i like just sitting here and looking at this ˝drama˝ while unironicaly enjoying every single total war game that i own which in this case means from rome 1 to wh 1 , and i play all of them depending on my mood , and something has to be really really bad (imo) to get my blood pumping , people always yap about how x feature from med 2 was great but then i go play med 2 and im like ˝okay˝ they litteraly just exist and dont rub me any particular way and since it seems to be something of a measuring stick ive been playing total war since 2015 and my first game was med 2 i couldnt afford any of the newer ones cause my pc ran on a dead hamster , i could also say something about my brain not being really engaged by any total war in any meaningful way especialy in terms of battles , like yes i do some thinking on the campaigns side but 99% of battles always were and always will be mostly brainless and simple affairs
Personally, Total War has been dead to me since Rome 2. To this day, I have only played 5 hours of that game. Never bought any other TW game afterwards; the appeal is just gone. In Mount&Blade+Warband I had so many epic moments fighting in the crusades or during Sengoku Jidai period, an experience TW games can never deliver. This reminds me of an old game called Rise&Fall, an rts where you can control a hero. If they can make something similar for TW, I would be interested. If not, I rather play Bannerlords regardless if the new TW game is historical, fantasy, MTW3 or WW1, I couldn't care less anymore.
A bit of apples to oranges comparing TW to MB, although I am a fan of both titles and sink way way to many hours in warband and bannerlord. Although if you want a historical RTS then I suggest Call to arms, both OG and Ostfront.
@@Lee-honour Hi, thanks for suggesting Calls to Arms! Of course you're right no game is like Total War (and propably never will be). For me, M&B/Bannerlords and even Age of Wonders are competing with Total War, since I see it as turn-based campaigns and commanding armies in tactical field battles (making them different than e.g. Europa Universalis). These exact 2 game franchises made me stop buying TW games (for now).
I got into Total War with Warhammer 2. I then went back and played Shogun 2 and FoTS, as well as Rome 2. I gotta say, I totally understand why an older fan would not like the Warhammer titles. The mechanics are extremely streamlined, both on campaign and in battle. Also, having a historical legendary faction leader game would be terrible imo. I think a lot of the fun in the older titles was that turns were a passage of time, with your characters having lifespans and evolving over time. I will say though, politics in the modern games are certainly an improvement in many respects.
Although I see why you would say that I feel the opposite, having more than 20 turns to spend with a character makes its easier to get attached to them. When I played Rome 2 for example generals didn't really jump out at me because they really didn't act all that different from each other. Although I would like to have some mechanics brought back from the older titles and polished a bit more.
Has total war fallen? Answer yes yes it has, the franchise on the whole since Shogun 2. has been on a trend of over simplification of what where once complex systems. Everything from the removal of population mechanics to simplified city building systems serve as clear examples.
Empire was the first slip up, Napoleon was a succesful recovery, Shogun 2 and FOS were the last great total war campaigns, Rome 2 and Atilla were the beginning of the end.
I'm a TW noob myself with only a small amount of TWW2 and TWW3 under my belt but I can say that these games feel fun to play if a bit complicated to learn. Due to this complexity I probably wouldn't try any historical TW games unless Jean D'arc becomes a Legendary Lord kind of character. Either way I think getting newer fans is a good thing for any franchise that wants to grow and thrive. Definitely subscribed for more of your content though!
Well first thank you very much for the sub! If you do like the warhammer style I would suggest picking up troy, three kingdoms, and even Rome 2 when they go on sale. All three are fantastic games!
i do not think it had "fallen". we have simply exhausted the formula. it was a good, revolutionary formula when it appeared. but now it is simply time to move on.
It's is a lot of that to go through, I will be honest I skipped ahead halfway went he started to cope about that one history diploma guy that liked warhammer 3.
PA's video was bad. Im no stranger to seeing my favorite franchises stripped down and pimped to the masses. Ive played TW since Med 1, for me modded wh3 is the most fun the series has been. Vanilla id give it to med 2. I think this series has really had more to do with scale and spectacle rather than strategy. Honestly as long as the next historical game has good unit diversity and good combat feel I think it'll be fine
Yes and no, Warhammer and Three kings was made by the mainline CA office while Pharaoh was made by CA Sofia. However if you are talking about staff that made the older titles I am sure a handful are still there.
