7 years late, but you were right on point. One among very few sane individuals back in those days. I love the like/dislike ratio showing the fanboy army was ready way back.
Better late than never haha, yeah I was expecting a buggy game, but the more in depth I’ve learned since then the whole gameplay system is fundamentally broken
The problem with the total war series is that it rules its own kind of market, their is no similar games out their which come close to total war. Which means there is no competition which means creative assembly can do whatever they please and not be worried that fans will go to different game series offering a better game.
Hey, I just came over from Surreal's channel, saw you in the comments discussing this. You make fair poits and summed everything up nicely, so good job on that. I have to say that I agree with you, depressing as that is. I've been playing total war games since rome 1 (still have it in it's DVD-case) and the end of this ideo nearly choked me up. Call me nostalgic but I don't like the direction these new games are taking and am sure as hell not gonna preorder. I might go buy Midieval II and download Call of Warhammer, it has so far impressed me more then this game. Thanks for making this and don't let the dislikes get you down, you will unfortunatly prove them wrong I think.
+Quintus V Yup, TW fans have become pretty zelous lately. They are in denial because this is their saving grace (if not theres a huge chance the series goes bust otherwise). I'm pretty pissed at the way they're lashing out at criticism but I don't blame their hope/optimism. If it turns out the advertising was a ruse all along and they were always showing extremely early builds of the game and it's kind of a "ho HO!" moment as on release it turns out they have a nearly flawless game I'll be the first to put my hands up, and admit that. I WANT that. But I need to be down to earth and I seriously doubt that with only a month out the videos they've been putting out iare indeed early builds.
Nasmr He is indeed, have you seen his surreal biceps video? Also, I think the game will be playable and maybe some fun, but still suffering at it's core. It's pretty sad that the most positive things people point out in this game are some cool units and the prettyness of some maps. I mean, nobody buys a new Call of Duty because there are af few cool maps and a few cool guns?
i wish they would copy and paste all the depth from medieval 2 into these new titles and make a campaign out of that l, i dont even care if they use the same medieval 2 engine....
Your video is well thought out. I enjoyed this as I am a newer generation to Total War games but not to gaming. My first games I felt completely enveloped was Civ 2 and Heroes of Might and Magic 3. My experience with Total War is limited to Rome 2 emperor edition, Atilla and Shogun 2. Atilla as a whole is too easy and already over saturated with terrible downloadable content. Developers are afraid to try new things even though its obvious its failing. Its like bashing your head into the same wall because you think the blood you spilled is sunlight.
Attila was tedious to me, it was either one settlement factions that you have to take aaaaaaaaaages building up to strike (more so than is pleasing imo) or you get the Roman empires which are in such a bad starting shape that it take aaaaaaaaaaages to micro. If I remember people like legend of total war can spend up to an hour on a single turn playing as Western Rome because of how bad a shape it is. If that's you're thing go for it, but I just don't have the time to go more than 10 turns in before dropping it off sheer boredom.
you make some good points and yes it is disappointing about the siege maps and dlc however your overlooking all the other excellent things about this game the campaign maps look amazing and I cant wait to play the different Warhammer armies using magic and monsters this will be awesome and lets face it there will be some bugs and balance problems but I can a sure you this game will be the biggest total war game yet.
Demigryph Knights looks really cool yeah. But these listed things really out weigh the pros. And like you already acknowledged it'll probably be buggy on launch. Can you really stand; rail roaded, linear, campaigns, Fifth of the faction ripped and resold back, Sieges being limited to essentially the same battle over and over, And most likely mass bugs and glitches at launch All for just the warhammer brand? I know I can't. I won't support mediocrity and excuse after excuse after excuse
the campaigns look great with added things like quest battles and five different ways of playing as each faction is very different compared too normally playing with just humans I just find that boring, plus I also mostly play online against other people which I am sure will be much more interesting. Really I just don't understand how you cant see all the amazing things they have done with this Warhammer game like the campaign map and flying monsters and the huge amount of spells plus all the legendary characters you can control yes there will be balancing issues but that's normal, I even think the sieges will still be fun.
There's not going to be a radical change in playstyle that's any different as switching from Rome to Parthia. Not sure why "it's more than just humans" really constitutes an argument. You still have the basic rules of TW. Swords, spears, ranged skirmishers, artillery, large, light cav, heavy cav, shock cav. They just have orc or vampire models and animations now which is purely superficial. Flying seems like a nice new aspect. But again ALL races have flying units. So it doesn't change your playstyle when you change race. Spells? General abilities buffed up. Damage spells are nice, but like I said this doesn't cover all the cons that have come out. And as I mentioned in other comments. Online play will likely be the worst yet. With only 4 or 5 factions and such a low choice of roster it's just going to be a game of 5-10 minutes in the lobby switching factions to try and counter their faction choice. And being able to easily know what they're going to bring. If it was 4 factions, but with 30 units to choose from it'd be different. But rosters are half that size. The meta is going to be a nightmare.
I think your focusing to much on the cons if you bother to look at what most people think about this game its mostly very positive and I know for sure playing with vampire counts for instance will be much more fun than playing with roman army with its over complicated roster of units that mostly don't mean anything. and as I said monsters magic and legendary heroes will be much more interesting to have in army and the game play will be different not sure your looking at same game as me. This total war game will be biggest yet that's for sure not sure why you cant see this open you eyes.
+jonathan davis come on dude that's not an argument. I could just as easily turn around and say you're only focusing on what's good and that's being naive and you need to open your eyes. I've explained pretty in depth on how factions are railroaded and won't have much individuality in campaign as is the nature of total war. They won't have different starting positions either. The DLC is shameful and, as you've already conceded, the game will most likely release I unoptimised and bug ridden that'll will take multiple patches to fix. I really would wait until post release before just handing them money in blind trust of a company that has a horrific reputation right now.
Really great video :) Total War series going to die. Because they doing these games in so horrible ways. And the Warhammer Total War sieges reminds me tower defences games, you capture the walls - you win...I could talk really long, about total war last series, how they failed...Because i grow up from first shogun total war...
Thanks man! I agree the sieges really seem waaaaay to linear to be viable now. I'm also wondering how messed up the multiplayer aspect is going to be, Attila was terrible but this seems like there might be absolutely no online presence whatsoever, so little race + roster variety to choose from might completely damper the competitive online completely as its to easy to know what the enemy is bringing
What. Are you saying money now is better than money later? Or are you saying that inflation is THAT bad?! I'm going to assume the first one and say this. If a business wants you're money NOW, before their product or service, and will gimp that product or service if you don't pay before they deliver....then they definitely don't deserve your money. There's no other industry that that does this. You'll see the movie industry taking pre-order tickets yes....but you don't see the movie industry taking out entire scenes for those who did not pre-order tickets. You can pre-order cars...but you don't see manufacturers removing all the electrics if you don't pre-order. You can pre-order the next IPhone....but you don't see apple taking out the camera for those who didn't. You just don't see it anywhere else. So it baffles me when the game industry is apathetic about it.
