome. Average career length in video games in 4-5 years. CA are a bunch of young modders brought in to squeeze as much money out of an old engine as possible.
To be fair to CA, I don’t think this model would have worked for them until quite recently. Paradox games age more gracefully over time just by them being map painters. Whereas TW have the real time system that shows its age a lot faster. I think graphics have reached the point of diminishing returns now where any long term game is going to look reasonably good 10 years from now. But Rome 2 would not have been able to last for 10 years, even if it was similar in scope to something like EU4.
Still playing Shogun 2 today, only 600+ hours on steam (half my time may have been without steam).
Edit - we never got the shogun 2 China/koria DLC, at that time they must have already been looking at the market in china. A China DLC for Shogun will have blacklisted them.
I'm not so sure about that.
It really depends on exactly how China teaches the history of the Opium Wars and the First Sino-Japanese War, particularly the part about Taiwan. China is not at all shy about Japanese atrocities, and it's not the least bit of an exaggeration to say the Japanese are to the Chinese what Germany was to Jews (Unit 731 was magnitudes worse than anything Mengele devised), especially since they literally have "Anti-Japanese" museums.
It cannot be understated how terrifying Japan's rapid industrialisation was. Japan's sinking of the Russian fleet at the Battle of Tsushima caused the European powers to collectively shit themselves because this upstart Asian country had gone from pre-industrial feudalism to an industrial powerhouse capable of defeating one of the great European powers in only a couple of generations. That was Europe, though. Europe's nightmares were Asia's reality. For more than half a century, Japan turned their fully modern military on their Asian neighbours, ultimately going on to invade half a dozen countries at the same time as they bombed Pearl Harbor (incidentally including the invasion of the Philippines, then a US territory, which therefore represents the US's greatest military defeat), conquering some of them in a matter of hours.
The thing you (and perhaps the CCP) have to remember is that TW games are an ALTERNATE HISTORY. For all the earnest bleating from fans about historical accuracy, history goes out the window the first time you press the End Turn button.
Any China/Korea DLC for Shogun 2 (the Boxer Rebellion would be the perfect end-date, giving us a nice round 50 years from 1866 to 1901) would mean a chance for Chinese players to re-write the history of the latter 19th century. Rather than a decrepit empire rife with internal division, beset by foreigners on all sides, and on the verge of collapse, they could build a mighty China that crushed the English, French, and Japanese, at the height of their power. None of what I mentioned above would ever have happened if the Chinese had invaded Japan in the 1860s.
Again, though, it all comes down to how they teach the relevant history because Japan's belligerence was a, if not ultimately the, direct cause of the eventual Communist Revolution.
Given how fractured China was at the time, there would probably have to be a lot of, mostly Rebel, factions representing multiple real-life factions combined into one. The Communists were still a long way off, so it could be as simple as combining the right IRL factions to make something acceptable for the CCP. I don't know Chinese history well enough to say but surely the Communist Manifesto was, at least in secret, known about around the European enclaves at the time, and that some of the groups that sprang up were at least partially inspired by it.
And that's just China's beef with Japan at the time. Korea went from a couple of hundred years of peace to, more or less, half a century of Japanese aggression and oppression, which again included some of the worst atrocities of the 20th century. What if the Joseon had invaded Japan in the 1860s?
You know what I just realised after typing all of this? China and the CCP isn't the problem here, Japan is.
While I can't say how the CCP frames the end of thousands of years of glorious empire, I can say that Japan is notorious for teaching outright lies about the early 20th century to it's citizens. While most of what we tend to think about happened in the 1930s and '40s, it all started in the 1860s and '70s. A Shogun 2 DLC set from 1866-1901 is a chance for Chinese and Korean players to re-write history and drive out the spiteful, racist, evil, Japanese of the period, while giving the Europeans a black eye. For a Japanese player? It's a chance for Japanese kids to learn about things the Japanese government spent much of the last 75 years pretending didn't happen... and for those Japanese aware of what happened, there's the whole 'glorifying evil' aspect of it.
As a Warhammer fan, I can say Total war Warhammer is a great Warhammer game but a poor total war.
The winner here is a good ole Game Workshop, they made a bank from the IP and they got so many people interested in fantasy total war that they are making a remake of Warhammer Fantasy battle, a tabletop game where they get all the profit.
honestly i never saw warhammer 1 and 2 (i dont care about 3) as poor total war games i simply saw them as the ˝new˝˝ kids on the block , similar to how wow cataclysm was the beggining of ˝new˝ wow , it barely bothered to be like its predecessors , certain groups of morons (particulary volound and his minions) like to bitch and moan about how warhammer isnt realisrtic or some shit but why does he assume that these games had any desire to be realistic in the first place , if i want realistic gunpowder battles ill just play napoleon or empire , not warhammer lol
You can play the battles from Field of Glory: Empires in Field of Glory 2. They are also making Field of Glory: Kingdoms which will have the same cross game function.
a big part of the problem is they started "balancing" factions. in the old games some factions were easy some were hard af.
Im all about older games and especially mods these days, besides the occasional new gem like Baldurs Gate 3.