Well done! I think you hit the nail completely on the head. When I watched PA video right when I clicked it I was like here we go again. Then when he switched over to promoting the new game I was ok here is the why for this video. This is why he made it to promote the new game. I watched legends and just today I put volounds video on and listened to it while I was working. None of these guys picked up on the why of PA's video. They are just like almost robotic went into their take. After Volounds video yours rolled next and I was oh no not another video on this. I kept listening because I was like alright he is setting up the arguments ok lets hear what narrative you would push. I was pleasantly surprised to not get a gaslighting narrative pushing video but someone that just spoke on the facts.
Well first off, thank you for your kind words! And yeah I just assumed that Legend was being overly polite to PA and managed to dig something out of that utter trash video. I know PA made another vid as a response but I don't care enough to listen to it. I skipped over a lot of stuff as I didn't want the video to swell up in size but yeah I could have made around an hour just dunking on PA's vid.
@ PA purpose for making the video was definitely to promote the game coming out. The second video is basically him explaining why he made the video and he starts into the same argument until he rolls into his pitch for the upcoming game. Question is would he have made the video without pitching the new game. 2 videos in looks like no.
I’ve only ever played the Warhammer titles. However I did play total war medieval 2 modded for Warhammer. I’d say mechanically, animations, and integrity of systems has fallen. I don’t think that the arcade like mobile gameplay is good. Simplifying mechanics so casual gamers can play. If you scrutinized the gameplay there’s a deterioration of mechanics. Shogun Rome 1 and Medieval 1/2 are so much more interesting on an animation/sword to sword, and mechanics suffer from laziness. I’m a Warhammer fan first, total war later. I recognize when there’s been a folly tho
shocker , all the comments that agree with you are noobs too, your analysis , especially when you start discussing about M3 proves his point how you consumers ruined total war.
The games were not “Streamlined”, they were stripped of mechanics and simplified full stop. “Streamlining” is when Total War finally gets a responsive and fully functional camera as shown in Shogun 2. Rome 2 remade the engine to make it not a fully actualized physics system where numbers ultimately trumps all. Where the AI is deliberately gimped of its intelligence. Sieges being absolutely garbage, uninspired, and uninteresting. Since then, the games have been copy/paste trash onwards with some games modifying their engines to allow other garbage mechanics. Atilla I think was the first modification with warhammer being the second if I recall correctly. These games are a symptom of the problem of CA. History and fantasy as a divide is a red herring btw. Only CA benefits from these discussions since it keeps the fanbase divided against each other and allows CA to sidestep their terrible game design and laziness that you love to eat up apparently. The real divide is the good games like med2 and shogun 2. At the very least empire was actually ambitious with its design, it was just executed terribly. As opposed to rome 2, 3k, warhammer, and Pharaoh. These games are rotten to the core. To fix them, you need to remake them entirely from the ground up. Unlike empire. Which leads me to the fanbase, which I certainly do believe we should call them out. It’s a newer fanbase with no actual framework of what total war has been, and fantasies of what it could be. The things they’ve taken away from them as customers. Good and interesting sieges, no naval combat, terrible numbers games with terrible unit design philosophies. I think the descriptor of “Consumer” fits quite well since they’ll lap up anything put in front of them. Finally, your ideas for med3… it simply just wouldn’t work. The passage of time for these games are paramount for allowing interesting mechanics and different pathways for the campaigns. A static LL where customization comes from a contrived tree that adds numbers is the shit that made total war (Especially WH) absolutely garbage. How about making them actual generals. Btw, I am by no way opposed to single entity units. It’s just that the implementation of them introduced from troy and downstream of that game is awful. Why? For one it looks stupid. Some god among men mindlessly standing in a blob getting poked at all sides from some fuckass mob not reacting to anything. Secondly, It doesn’t facilitate tactical gaming. In troy and WH, you send your unkillable lord to blob up chaff so you can just sidestep the whole point of fighting lines. With leadership not mattering anymore, it always seems like that lord unit is the last thing to die on a battle. Lastly, it’s fucking boring. When you and every army gets some fuckass dude to essentially stall the game and remove tactical decision making shouldn’t be encouraged or facilitated. There’s been single entity units since shogun 1, and at least the Kensei tried dodging attacks. Why? Because ultimately it could die from a single attack since it was still just a man. That’s the kind of single entity unit I want. Seriously, people joke about CA putting in LLs of leaders of that time and you unironically go, “Yeah, that’s peak”. Tl:dr Yes, Total War (and its fanbase) has fallen.