"Are you saying money now is better than money later? Or are you saying that inflation is THAT bad?!" Inflation is virtually zero, I am talking about the ROI CA can get on that money by getting it earlier. You should read CA's open letter about this, they explained it themselves perfectly well and anyone who is schooled in Economics understands this principle. "If a business wants you're money NOW, before their product or service, and will gimp that product or service if you don't pay before they deliver....then they definitely don't deserve your money." Ok well then a whole lot, of not the majority, of businesses around the world doesn't deserve your money it seems. I guess that when you go to Disney World, you ask to pay for the entrance ticket after you have left the park and know you got value for your money? And you of course never buy flight tickets because you want to know you didn't crash och flight got cancelled before you paid, to name a few. "There's no other industry that that does this." Really? See above. "You can pre-order cars...but you don't see manufacturers removing all the electrics if you don't pre-order." Not a comparable example. CA didn't make the game unplayable by not making Chaos as a PLAYABLE faction. Chaos are the common antagonists in Warhammer. That's like complaining you cannot play Sauron's army in a LotR game. Hardly something that's required. In fact in most such games you wouldn't be able to, because you play the good guys. Chaos are still in the game as AI, otherwise you would have had a point. As for cars, there are often offers that you get extra equipment packages if you pre-order. I never hear someone say that equipment is cut content and should have been in the car to begin with. And these kind of equipment tend to become standard in future carsd,s o they are clearly deemed "necessary" othwrwise they wouldn't become standard. For example when ABS breaks or airbags were a new thing, they were always extra equipment you had to pay for. Who in their right mind would argue today ABS breaks or airbags aren't necessary today? So clearly cut content by your logic, we're talking about saving people's lives here. "You can pre-order the next IPhone....but you don't see apple taking out the camera for those who didn't." Because a camera cannot simply be added to a phone, it has to be buolt in. Instead when cameras were first launched, you had phones without camera and then you had phones wiht cameras that were more expensive. It's just the same bloody thing as if you had paid extra to get a camera as extra equipment, it just wasn't technically feasible to make it an add-on. "You just don't see it anywhere else. So it baffles me when the game industry is apathetic about it." It baffles me how you don't seem to know how just about every businesses use this model in one way or another and always have. You always have to pay for more content, ALWAYS. One way or another. If Chaos would have been in the game for start, you'd have to pay more for the game than you do now. Instead you can look at it like this: you get the game now at a discounted price, but if you wanna wait till after launch you will pay the "full price". There are no such things as a free lunch. Are you arguing that a flight company should offer people to fly business class for no extra charge? Clearly the seats are there and they paid the cost for them already so they're cutting content for you by offering a worse seat and holding the business seats behind a pay wall.. It wouldn't cost them a dime to let you sit in such a seat (by your logic) and especially if they're not even booked (and you'd still not be allowed to sit there!). But the truth is those seats wouldn't be there if they couldn't charge extra money for them. Just like Chaos as a PLAYABLE race. Greenmangaming already offers the game at 25% discount. So that clearly means CA's original price is a rip off then and they "charge you for nothing"?
+Roger Carhult I'm mainly talking about pysical tangible products or media entertainment, as that's what warhammer is. It's why I used a car, iphone and a movie as examples. Disney world isn't apt. But here's the thing When I said took out the electrics of the car you say "Not a comparable example. CA didn't make the game unplayable by not making Chaos as a PLAYABLE faction" Well removing the electrics doesn't make the car undrivable. But now they can charge extra for the electrics! Even though it's unanimously agreed to be pretty essential you can make the argument that you don't NEED them to work the car. That's literally the logical argument here The better example is the phone one. If apple releases a series of TERRIBLE Iphones that crash consistently and took years of patching, then claimed they were releasing a new phone that they promise THIS TIME is good, but to get the camera you have to pay in advance you think that'd be acceptable? Because that's exactly what CA is doing. Something that has been standard practice now being removed and sold for extra when they don't even have the reputation for releasing quality products for some time now. Also...come on. "yeah but the camera is part of the phone!!!" Do I have to hand hold you? Is it really that hard to propose a hypothetical that the manufacters could release a phone without the camera and then you pay to have it sent in and the camera added? Use your imagination to fill in the blanks there. This "economics 101" nonsense is nothing but an vain attempt to discredit my argument. See /watch?v=QaAH-cv2ybo on how business deserve to make money for their product, as I'm in favour of that, but how it can't be accepted taht they should put the squeeze on the customer to make as MUCH money as possible. It's why you won't see me pirating games, but not giving in to every bloody shiny shiny a business trick at the same impulsive rate a lot of other gamers seem to be doing these days. I will not incentivise them to repeat these actions.
They haven't showed a Chaos campaign walkthrough on their twitch channel yet. They did 4 factions, and then when it was time to do a Chaos walkthrough stream, they chose to continue a their last empire walkthrough, that doesn't sound right. I have also played totalwar games since Rome 1. The reviews on steam from each game starting with Medievil 2 show a pattern. The Bad Reviews are getting bigger and bigger every game. For etc.... 2010 Game development plan... - 2 years developing game, 100 staff. - 60$ - Develop Dlc after release, 50 staff - 40$ - Started on new game, 50 staff. 2016 Game development plan. - 1.5 years developing game, 50 staff - 60$ - 5 months Work on Dlc before release, 10 staff - (Charge players for a part of the game) 15$ - Work on Dlc after release, 20 staff, - 40$ Less staff is less expenses and more profit. Less staff = less content. Games do cost more to make than 6 years ago, but more ppl are playing games these days. Ca need a new publisher, Sega are destroying them. I wonder how many ppl will put bad reviews on steam because of the unit Dlc in the first 2 weeks of release. If ppl keep buying this crap, then Sega will never stop milking it. I'm not against Dlc. Dlc keeps games interesting, that is why it was introduced, to get players to come back. Just like i have finished Fallout 4 and i'm bored of it, but i'm going to start it back up for far harbar. Funny how every game i look at now that has the Sega name attached to it, has a shit tonne of Dlc and bad reviews. I was a company of heroes fan, but when the second one came out, it was upsetting seeing a great game being destroyed by Dlc. The main menu was designed to throw Dlc down your throat. I will never buy a Sega game ever again..
I, personally, can forgive Empire for being shit since its all new engine and all that but Rome II was a downright "ruck this is" and if TW:warhammer is the same, well...........bye bye CA ya out
Word, brother! For all its bests, the franchise's recent releases left me bitter and sour. I don't want to be a part of it anymore. I'll just pirate all releases and buy them later on sale, when the editions are complete, the game is optimized and the hardware to play them on is out. If this day comes, that is!
