My biggest complaint about newer Total war games is that you no longer have bodyguards guarding your general. Instead, your general is a demigod who doesn't even need an army
I think for me one of the things I really hate about new games is the garrison system and your inability to split troops off of a generals army to have them ride off by themselves
I think you've hit the nail on the head. CA's kind of painted themselves into a corner by effectively splitting their (already quite niche) playerbase between fantasy and historical. Ever since Warhammer came out every historical release (ThroB, Troy, 3K, and Pharaoh) has been underwhelming at best. They don't seem to understand that dumbing down the core mechanics (which works for a fantasy game with like 50+ different factions each with their own unique mechanics) largely turns off the historical playerbase who like super in-depth, gritty, and realistic mechanics, and the historical settings they've been using lately just haven't been interesting enough (or well executed enough) to pull people away from Warhammer Fantasy games. I love both kinds of games (leaning more toward fantasy) and I haven't fully enjoyed a historical TW since Rome 2 so it's been sad to see them fall off so sharply. Theoretically I should've loved ThroB because I love the setting but it was so broken and the mechanics were so unengaging. Troy outright made me stop buying CA historical titles. Conversely so much love and passion has been put into the Warhammer series, and I don't think it's entirely corporate greed that's driving it. Rumour has it that they're working on a WW1 game which will act as a test bed for a 40K game, which is great news, IF they can pull it off. But that's in danger of suffering from the same problem - either the WW1 game will be too dumbed down, or the 40K game will be too complicated. Hope they can do both well. 40K is likely to be an absolute cash cow - and a gateway drug for a lot of players into TW games - for them if they execute it well since it's orders of magnitude more popular than WHF.
I´m a historical player and I would be open to Star Wars or Elder Scrolls fantasy TW. But I don´t get the appeal of Warhammer at all. I bet it wasn´t their first choice.
If you ask me, Total war wants to be 2 things at once, Fantasy does great, even better than any historical game, therefore they will focus on them, The games are doing good, have a good playerbase and with another good ID pull it will be even better, If you ask me the age of "hystorical" games is over
It works better than historical because they screw up historical. The market for historical games is still big. Games like ck3, age of empires, mount and blade, and manor lords shows that. Companies just can't seem to make any decent total war type large battle games with a campaign map
After playing Bannerlords... total war Is dead. All The Mount and blade devs need to do is a ps5/x box and pc co-op campaign in a historical or lotr setting.. and they win forever.
Bannerlord is overrated... Pretty much a graphical upgrade with a few major changes from Warband, yet lacks mechanics present in the prequels. Don't get me wrong, it's a somewhat good game, but it really isn't and I don't think it ever will be what it could've been.
My biggest complaint about newer Total war games is that you no longer have bodyguards guarding your general. Instead, your general is a demigod who doesn't even need an army
I think for me one of the things I really hate about new games is the garrison system and your inability to split troops off of a generals army to have them ride off by themselves
I think you've hit the nail on the head. CA's kind of painted themselves into a corner by effectively splitting their (already quite niche) playerbase between fantasy and historical. Ever since Warhammer came out every historical release (ThroB, Troy, 3K, and Pharaoh) has been underwhelming at best. They don't seem to understand that dumbing down the core mechanics (which works for a fantasy game with like 50+ different factions each with their own unique mechanics) largely turns off the historical playerbase who like super in-depth, gritty, and realistic mechanics, and the historical settings they've been using lately just haven't been interesting enough (or well executed enough) to pull people away from Warhammer Fantasy games. I love both kinds of games (leaning more toward fantasy) and I haven't fully enjoyed a historical TW since Rome 2 so it's been sad to see them fall off so sharply. Theoretically I should've loved ThroB because I love the setting but it was so broken and the mechanics were so unengaging. Troy outright made me stop buying CA historical titles. Conversely so much love and passion has been put into the Warhammer series, and I don't think it's entirely corporate greed that's driving it.
Rumour has it that they're working on a WW1 game which will act as a test bed for a 40K game, which is great news, IF they can pull it off. But that's in danger of suffering from the same problem - either the WW1 game will be too dumbed down, or the 40K game will be too complicated. Hope they can do both well. 40K is likely to be an absolute cash cow - and a gateway drug for a lot of players into TW games - for them if they execute it well since it's orders of magnitude more popular than WHF.
agree the new games are to arcadey and fast paced, shogun was perfect
Yeah Attila was the peak, it was all downhill from there.
it dropped off after shogun 2
good morning, welcome to the real world
I´m a historical player and I would be open to Star Wars or Elder Scrolls fantasy TW. But I don´t get the appeal of Warhammer at all. I bet it wasn´t their first choice.
If you ask me, Total war wants to be 2 things at once, Fantasy does great, even better than any historical game, therefore they will focus on them, The games are doing good, have a good playerbase and with another good ID pull it will be even better, If you ask me the age of "hystorical" games is over
It works better than historical because they screw up historical. The market for historical games is still big. Games like ck3, age of empires, mount and blade, and manor lords shows that. Companies just can't seem to make any decent total war type large battle games with a campaign map
After playing Bannerlords... total war Is dead. All The Mount and blade devs need to do is a ps5/x box and pc co-op campaign in a historical or lotr setting.. and they win forever.
Bannerlord is overrated... Pretty much a graphical upgrade with a few major changes from Warband, yet lacks mechanics present in the prequels. Don't get me wrong, it's a somewhat good game, but it really isn't and I don't think it ever will be what it could've been.
these games suck compared to alien, which they're making a new one
@@x0j alien?
@@noobhunter94mc22 yeah u know, alien isolation
@x0j i haven't played that one. Not a fan of stealth. I have been playing alien dark decent though. It's been pretty good