It's really awesome to be able to tweak all aspects of a game to your personal liking instead of eating up what the developers cooked up.
Right now I'm obsessed with the Stalker series, but Imperium Surrectum is definitely on my list once it's further in development. I loved Roma Surrectum 2 so much back in the day but that old rome engine runs like absolutely jank even on the best modern computers.
i have over 1000 hours in m2tw, i had to uninstall from my pc because i couldn't help myself but I even bought it on iPad and I'm on turn 92 of a map domination as HRE, I just cannot explain how much I love this game
You are also kinda missing the elephant in the room. Look at steam's most wishlisted games. Right in second place (atm) you can find Manor Lords. A strategy game set in medieval times with Total War style combat.
it would flop. kek. diablo 4 sold 10 millions only in early purchase. good game yea?
@@BloodyArchangelus What has amount of times wishlisted or purchased to do with the end quality of a game?
and it funny i remerber troy tried to make all the myth units people, yet there was no science that said any of the myth units where humans.
Greed is a killer to any business. Gamers lose again to the suits.
As an artist, this pisses me off more than anything. I like art in gaming and i like good games.
I like shogun 2 over the other Total wars so I get why it's so popular such a good game, Warhammer was ok but a friend bought that one for me so meh combat is kind of sketchy though and doesn't function properly compared to older Total wars so yeah have not even consider buying another Total war since. Shogun 2 and fall of the samurai was the last time I opened my wallet personally.
People forget Rome Total War Alexander.
I got hooked on the entire series since the first Medieval, but since shogun2 my interest in their games just plummeted. I don't even look at anything they're developing anymore. Even if they don't make anything else their older games still hold up really well and anyone who worked on them should be very proud.
happy to get well researched, written and presented news again. Thanks to the whole team once again
You forgot Planet War for the lunatics like me.
i wasn't playing any total war games for a while now, i think even before shadows of change release after i quitted over bugs and awful communication with ca, i don't really feel like coming back rn. maybe one day. but i certainly have fun watching legend's videos, i don't need to currently play the game to enjoy them. and also the frustration is always a bit lesser when it's someone else experiencing some bs bugs or bad game mechanics, not me. i'm really short on patience rn so even the small inconveniences would impact my fun more negatively than they should, and when the game crashes after i just won a very difficult battle... yk i'm not picking this game up for months.
The fatal mistake actually didn't cause any immediate fluctuation as behind the scenes design philosophy change isn't immediately noticeable besides having "something's off and it's not good despite X Y and Z elements being better" vibe in the next game the studio produces. It was easy for people to dogpile on the minor settlement or city construction systems of Rome 2 and such, but the way games treat single units (or units in general), morale or the way it counts stuff is not going to be immediately visually noticeable and even then it will be hard to pinpoint.
Btw the funniest aspect of the nu total war issues is that in warhammer and all further games they doubled down on what's wrong with the nu-TW, while ditching every improvement to the formula they made in Nu-TW, including stuff as relatively simple to implement as dismounting lmao
Probably the huge discount was the reason. Weird to not factor that in
Total War: Warhammer is amazing. It’s a masterpiece
SEGA was also driving them down this road as a publisher. That said CA could have also made a passionate last stand and say about the Japanese what you want, but its a country in which you can buy near ancient games and consoles. Pitching in-depth hisorical TW games was not impossible vs. the slim-downed, console friendly, healthbar fights we have today.
Last TW game: 3 Kingdoms Last TW game I really enjoyed: Shogun2 FOTS
YUUUUUUP!!!
Its CK3 that has the integration to fight out battles within Atilla, and then transfer those reaults directly back into CK3. This is done through either the LOTR mods (Dawnless Days and CK3s LOTR mod), or through Crusader Wars CK3 mod and the MK1212 AD Atilla mod. Its awesome.
What are they doing? They're attempting to save Warhammer 3, now and for the foreseeable future... nothing else... CA is a just shadow of it's former self, and that won't change...
My personal take on this is thus: You dont need to release a new game to add a new campaign with reskined units. A new campaign with it's own map and units and factions can all be made for a single game as a DLC. You should be able to boot the game, select the era in which you want to play, select a faction and play. Now i would only make the warhammer as an exception, as it is a different universe and so is acceptable to be as a separate game.
Currently playing Alien Isolation... Also done by CA.
It's hard to think it's the same company behind the shtstorm that is Total War
CA needs to realise that if you sell the same game that 10 years ago... half price... but with 10 years of DLC, you still make more than one big full release.
Right now they are trying to eat the cake and have it too (what a surprise! /s)
Bros showing EU4 gameplay footage from like 5 years ago lmao
That is awesome and poetic, the grand strategy game company CA failing at strategy.
Total war as a franchise is like the dayz of game franchises. You grow up playing it, you go through highschool, colledge, get married have a kid. You change in your entirety and TTW is frozen in time.
Exactly. Rome 1 and Rome 2 aren’t significantly different. Both have broken diplomacy. Rome 2 has arguably worse gameplay. The games just don’t change. It’s why I don’t support them.
Really good vid I hope CA can step up again. There is nothing like a total war out there.