Im waiting till reviews. I do have it pre ordered but if the reviews suck im refunding and getting hearts of iron4 instead. Il probably give up on TW unless they put back in the features a TW game is supose to have.
+Todd Zimmerman Sega will select the ppl they want to review the game and pay websites like Ign to say the game is amazing. This is why they delayed the game, yes maybe a little tweaking too, but the main reason is to boost pre-order sales through ppl like lionheart, pixelated apollo etc, you know all the Sega little cum minions. No way will they will give a review copy to Angryjoe joe. lol.
Made a business perspective that no one really seems to have touched on. Also it using the Lord of the rings as an example of what it should look like when you smashing the gates down with monsters and beasts is very apt. Especially considering how much inspiration warhammer had from Tolkiens works.
I have said this many times. Creative Assembly is the only company willing to make games of this caliber/style. Meaning? Well to start off it shows that what it takes to develop a game of the scope that CA does it actually quite difficult. There is plenty of commercial interest to market this style of games. Which would mean that someone else would try to compete against CA for the market. But if you take a look at the genre it's just CA. Anyone who tries to "make a better game" has failed. Because if it is as easy as people like you play it up to be, then not only would CA do it; but so would other developers. This is clearly not the case. In fact I stand on my own soap box and congratulate CA for how far they have come. Gamers of today are so entitled and greedy. You spend $60 on a piece of art and entertainment that hundreds of people worked tirelessly for hundreds of hours to complete. That's it...your contribution is monetary....you quite literally have no right to bitch about anything unless you have the skills and knowledge to do a better job. Which I would then say you should get up off your lazy ass and make a better game yourself. Which is exactly what some people have done with mods (but they are still skipping so much of the hardwork; using the foundation that CA laid with the base game) I am not saying you should constructively suggest ways to remedy what you deem to be a problem. But just blindly pointing out things you dislike and saying they can/should do a better job is just lazy ignorance. I agree that this kind of DLC model is %100 greed. But it's a model that is used universally in the entire gaming community. Get used to it or stop playing games. The vocal portion of the community that is boycotting Pre-ordering these games and are threatening to stop playing the games all together are unfortunately a small % of the entire Total War fanbase. Because if the nay sayers actually had any pull in making a statement to the developers then they would never have found investors for Warhammer. Star Citizen is a great game to look at if you wanna see what it would take for Creative Assembly to start producing absolute gold. If a group of game developers banded together and started a kick starter to go above and beyond CA. With plans to make a total war styled game so immense and fine tuned. We would be looking at a $200+ price tag. We as consumers expect so much for a meager $60. But with the demands for better graphics, AI, scope, scale and immersion companies can't keep up. To finish off my rant, @OP you stated your long history with playing Total War games. One of which you played over 1000 hours. For a game that you payed $60 for, you really can't ask for better bang for your buck. And even with some of the more shake titles you had 80+ hours. Most games today can barely give you 30. I just feel you are being really hard on a company who has given you so much entertainment for so long. And truly is trying their best to keep up with technology and improve upon previous titles. But clearly it's 1000x harder then we understand. You really think they are happy with negative reviews and hate for their games? You think they would change/fix it if they could?
+Dustin Friesen Yes it's true that CA are the only guys creating 2000 manned on screen battles in real time, it's why I fell in love with it. I think I was about 13 and a HUGE fan of the lord of the rings, the twin towers at the time. Which is why when I bought rome for the first time and saw 2,300 pike men I collectively lost my shit. It's also that core basis of such grand scale battles that I love to this day and why I can dump thousands of hours into (heavily modded) modern versions of the series. But when I see that the ONLY provider of that piece of awesome is suddenly completely dicking me over by releasing heavily bugged and broken games that take years to patch up properly, or taking out massive chunks of the game to sell day 1? I get reaaaaaaaallly pissed off at that. Personally I do believe a lot of guys at CA are genuine dudes who want to release a genuine product, and it's SEGA who are telling them to do that. But from what I read on that massive blog post trying to explain the chaos DLC a lot of team members were shocked to find a negative response and suggested to just ignore it and hope it goes away...telling me a lot of them are really oblivious too. I don't exactly know how the contracts work out for them, or how long they have left in their deals with SEGA. But as soon as it expires I would tell them to go shove it and try and get valve to buy the rights. Hell, I think they should start pitching to valve right now, total war has been featured on the front page of steam so many times they MUST have a good standing and business relationship with them. It would be pretty awesome if valve bought CA and gave them more creative freedoms that avoid debacles like Rome 2 or Chaos DLC. I don't think valve are the best ever, that goes to GOG and cdprojektred (oh my glorious fuck if they bought CA imagine a witcher total war), but still valve know more on how to handle these things than a dying SEGA who still can't grasp their own shit (sonic).
Interesting video, but I respectfully disagree with a few of your points - namely about the sieges, engine, and regional occupation. My first question, is have you even actually conquered the entire map in any Total War game? My guess is no. If you've played the Age of Charlemagne DLC, you can see that they were experimenting with the idea of a player increasing their Imperium and super upgrading a handful of provinces rather than expanding over the entire map. You can see evidence of them continuing in this directing in the newest Vampire Counts campaign video, where they were able to have some of the highest tier units with only 2 and a half provinces. As far as the engine goes, making a new engine is fucking expensive, and the battles are exquisite in Rome II nowadays. All my problems with battles in Attila boil down to how the units form up, but not the function. The shadow hand example was made when Rome II was a broken mess, but that engine works really well in both Rome II and Attila. As far as sieges go, why aren't you glad that they're moving away from siege focused game play? Bouncing from town to town wasn't as engaging as massive field battles, and it seems like that's what they're going for more because of how siege battles are presented. Oh and also, your point on how towns don't level up is absolute and complete bullshit. They've states MULTIPLE times that the towers get stronger. Thanks for reading! :D
+Torneko Just to respond to your arguments with my views, yes people actually conquer the map in campaigns, I myself have completed campaigns in Shogun 1, Rome 1, Medieval 2, Not empire because it still crashes regularly after 50 turns and the combat still hasn't been fixed, Some parts of Napoleon I completed because they actually worked but on the whole weren't particularly entertaining, Shogun 2 of about 80-100 campaigns I have completed just under 50% as albeit a few graphical bugs and loading times, the gameplay was interesting, Rome II never completed a campaign even with the new emperor edition as its still boring start to end, same for Attila, and thank goodness I picked that up for under £4, wouldn't have been worth much more even post all the patches. None the less the regional occupation makes no sense from a strategic or lore standpoint, the only standpoint that it can make sense from is a CA/SEGA/GW in terms of money because they don't have to model other race conversions of different provinces, i.e. instead of 4 variations of each map, they only need to do 2, it's just lazy. With regards to Age of Charlemagne, I concede that I have not purchased it to try it because the gameplay I have seen appears even lack-luster than compared to normal Attila, with fewer units and a much smaller campaign map. They very well may have been 'experimenting' with super upgrading