See all this falls flat on it's face as I have gone back to play Napoleon rather recently and everything you said about the AI can be said about the AI in that game. It's a extremely simple AI that doesn't know how to place it's arty properly be it on a land battle or a star fort battle, placing the arty outside the walls of all things. And the AI loves to just rush it's cav forward to die and allows the infantry to be picked off. Never mind the numinous sound bugs and CTD when I try to load the game, which you can find in the livestream I did of the game last week. The UI is clunky but serviceable but it does need streamlining and would improve a lot from features that were introduced later on, such as the ability to easily move the entire army in one formation. And you bring up shogun 2 where this is where the streamlining first started with the overhaul to the province system which all other games after used. A lot of naysayers like yourself suffer from rose tinted glasses, playing the games modded and forgetting what the base game warts and all is really like. TLDR: The fanbase hasn't fallen, you're just incorrect.
@ I’m sorry, in my post did I say old tw ai was good? I said the AI for newer games have been deliberately sabotaged. *This is a fact.* Ex-devs have gone on record saying CA wants to keep their AI trash for casuals. They were also gimped for sieges specifically. This gimping is why siege maps are so barebones compared to med2 Whatever you posted is irrelevant. I don’t care about whataboutisms and other nonsense. You can come to terms that CA wants to keep their AI bad for their consoomer base or you can cope about it. Again, ex-ca devs are on record saying this to be true. The regions system is certainly not ideal, as a facilitator of open-ended campaign options since we as gamers actually know what it can look like in rome 1 and med2. However, that system is in no way as restrictive as the games rome 2 and onwards was. At the end of the day, I can still build a province exactly to my liking, expand into provinces that affects my campaign and battles significantly, and have a fulfilling and engaging campaign with the systems afforded to us. This is not true for rome 2 and onwards. All that to only harp on AI and regions. Shogun 2 was still good with it. Can’t say the same for the other games with its stats and spreadsheeting, arbitrary trees to increase numbers that were half assed into the copy/paste formula. The battle mechanics either stripped away or taken out like chain routs, stamina, and leadership. A new engine that does not have an actualized physics engine for the battles so guys just slide around willy-nilly on ice. Presentation so dogshit they can’t be bothered to give firearms reloading and have them fire in ranks. Having dudes poke at some LL as he stone faces them down unfazed because CA has gotten lazy and lost all passion. I don’t think I’m wrong at all. Of course a fanbase who will lap up anything given to them would say otherwise. Again, they’re ok with purchasing blood, and paying $10-$20 for some fantasy faction that doesn’t even get them all the lords and units I bet. I’m much newer to this franchise and I can see the trash from a fresh perspective. I’ve only been playing TW for a few months and I haven’t needed to use mods for shogun 2 and med2 at least. I’ve needed to for WH though. I needed to purchase every game in fact just to use the factions I wanted to play as. Thank fucking god I didn’t purchase it through steam and got some key for the games for only $10 each cuz ca does not need my money, nor are they ever worth the $60 price tag. Tl:dr No matter what you say, TW is a shell of its former self, chasing fantasies of what it wants to be. And me? I can see this obviously by only playing these games a few months.
@@xenmaster2203 You seem very emotional for a series that you seem to dislike like, may I suggest touching some grass or even playing a different game instead of gnashing your teeth and wailing like banshee?
@@Lee-honour I like shogun 2 and I like Med2. And what I like even more is my two best friends who I’ve been with since starting High School. They like to play WH, so I got warhammer. Shitty games can still be fun with friends, just not because of the games. I assume you start calling me emotional because you don’t know why the games from rome 2 onwards are bad? I’m guessing you don’t know that ex-ca devs are more happier in other companies, getting payed more for the same amount of effort. I’m glad they left and are being valued for their worth. CA doesn’t care about them obviously. They also don’t care about the quality of their games past rome 2. By proxy, I doubt they care much about their fanbase. Since they themselves propagate the division of fantasy v history discussions. CA encourages infighting of their own fanbases in their deepest of communities. Why? Because if they were to start fighting together on things that matter (like the mechanics instead of the setting), CA would be forced to come to grips with their laziness and terrible mechanics. I don’t think you’re a shill necessarily but you come off as one. Since none of your posts actually talked about the very real mechanics that has turned these games actually trash. You talked about the ai I guess but it wasn’t of any actual substance. Just said the old games ai was bad. I hope that doesn’t mean you’re fine with them to keeping the ai gimped, right? If you don’t want to engage with the post you can save us both the time and not reply. If you reply I will simply list off mechanics, systems, and interactions that I’ve noticed taken away from you as a gamer. Tl:dr I like shogun 2 and med2. They took so much away from you and even I can see it.