Total War players would riot if Paradox tried to sell them a game given how much they charge for dlc that adds only a couple of mechanical updates to their game a comparable total war style dlc would get charged easily $30+. Don't forget how bare bones those games are at launch either, it would take several dlcs to get a paradox game comparable to a decent total war game. And lets be real, it would look like an old total war game, so who would buy into it?
And the thing is, saga style games are nothing new. Creative Assembly made Napoleon which was an updated Empire, they made Fall of the Samurai which was an update of Shogun 2, they made Attila, which was an updated Rome II. You could even argue Shogun 2 was close to a saga game in map size and unit variety, it was just balanced well and a massive improvement visually to shogun. The problem is more the warhammer influence on gameplay for historical titles, like legendary lords. I never play Three Kingdoms in Romance Mode for example.
Ca created the very thing they wanted to prevent. Rather than partnering with modders. Rather then facilitating 3rd party contactors. Rather than make improvements around the current model. No, they instead, decided to make the warscape engine as a way to deter ease of access for mod capabilities. Because they couldnt profit off mods, and b, mods were implementing mechanics for free...ca determined those mechanics were worth money for dlc. Basically greed and child like tactics.
I think if they want to rebuild trust with the community they need to fix up their core engine with a dedicated engine team so that each historical title feels better than the last. They also need to diversify. I do not think the current team can handle it but Med3 is the win they need if they deliver. It could be a stepping stone towards a bigger more complex sequel to Empire, as many of the same nations with the same histories are involved. They could be 4 years apart and have dozens of dlc factions each because their massive theatre.
Here is my pledge. Even if CA made Medieval 3, which is my most anticipated title, as long as it is using the same Warscape engine, I will not buy it.
in my opinion they "dimbed down" the management of cities and making impossible to use armys with no general´s, in rome 2 killed it to me
I started playing Shogun 2, Rome 1, and Medieval 2 around that period, but that was because of the drama and I started realising how much better the old Total Wars were and needed my fix.
22:20 Best Empire mod is Imperial Spleandor, if you ask me. It's the most finely polished and biggest passion project, from what I can see. Great mod.
The whole "community is making the games better and more playable" by making mods is also something that scares me. Look at Bethesda and their payed mods. There will be a time where A. Games will be made so that modding is very difficult or B, which will propaply more likely happen, they will monetise Mods so hard, there wont be free Mods anymore.
I am willingly pay for a mod when it is made well and does not cost like 20 bucks. But then it must also deliver. I wont pay for a mod that fixes something or alters some gameplay stuff. You know, those little things in order to change the game to your liking.
I just want to play Rome 2 with massively upgrade annimation and unit interactions.. not allowing push through and so on
Paradox is trash for the amount of dlc milking they do. They are not an example I'd like to see any company follow.
yeah the imperial collection costs 253 euros , but at the very least you can get the 4 euro subscription for a month , but still their dlc policy is pure hell and i dont give a shit how good the games are i aint paying hundreds of euros for dlc and games which are over a decade old
Total War died when the UI was changed to this simplified crap they have today.
They dumbed down a game which was famous for being a complex experience.
There is a mod that lets you play the Grand Strategy of Crusader Kings 3, and then lets you do the fights in Mount and Blade 2: Bannerlord. It's good, but I only ever saw the early game, and the units are all very much the same at that stage. I never saw the late game of it. The tricky bit was also balancing Knights, as they have huge power swings from good, to extremely strong depending on how you play.
Field of Glory: Empires allows playing the battle in Field of Glory II.
Furthermore, the mod CRUSADER WARS for Crusader Kings III allows you playing battles in Total War Attila
19:55 Crusader Wars is a total conversion mod that allows you to play your CK3 battles in Total War: Attila with scaled units matching your Men-at-Arms and Knights etc. It just gives you a button that launches Attila and translates the results of the battle back and forth
Thought he was talking about the one where you play Mount and Blade.
What a shot of nostalgia. Time to dust off my TW Empires again to scratch my itch.
Ultimate General Civil War is actually a great game and I recommend it for TW fans, at least in terms of the battles. There's no campaign map that you move around and develop, but army management is more in depth.
Check out Ultimate General American Revolution!
It's sad how greed and the executive bloat just continues to keep screwing these companies over.
I hope CA manages to make it through this. Empire 2 would be extremely popular, I have many friends that play empire (without mods) from time to time, and that casual market is where CA need to look to make profit. An empire 2 would surely sell well the problem would be how to monetize it further. Expansions based on different starting dates could be possible. A 30 years war campaign comes to mind.
As far as fans are concerned, total war went downhill after medieval 2
I think the best large-scale historical game they could make now is Empire II, but set in the 1800s. Specifically post-napolean/concert of europe through the 1890s or so. Historically, technology shifted massively over this time period, countries grew into world-spanning empires, but combat was still mostly based in company/regiment-based tactics. The standard total war gameplay would fit all of this very well. The closest competitor at the moment is Victoria 3, but that's far less focused on warfare and combat, which is where Total War shines.
You should also look into 'The Last Alliance' for Shogun 2. It's also a Middle Earth mod where they have a campaign map they are working on. Right now my two go-to titles are Shogun 2 and Attila. Don't need any others methinks...