a handful of provinces, that's the thing though isn't it common sense in all total wars to upgrade the more central settlements anyway, and then send units from them out to support armies throughout your empire, ah wait I know you can't do that in Rome II because general numbers are limited, and of course you couldn't possibly send out units without a dedicated 'general'. Also in regards to the higher tier units, I believe the modern total war tech trees restrict the best units until they are both researched and have required buildings, which is usually more easily obtained with more settlements (i.e. a higher income therefore more money to build and upgrade). Yes new engines are expensive, but they've had this for 7 years + now, and I am not aware of anyone that hugely criticized the engine of the total wars until they changed it in Empire, at which point it had been designed for musket-line warfare, I will agree that it worked well in Shogun 2 because of all the polish and EFFORT they put in, however it is fundamentally incompatible with Rome II and Attila; Warhammer will have some units from dwarfs and humans that use the strengths of the engine but the rest of the faction units do not to any huge degree. A different engine is necessary to actually obtain the objectives/ features that CA is envisioning as it cannot properly implement something as logical as unit collision, and SEGA are backing CA, don't tell me they don't have the money for it, SEGA still got their money from Rome II. In regards to Rome II, I can tell you from more than 700 hrs the battles are still boring and glitchy, the gatehouses in particular. Yeah I have problems with my units forming up in Attila too, they often get stuck on the walls, phase through buildings with no walking animations and decide to form up in the opposite direction to the way they are told to and on legendary, seeing my spearmen getting charged in the rear because they haven't been programmed to know forwards from backwards is a very annoying and common occurence. No they shadow hands moving away from each other concept still applies to Rome II and Attila. Moving away from siege focused? With Chaos acting like Attila at launch and razing half the map, there won't be settlements at all in the next game. Also just to point out yes Shogun 2 had lots of sieges, however on hard and on legendary I personally found there to be a 45:40:15 split between sieges, open-field and naval battles. Rome II was undefended settlement battles, effectively open-field battles with some obscuring terrain. Also please choose a different PR word than 'engaging' with an engine that doesn't implement unit-collision. Finally I think the point that was trying to be made towards the end was the maps don't differ in size, or number of defenses or layout, the only things that change are the garrisons and the strength of the towers, every total war game previously has had some differences in layout and number of defenses, depending on location, size of settlement and how upgraded the defensive buildings are. An Empire town and a Dwarven Karak, occupied by their respective cultures should not have identical layouts, it is lazy and makes no sense. I hope you find my insights of use.
Actually yes, I've managed two campaigns as rome and averni that was total domination. Also there are players out there like legend of total war who consistently have campaigns that are total domination, fuck, he must have about 50 total domination campaigns under his belt now. The option was always there to just do a short campaign like I said in the video. We had both choices before, now we have only one. So orc and dwarf campaigns will be limited ONLY to karraks and holds. Which on the map is a straight linear line. With whag looks like the same siege over, and over, and over....and over. We are being extremely rail Roaded here. Also that video was rome 2, one year on. There hasn't been significant change to it since then. Only balancing changes that effects the meta in multiplayer
+yugioh37323 Age of Charlemagne is legit. There's loads of unit diversity, and the map is plenty big. Also, there are some spectacular mods made for it.9/10, highly recommend.
+Torneko Age of Charlemagne, diversity, well ignoring the re-skinning and copy-paste tactics, most factions have 20 units or less to choose from, one I saw even has 14, 14 units, and most factions have 2 or 3 categories where there are literally 2 or even 1 choice for each category of unit. A small map spanning Europe east till turkey and south till Spain, but with a reasonable amount of provinces for dlc, I wish I found it interesting. Finally I do want to stress that you cannot recommend a game for it's mods, they are developed by separate people and are not a part of the product consumers pay good money for; many of the recent total war titles would still likely be floundering in the mud if great modders hadn't stepped in to improve the game. And incase you hadn't heard Total War won't be supporting mods for warhammer.
I have said this many times. Creative Assembly is the only company willing to make games of this caliber/style. Meaning? Well to start off it shows that what it takes to develop a game of the scope that CA does it actually quite difficult. There is plenty of commercial interest to market this style of games. Which would mean that someone else would try to compete against CA for the market. But if you take a look at the genre it's just CA. Anyone who tries to "make a better game" has failed. Because if it is as easy as people like you play it up to be, then not only would CA do it; but so would other developers. This is clearly not the case. In fact I stand on my own soap box and congratulate CA for how far they have come. Gamers of today are so entitled and greedy. You spend $60 on a piece of art and entertainment that hundreds of people worked tirelessly for hundreds of hours to complete. That's it...your contribution is monetary....you quite literally have no right to bitch about anything unless you have the skills and knowledge to do a better job. Which I would then say you should get up off your lazy ass and make a better game yourself. Which is exactly what some people have done with mods (but they are still skipping so much of the hardwork; using the foundation that CA laid with the base game) I am not saying you should constructively suggest ways to remedy what you deem to be a problem. But just blindly pointing out things you dislike and saying they can/should do a better job is just lazy ignorance. I agree that this kind of DLC model is %100 greed. But it's a model that is used universally in the entire gaming community. Get used to it or stop playing games. The vocal portion of the community that is boycotting Pre-ordering these games and are threatening to stop playing the games all together are unfortunately a small % of the entire Total War fanbase. Because if the nay sayers actually had any pull in making a statement to the developers then they would never have found investors for Warhammer. Star Citizen is a great game to look at if you wanna see what it would take for Creative Assembly to start producing absolute gold. If a group of game developers banded together and started a kick starter to go above and beyond CA. With plans to make a total war styled game so immense and fine tuned. We would be looking at a $200+ price tag. We as consumers expect so much for a meager $60. But with the demands for better graphics, AI, scope, scale and immersion companies can't keep up. To finish off my rant, @OP you stated your long history with playing Total War games. One of which you played over 1000 hours. For a game that you payed $60 for, you really can't ask for better bang for your buck. And even with some of the more shake titles you had 80+ hours. Most games today can barely give you 30. I just feel you are being really hard on a company who has given you so much entertainment for so long. And truly is trying their best to keep up with technology and improve upon previous titles. But clearly it's 1000x harder then we understand. You really think they are happy with negative reviews and hate for their games? You think they would change/fix it if they could?
7 years late, but you were right on point. One among very few sane individuals back in those days. I love the like/dislike ratio showing the fanboy army was ready way back.
Better late than never haha, yeah I was expecting a buggy game, but the more in depth I’ve learned since then the whole gameplay system is fundamentally broken
Aged like fine wine
The problem with the total war series is that it rules its own kind of market, their is no similar games out their which come close to total war. Which means there is no competition which means creative assembly can do whatever they please and not be worried that fans will go to different game series offering a better game.