i like just sitting here and looking at this ˝drama˝ while unironicaly enjoying every single total war game that i own which in this case means from rome 1 to wh 1 , and i play all of them depending on my mood , and something has to be really really bad (imo) to get my blood pumping , people always yap about how x feature from med 2 was great but then i go play med 2 and im like ˝okay˝ they litteraly just exist and dont rub me any particular way and since it seems to be something of a measuring stick ive been playing total war since 2015 and my first game was med 2 i couldnt afford any of the newer ones cause my pc ran on a dead hamster , i could also say something about my brain not being really engaged by any total war in any meaningful way especialy in terms of battles , like yes i do some thinking on the campaigns side but 99% of battles always were and always will be mostly brainless and simple affairs
Personally, Total War has been dead to me since Rome 2. To this day, I have only played 5 hours of that game. Never bought any other TW game afterwards; the appeal is just gone. In Mount&Blade+Warband I had so many epic moments fighting in the crusades or during Sengoku Jidai period, an experience TW games can never deliver. This reminds me of an old game called Rise&Fall, an rts where you can control a hero. If they can make something similar for TW, I would be interested. If not, I rather play Bannerlords regardless if the new TW game is historical, fantasy, MTW3 or WW1, I couldn't care less anymore.
A bit of apples to oranges comparing TW to MB, although I am a fan of both titles and sink way way to many hours in warband and bannerlord. Although if you want a historical RTS then I suggest Call to arms, both OG and Ostfront.
@@Lee-honour Hi, thanks for suggesting Calls to Arms! Of course you're right no game is like Total War (and propably never will be). For me, M&B/Bannerlords and even Age of Wonders are competing with Total War, since I see it as turn-based campaigns and commanding armies in tactical field battles (making them different than e.g. Europa Universalis). These exact 2 game franchises made me stop buying TW games (for now).
@@demi9383 Not a problem, I do have Call to Arms Ostfront videos and streams up on the channel if you want to take a look before jumping in!
pharaoh dynasties was good in my opinion
I got into Total War with Warhammer 2. I then went back and played Shogun 2 and FoTS, as well as Rome 2. I gotta say, I totally understand why an older fan would not like the Warhammer titles. The mechanics are extremely streamlined, both on campaign and in battle.
Also, having a historical legendary faction leader game would be terrible imo. I think a lot of the fun in the older titles was that turns were a passage of time, with your characters having lifespans and evolving over time.
I will say though, politics in the modern games are certainly an improvement in many respects.
Although I see why you would say that I feel the opposite, having more than 20 turns to spend with a character makes its easier to get attached to them. When I played Rome 2 for example generals didn't really jump out at me because they really didn't act all that different from each other. Although I would like to have some mechanics brought back from the older titles and polished a bit more.
Has total war fallen? Answer yes yes it has, the franchise on the whole since Shogun 2. has been on a trend of over simplification of what where once complex systems. Everything from the removal of population mechanics to simplified city building systems serve as clear examples.
Empire was the first slip up, Napoleon was a succesful recovery, Shogun 2 and FOS were the last great total war campaigns, Rome 2 and Atilla were the beginning of the end.
I'm a TW noob myself with only a small amount of TWW2 and TWW3 under my belt but I can say that these games feel fun to play if a bit complicated to learn. Due to this complexity I probably wouldn't try any historical TW games unless Jean D'arc becomes a Legendary Lord kind of character. Either way I think getting newer fans is a good thing for any franchise that wants to grow and thrive.
Definitely subscribed for more of your content though!
Well first thank you very much for the sub!
If you do like the warhammer style I would suggest picking up troy, three kingdoms, and even Rome 2 when they go on sale. All three are fantastic games!