+Huw Griffiths Paradox has the same thing with their games
Hey, I just came over from Surreal's channel, saw you in the comments discussing this. You make fair poits and summed everything up nicely, so good job on that. I have to say that I agree with you, depressing as that is. I've been playing total war games since rome 1 (still have it in it's DVD-case) and the end of this ideo nearly choked me up. Call me nostalgic but I don't like the direction these new games are taking and am sure as hell not gonna preorder. I might go buy Midieval II and download Call of Warhammer, it has so far impressed me more then this game. Thanks for making this and don't let the dislikes get you down, you will unfortunatly prove them wrong I think.
+Quintus V Yup, TW fans have become pretty zelous lately. They are in denial because this is their saving grace (if not theres a huge chance the series goes bust otherwise). I'm pretty pissed at the way they're lashing out at criticism but I don't blame their hope/optimism.
If it turns out the advertising was a ruse all along and they were always showing extremely early builds of the game and it's kind of a "ho HO!" moment as on release it turns out they have a nearly flawless game I'll be the first to put my hands up, and admit that. I WANT that. But I need to be down to earth and I seriously doubt that with only a month out the videos they've been putting out iare indeed early builds.
+Quintus V Also Surreal is a total babe. no homo
Nasmr He is indeed, have you seen his surreal biceps video?
Also, I think the game will be playable and maybe some fun, but still suffering at it's core. It's pretty sad that the most positive things people point out in this game are some cool units and the prettyness of some maps. I mean, nobody buys a new Call of Duty because there are af few cool maps and a few cool guns?
Fuck CA. I love the Warhammer franchise and love Total War, but the Chaos DLC is over the line in so many ways. I refuse to be taken advantage of.
i wish they would copy and paste all the depth from medieval 2 into these new titles and make a campaign out of that l, i dont even care if they use the same medieval 2 engine....
Your video is well thought out. I enjoyed this as I am a newer generation to Total War games but not to gaming. My first games I felt completely enveloped was Civ 2 and Heroes of Might and Magic 3. My experience with Total War is limited to Rome 2 emperor edition, Atilla and Shogun 2. Atilla as a whole is too easy and already over saturated with terrible downloadable content. Developers are afraid to try new things even though its obvious its failing. Its like bashing your head into the same wall because you think the blood you spilled is sunlight.
Attila was tedious to me, it was either one settlement factions that you have to take aaaaaaaaaages building up to strike (more so than is pleasing imo) or you get the Roman empires which are in such a bad starting shape that it take aaaaaaaaaaages to micro. If I remember people like legend of total war can spend up to an hour on a single turn playing as Western Rome because of how bad a shape it is.
If that's you're thing go for it, but I just don't have the time to go more than 10 turns in before dropping it off sheer boredom.
you make some good points and yes it is disappointing about the siege maps and dlc however your overlooking all the other excellent things about this game the campaign maps look amazing and I cant wait to play the different Warhammer armies using magic and monsters this will be awesome and lets face it there will be some bugs and balance problems but I can a sure you this game will be the biggest total war game yet.
Demigryph Knights looks really cool yeah. But these listed things really out weigh the pros. And like you already acknowledged it'll probably be buggy on launch.
Can you really stand;
rail roaded, linear, campaigns,
Fifth of the faction ripped and resold back,
Sieges being limited to essentially the same battle over and over,
And most likely mass bugs and glitches at launch
All for just the warhammer brand? I know I can't. I won't support mediocrity and excuse after excuse after excuse
the campaigns look great with added things like quest battles and five different ways of playing as each faction is very different compared too normally playing with just humans I just find that boring, plus I also mostly play online against other people which I am sure will be much more interesting. Really I just don't understand how you cant see all the amazing things they have done with this Warhammer game like the campaign map and flying monsters and the huge amount of spells plus all the legendary characters you can control yes there will be balancing issues but that's normal, I even think the sieges will still be fun.
There's not going to be a radical change in playstyle that's any different as switching from Rome to Parthia. Not sure why "it's more than just humans" really constitutes an argument.
You still have the basic rules of TW.
Swords, spears, ranged skirmishers, artillery, large, light cav, heavy cav, shock cav.
They just have orc or vampire models and animations now which is purely superficial.
Flying seems like a nice new aspect. But again ALL races have flying units. So it doesn't change your playstyle when you change race.
Spells? General abilities buffed up. Damage spells are nice, but like I said this doesn't cover all the cons that have come out.
And as I mentioned in other comments. Online play will likely be the worst yet. With only 4 or 5 factions and such a low choice of roster it's just going to be a game of 5-10 minutes in the lobby switching factions to try and counter their faction choice. And being able to easily know what they're going to bring. If it was 4 factions, but with 30 units to choose from it'd be different. But rosters are half that size. The meta is going to be a nightmare.
I think your focusing to much on the cons if you bother to look at what most people think about this game its mostly very positive and I know for sure playing with vampire counts for instance will be much more fun than playing with roman army with its over complicated roster of units that mostly don't mean anything. and as I said monsters magic and legendary heroes will be much more interesting to have in army and the game play will be different not sure your looking at same game as me. This total war game will be biggest yet that's for sure not sure why you cant see this open you eyes.
+jonathan davis come on dude that's not an argument.
I could just as easily turn around and say you're only focusing on what's good and that's being naive and you need to open your eyes.
I've explained pretty in depth on how factions are railroaded and won't have much individuality in campaign as is the nature of total war. They won't have different starting positions either. The DLC is shameful and, as you've already conceded, the game will most likely release I unoptimised and bug ridden that'll will take multiple patches to fix.
I really would wait until post release before just handing them money in blind trust of a company that has a horrific reputation right now.
Really great video :) Total War series going to die. Because they doing these games in so horrible ways. And the Warhammer Total War sieges reminds me tower defences games, you capture the walls - you win...I could talk really long, about total war last series, how they failed...Because i grow up from first shogun total war...
Thanks man! I agree the sieges really seem waaaaay to linear to be viable now.
I'm also wondering how messed up the multiplayer aspect is going to be, Attila was terrible but this seems like there might be absolutely no online presence whatsoever, so little race + roster variety to choose from might completely damper the competitive online completely as its to easy to know what the enemy is bringing
+Dahurian What are you talking about? Use arguments or go to sleep kid.
nar man 2 walls now see the new game play lol
chaos vampire siege
Dude basic economics 101: £39.99 today > £39.99 24th of May. And it could be buggy on 24th of May, but it would even more buggy today.
What.
Are you saying money now is better than money later?
Or are you saying that inflation is THAT bad?!
I'm going to assume the first one and say this.
If a business wants you're money NOW, before their product or service, and will gimp that product or service if you don't pay before they deliver....then they definitely don't deserve your money.
There's no other industry that that does this. You'll see the movie industry taking pre-order tickets yes....but you don't see the movie industry taking out entire scenes for those who did not pre-order tickets.
You can pre-order cars...but you don't see manufacturers removing all the electrics if you don't pre-order.
You can pre-order the next IPhone....but you don't see apple taking out the camera for those who didn't.
You just don't see it anywhere else. So it baffles me when the game industry is apathetic about it.
"Are you saying money now is better than money later?
Or are you saying that inflation is THAT bad?!"
Inflation is virtually zero, I am talking about the ROI CA can get on that money by getting it earlier. You should read CA's open letter about this, they explained it themselves perfectly well and anyone who is schooled in Economics understands this principle.
"If a business wants you're money NOW, before their product or service, and will gimp that product or service if you don't pay before they deliver....then they definitely don't deserve your money."
Ok well then a whole lot, of not the majority, of businesses around the world doesn't deserve your money it seems. I guess that when you go to Disney World, you ask to pay for the entrance ticket after you have left the park and know you got value for your money? And you of course never buy flight tickets because you want to know you didn't crash och flight got cancelled before you paid, to name a few.
"There's no other industry that that does this."
Really? See above.
"You can pre-order cars...but you don't see manufacturers removing all the electrics if you don't pre-order."
Not a comparable example. CA didn't make the game unplayable by not making Chaos as a PLAYABLE faction. Chaos are the common antagonists in Warhammer. That's like complaining you cannot play Sauron's army in a LotR game. Hardly something that's required. In fact in most such games you wouldn't be able to, because you play the good guys. Chaos are still in the game as AI, otherwise you would have had a point.
As for cars, there are often offers that you get extra equipment packages if you pre-order. I never hear someone say that equipment is cut content and should have been in the car to begin with. And these kind of equipment tend to become standard in future carsd,s o they are clearly deemed "necessary" othwrwise they wouldn't become standard. For example when ABS breaks or airbags were a new thing, they were always extra equipment you had to pay for. Who in their right mind would argue today ABS breaks or airbags aren't necessary today? So clearly cut content by your logic, we're talking about saving people's lives here.
"You can pre-order the next IPhone....but you don't see apple taking out the camera for those who didn't."
Because a camera cannot simply be added to a phone, it has to be buolt in. Instead when cameras were first launched, you had phones without camera and then you had phones wiht cameras that were more expensive. It's just the same bloody thing as if you had paid extra to get a camera as extra equipment, it just wasn't technically feasible to make it an add-on.
"You just don't see it anywhere else. So it baffles me when the game industry is apathetic about it."
It baffles me how you don't seem to know how just about every businesses use this model in one way or another and always have. You always have to pay for more content, ALWAYS. One way or another. If Chaos would have been in the game for start, you'd have to pay more for the game than you do now. Instead you can look at it like this: you get the game now at a discounted price, but if you wanna wait till after launch you will pay the "full price". There are no such things as a free lunch.
Are you arguing that a flight company should offer people to fly business class for no extra charge? Clearly the seats are there and they paid the cost for them already so they're cutting content for you by offering a worse seat and holding the business seats behind a pay wall.. It wouldn't cost them a dime to let you sit in such a seat (by your logic) and especially if they're not even booked (and you'd still not be allowed to sit there!). But the truth is those seats wouldn't be there if they couldn't charge extra money for them. Just like Chaos as a PLAYABLE race.
Greenmangaming already offers the game at 25% discount. So that clearly means CA's original price is a rip off then and they "charge you for nothing"?
+Roger Carhult I'm mainly talking about pysical tangible products or media entertainment, as that's what warhammer is. It's why I used a car, iphone and a movie as examples. Disney world isn't apt.
But here's the thing
When I said took out the electrics of the car you say
"Not a comparable example. CA didn't make the game unplayable by not making Chaos as a PLAYABLE faction"
Well removing the electrics doesn't make the car undrivable. But now they can charge extra for the electrics! Even though it's unanimously agreed to be pretty essential you can make the argument that you don't NEED them to work the car. That's literally the logical argument here
The better example is the phone one.
If apple releases a series of TERRIBLE Iphones that crash consistently and took years of patching, then claimed they were releasing a new phone that they promise THIS TIME is good, but to get the camera you have to pay in advance you think that'd be acceptable? Because that's exactly what CA is doing. Something that has been standard practice now being removed and sold for extra when they don't even have the reputation for releasing quality products for some time now.
Also...come on.
"yeah but the camera is part of the phone!!!" Do I have to hand hold you?
Is it really that hard to propose a hypothetical that the manufacters could release a phone without the camera and then you pay to have it sent in and the camera added? Use your imagination to fill in the blanks there.
This "economics 101" nonsense is nothing but an vain attempt to discredit my argument.
See /watch?v=QaAH-cv2ybo on how business deserve to make money for their product, as I'm in favour of that, but how it can't be accepted taht they should put the squeeze on the customer to make as MUCH money as possible. It's why you won't see me pirating games, but not giving in to every bloody shiny shiny a business trick at the same impulsive rate a lot of other gamers seem to be doing these days. I will not incentivise them to repeat these actions.
They haven't showed a Chaos campaign walkthrough on their twitch channel yet. They did 4 factions, and then when it was time to do a Chaos walkthrough stream, they chose to continue a their last empire walkthrough, that doesn't sound right. I have also played totalwar games since Rome 1. The reviews on steam from each game starting with Medievil 2 show a pattern. The Bad Reviews are getting bigger and bigger every game.
For etc....
2010 Game development plan...
- 2 years developing game, 100 staff. - 60$
- Develop Dlc after release, 50 staff - 40$
- Started on new game, 50 staff.
2016 Game development plan.
- 1.5 years developing game, 50 staff - 60$
- 5 months Work on Dlc before release, 10 staff - (Charge players for a part of the game) 15$
- Work on Dlc after release, 20 staff, - 40$
Less staff is less expenses and more profit. Less staff = less content. Games do cost more to make than 6 years ago, but more ppl are playing games these days. Ca need a new publisher, Sega are destroying them. I wonder how many ppl will put bad reviews on steam because of the unit Dlc in the first 2 weeks of release. If ppl keep buying this crap, then Sega will never stop milking it.
I'm not against Dlc. Dlc keeps games interesting, that is why it was introduced, to get players to come back. Just like i have finished Fallout 4 and i'm bored of it, but i'm going to start it back up for far harbar. Funny how every game i look at now that has the Sega name attached to it, has a shit tonne of Dlc and bad reviews. I was a company of heroes fan, but when the second one came out, it was upsetting seeing a great game being destroyed by Dlc. The main menu was designed to throw Dlc down your throat.
I will never buy a Sega game ever again..
I, personally, can forgive Empire for being shit since its all new engine and all that but Rome II was a downright "ruck this is" and if TW:warhammer is the same, well...........bye bye CA ya out
Word, brother!
For all its bests, the franchise's recent releases left me bitter and sour.
I don't want to be a part of it anymore. I'll just pirate all releases and buy them later on sale, when the editions are complete, the game is optimized and the hardware to play them on is out. If this day comes, that is!
Im waiting till reviews. I do have it pre ordered but if the reviews suck im refunding and getting hearts of iron4 instead. Il probably give up on TW unless they put back in the features a TW game is supose to have.
+Todd Zimmerman Sega will select the ppl they want to review the game and pay websites like Ign to say the game is amazing. This is why they delayed the game, yes maybe a little tweaking too, but the main reason is to boost pre-order sales through ppl like lionheart, pixelated apollo etc, you know all the Sega little cum minions. No way will they will give a review copy to Angryjoe joe. lol.
The DLC horse has been beat to death man.
And comparing a game to LOTR is totally logical
Made a business perspective that no one really seems to have touched on.
Also it using the Lord of the rings as an example of what it should look like when you smashing the gates down with monsters and beasts is very apt. Especially considering how much inspiration warhammer had from Tolkiens works.
I have said this many times.
Creative Assembly is the only company willing to make games of this caliber/style.
Meaning? Well to start off it shows that what it takes to develop a game of the scope that CA does it actually quite difficult. There is plenty of commercial interest to market this style of games. Which would mean that someone else would try to compete against CA for the market. But if you take a look at the genre it's just CA. Anyone who tries to "make a better game" has failed. Because if it is as easy as people like you play it up to be, then not only would CA do it; but so would other developers.
This is clearly not the case. In fact I stand on my own soap box and congratulate CA for how far they have come. Gamers of today are so entitled and greedy. You spend $60 on a piece of art and entertainment that hundreds of people worked tirelessly for hundreds of hours to complete. That's it...your contribution is monetary....you quite literally have no right to bitch about anything unless you have the skills and knowledge to do a better job. Which I would then say you should get up off your lazy ass and make a better game yourself. Which is exactly what some people have done with mods (but they are still skipping so much of the hardwork; using the foundation that CA laid with the base game) I am not saying you should constructively suggest ways to remedy what you deem to be a problem. But just blindly pointing out things you dislike and saying they can/should do a better job is just lazy ignorance.
I agree that this kind of DLC model is %100 greed. But it's a model that is used universally in the entire gaming community. Get used to it or stop playing games.
The vocal portion of the community that is boycotting Pre-ordering these games and are threatening to stop playing the games all together are unfortunately a small % of the entire Total War fanbase. Because if the nay sayers actually had any pull in making a statement to the developers then they would never have found investors for Warhammer.
Star Citizen is a great game to look at if you wanna see what it would take for Creative Assembly to start producing absolute gold.
If a group of game developers banded together and started a kick starter to go above and beyond CA. With plans to make a total war styled game so immense and fine tuned. We would be looking at a $200+ price tag. We as consumers expect so much for a meager $60. But with the demands for better graphics, AI, scope, scale and immersion companies can't keep up.
To finish off my rant, @OP you stated your long history with playing Total War games. One of which you played over 1000 hours. For a game that you payed $60 for, you really can't ask for better bang for your buck. And even with some of the more shake titles you had 80+ hours. Most games today can barely give you 30. I just feel you are being really hard on a company who has given you so much entertainment for so long. And truly is trying their best to keep up with technology and improve upon previous titles. But clearly it's 1000x harder then we understand. You really think they are happy with negative reviews and hate for their games? You think they would change/fix it if they could?
+Dustin Friesen Yes it's true that CA are the only guys creating 2000 manned on screen battles in real time, it's why I fell in love with it. I think I was about 13 and a HUGE fan of the lord of the rings, the twin towers at the time. Which is why when I bought rome for the first time and saw 2,300 pike men I collectively lost my shit.
It's also that core basis of such grand scale battles that I love to this day and why I can dump thousands of hours into (heavily modded) modern versions of the series.
But when I see that the ONLY provider of that piece of awesome is suddenly completely dicking me over by releasing heavily bugged and broken games that take years to patch up properly, or taking out massive chunks of the game to sell day 1? I get reaaaaaaaallly pissed off at that.
Personally I do believe a lot of guys at CA are genuine dudes who want to release a genuine product, and it's SEGA who are telling them to do that.
But from what I read on that massive blog post trying to explain the chaos DLC a lot of team members were shocked to find a negative response and suggested to just ignore it and hope it goes away...telling me a lot of them are really oblivious too.
I don't exactly know how the contracts work out for them, or how long they have left in their deals with SEGA. But as soon as it expires I would tell them to go shove it and try and get valve to buy the rights.
Hell, I think they should start pitching to valve right now, total war has been featured on the front page of steam so many times they MUST have a good standing and business relationship with them.
It would be pretty awesome if valve bought CA and gave them more creative freedoms that avoid debacles like Rome 2 or Chaos DLC. I don't think valve are the best ever, that goes to GOG and cdprojektred (oh my glorious fuck if they bought CA imagine a witcher total war), but still valve know more on how to handle these things than a dying SEGA who still can't grasp their own shit (sonic).
Interesting video, but I respectfully disagree with a few of your points - namely about the sieges, engine, and regional occupation. My first question, is have you even actually conquered the entire map in any Total War game? My guess is no. If you've played the Age of Charlemagne DLC, you can see that they were experimenting with the idea of a player increasing their Imperium and super upgrading a handful of provinces rather than expanding over the entire map. You can see evidence of them continuing in this directing in the newest Vampire Counts campaign video, where they were able to have some of the highest tier units with only 2 and a half provinces. As far as the engine goes, making a new engine is fucking expensive, and the battles are exquisite in Rome II nowadays. All my problems with battles in Attila boil down to how the units form up, but not the function. The shadow hand example was made when Rome II was a broken mess, but that engine works really well in both Rome II and Attila. As far as sieges go, why aren't you glad that they're moving away from siege focused game play? Bouncing from town to town wasn't as engaging as massive field battles, and it seems like that's what they're going for more because of how siege battles are presented. Oh and also, your point on how towns don't level up is absolute and complete bullshit. They've states MULTIPLE times that the towers get stronger. Thanks for reading! :D
+Torneko Just to respond to your arguments with my views, yes people actually conquer the map in campaigns, I myself have completed campaigns in Shogun 1, Rome 1, Medieval 2, Not empire because it still crashes regularly after 50 turns and the combat still hasn't been fixed, Some parts of Napoleon I completed because they actually worked but on the whole weren't particularly entertaining, Shogun 2 of about 80-100 campaigns I have completed just under 50% as albeit a few graphical bugs and loading times, the gameplay was interesting, Rome II never completed a campaign even with the new emperor edition as its still boring start to end, same for Attila, and thank goodness I picked that up for under £4, wouldn't have been worth much more even post all the patches. None the less the regional occupation makes no sense from a strategic or lore standpoint, the only standpoint that it can make sense from is a CA/SEGA/GW in terms of money because they don't have to model other race conversions of different provinces, i.e. instead of 4 variations of each map, they only need to do 2, it's just lazy.
With regards to Age of Charlemagne, I concede that I have not purchased it to try it because the gameplay I have seen appears even lack-luster than compared to normal Attila, with fewer units and a much smaller campaign map. They very well may have been 'experimenting' with super upgrading a handful of provinces, that's the thing though isn't it common sense in all total wars to upgrade the more central settlements anyway, and then send units from them out to support armies throughout your empire, ah wait I know you can't do that in Rome II because general numbers are limited, and of course you couldn't possibly send out units without a dedicated 'general'.
Also in regards to the higher tier units, I believe the modern total war tech trees restrict the best units until they are both researched and have required buildings, which is usually more easily obtained with more settlements (i.e. a higher income therefore more money to build and upgrade).
Yes new engines are expensive, but they've had this for 7 years + now, and I am not aware of anyone that hugely criticized the engine of the total wars until they changed it in Empire, at which point it had been designed for musket-line warfare, I will agree that it worked well in Shogun 2 because of all the polish and EFFORT they put in, however it is fundamentally incompatible with Rome II and Attila; Warhammer will have some units from dwarfs and humans that use the strengths of the engine but the rest of the faction units do not to any huge degree. A different engine is necessary to actually obtain the objectives/ features that CA is envisioning as it cannot properly implement something as logical as unit collision, and SEGA are backing CA, don't tell me they don't have the money for it, SEGA still got their money from Rome II. In regards to Rome II, I can tell you from more than 700 hrs the battles are still boring and glitchy, the gatehouses in particular. Yeah I have problems with my units forming up in Attila too, they often get stuck on the walls, phase through buildings with no walking animations and decide to form up in the opposite direction to the way they are told to and on legendary, seeing my spearmen getting charged in the rear because they haven't been programmed to know forwards from backwards is a very annoying and common occurence.
No they shadow hands moving away from each other concept still applies to Rome II and Attila.
Moving away from siege focused? With Chaos acting like Attila at launch and razing half the map, there won't be settlements at all in the next game. Also just to point out yes Shogun 2 had lots of sieges, however on hard and on legendary I personally found there to be a 45:40:15 split between sieges, open-field and naval battles. Rome II was undefended settlement battles, effectively open-field battles with some obscuring terrain. Also please choose a different PR word than 'engaging' with an engine that doesn't implement unit-collision.
Finally I think the point that was trying to be made towards the end was the maps don't differ in size, or number of defenses or layout, the only things that change are the garrisons and the strength of the towers, every total war game previously has had some differences in layout and number of defenses, depending on location, size of settlement and how upgraded the defensive buildings are. An Empire town and a Dwarven Karak, occupied by their respective cultures should not have identical layouts, it is lazy and makes no sense.
I hope you find my insights of use.
Actually yes, I've managed two campaigns as rome and averni that was total domination. Also there are players out there like legend of total war who consistently have campaigns that are total domination, fuck, he must have about 50 total domination campaigns under his belt now.
The option was always there to just do a short campaign like I said in the video. We had both choices before, now we have only one.
So orc and dwarf campaigns will be limited ONLY to karraks and holds. Which on the map is a straight linear line. With whag looks like the same siege over, and over, and over....and over. We are being extremely rail Roaded here.
Also that video was rome 2, one year on. There hasn't been significant change to it since then. Only balancing changes that effects the meta in multiplayer
+yugioh37323 Age of Charlemagne is legit. There's loads of unit diversity, and the map is plenty big. Also, there are some spectacular mods made for it.9/10, highly recommend.
+Torneko Age of Charlemagne, diversity, well ignoring the re-skinning and copy-paste tactics, most factions have 20 units or less to choose from, one I saw even has 14, 14 units, and most factions have 2 or 3 categories where there are literally 2 or even 1 choice for each category of unit. A small map spanning Europe east till turkey and south till Spain, but with a reasonable amount of provinces for dlc, I wish I found it interesting.
Finally I do want to stress that you cannot recommend a game for it's mods, they are developed by separate people and are not a part of the product consumers pay good money for; many of the recent total war titles would still likely be floundering in the mud if great modders hadn't stepped in to improve the game. And incase you hadn't heard Total War won't be supporting mods for warhammer.
yugioh37323 Why not? You get the DLC you get the mods.
I have said this many times.
Creative Assembly is the only company willing to make games of this caliber/style.
Meaning? Well to start off it shows that what it takes to develop a game of the scope that CA does it actually quite difficult. There is plenty of commercial interest to market this style of games. Which would mean that someone else would try to compete against CA for the market. But if you take a look at the genre it's just CA. Anyone who tries to "make a better game" has failed. Because if it is as easy as people like you play it up to be, then not only would CA do it; but so would other developers.
This is clearly not the case. In fact I stand on my own soap box and congratulate CA for how far they have come. Gamers of today are so entitled and greedy. You spend $60 on a piece of art and entertainment that hundreds of people worked tirelessly for hundreds of hours to complete. That's it...your contribution is monetary....you quite literally have no right to bitch about anything unless you have the skills and knowledge to do a better job. Which I would then say you should get up off your lazy ass and make a better game yourself. Which is exactly what some people have done with mods (but they are still skipping so much of the hardwork; using the foundation that CA laid with the base game) I am not saying you should constructively suggest ways to remedy what you deem to be a problem. But just blindly pointing out things you dislike and saying they can/should do a better job is just lazy ignorance.
I agree that this kind of DLC model is %100 greed. But it's a model that is used universally in the entire gaming community. Get used to it or stop playing games.
The vocal portion of the community that is boycotting Pre-ordering these games and are threatening to stop playing the games all together are unfortunately a small % of the entire Total War fanbase. Because if the nay sayers actually had any pull in making a statement to the developers then they would never have found investors for Warhammer.
Star Citizen is a great game to look at if you wanna see what it would take for Creative Assembly to start producing absolute gold.
If a group of game developers banded together and started a kick starter to go above and beyond CA. With plans to make a total war styled game so immense and fine tuned. We would be looking at a $200+ price tag. We as consumers expect so much for a meager $60. But with the demands for better graphics, AI, scope, scale and immersion companies can't keep up.
To finish off my rant, @OP you stated your long history with playing Total War games. One of which you played over 1000 hours. For a game that you payed $60 for, you really can't ask for better bang for your buck. And even with some of the more shake titles you had 80+ hours. Most games today can barely give you 30. I just feel you are being really hard on a company who has given you so much entertainment for so long. And truly is trying their best to keep up with technology and improve upon previous titles. But clearly it's 1000x harder then we understand. You really think they are happy with negative reviews and hate for their games? You think they would change/fix it if they could?