@Lee-honour I may do that at some point. Fantasy has always been my speed over historical so it may be awhile lol
i do not think it had "fallen". we have simply exhausted the formula. it was a good, revolutionary formula when it appeared. but now it is simply time to move on.
I couldn't finish watching PA's video. I probably didn't even get halfway through. It was too much BS for me.
It's is a lot of that to go through, I will be honest I skipped ahead halfway went he started to cope about that one history diploma guy that liked warhammer 3.
PA's video was bad. Im no stranger to seeing my favorite franchises stripped down and pimped to the masses. Ive played TW since Med 1, for me modded wh3 is the most fun the series has been. Vanilla id give it to med 2. I think this series has really had more to do with scale and spectacle rather than strategy. Honestly as long as the next historical game has good unit diversity and good combat feel I think it'll be fine
Ive felt like PA dosnt have the same team/code the made shogun2 and rome 2. New folks are working on warhammers, 3kings and pharaoh.
Rome 2 sucked
Yes and no, Warhammer and Three kings was made by the mainline CA office while Pharaoh was made by CA Sofia. However if you are talking about staff that made the older titles I am sure a handful are still there.
Well done! I think you hit the nail completely on the head. When I watched PA video right when I clicked it I was like here we go again. Then when he switched over to promoting the new game I was ok here is the why for this video. This is why he made it to promote the new game. I watched legends and just today I put volounds video on and listened to it while I was working. None of these guys picked up on the why of PA's video. They are just like almost robotic went into their take. After Volounds video yours rolled next and I was oh no not another video on this. I kept listening because I was like alright he is setting up the arguments ok lets hear what narrative you would push. I was pleasantly surprised to not get a gaslighting narrative pushing video but someone that just spoke on the facts.
Well first off, thank you for your kind words! And yeah I just assumed that Legend was being overly polite to PA and managed to dig something out of that utter trash video. I know PA made another vid as a response but I don't care enough to listen to it. I skipped over a lot of stuff as I didn't want the video to swell up in size but yeah I could have made around an hour just dunking on PA's vid.
@ PA purpose for making the video was definitely to promote the game coming out. The second video is basically him explaining why he made the video and he starts into the same argument until he rolls into his pitch for the upcoming game. Question is would he have made the video without pitching the new game. 2 videos in looks like no.
I’ve only ever played the Warhammer titles. However I did play total war medieval 2 modded for Warhammer. I’d say mechanically, animations, and integrity of systems has fallen. I don’t think that the arcade like mobile gameplay is good. Simplifying mechanics so casual gamers can play. If you scrutinized the gameplay there’s a deterioration of mechanics. Shogun Rome 1 and Medieval 1/2 are so much more interesting on an animation/sword to sword, and mechanics suffer from laziness. I’m a Warhammer fan first, total war later. I recognize when there’s been a folly tho
Good take here.
Why thank you very much and awesome Myth pfp!
@@Lee-honour Thank you.
shocker , all the comments that agree with you are noobs too, your analysis , especially when you start discussing about M3 proves his point how you consumers ruined total war.
I don't understand this gate keeping
I've read this 6 times and still have no idea what it means.
Nice
Thank you!
The games were not “Streamlined”, they were stripped of mechanics and simplified full stop. “Streamlining” is when Total War finally gets a responsive and fully functional camera as shown in Shogun 2.
Rome 2 remade the engine to make it not a fully actualized physics system where numbers ultimately trumps all. Where the AI is deliberately gimped of its intelligence. Sieges being absolutely garbage, uninspired, and uninteresting.
Since then, the games have been copy/paste trash onwards with some games modifying their engines to allow other garbage mechanics. Atilla I think was the first modification with warhammer being the second if I recall correctly. These games are a symptom of the problem of CA.
History and fantasy as a divide is a red herring btw. Only CA benefits from these discussions since it keeps the fanbase divided against each other and allows CA to sidestep their terrible game design and laziness that you love to eat up apparently. The real divide is the good games like med2 and shogun 2. At the very least empire was actually ambitious with its design, it was just executed terribly. As opposed to rome 2, 3k, warhammer, and Pharaoh. These games are rotten to the core. To fix them, you need to remake them entirely from the ground up. Unlike empire.
Which leads me to the fanbase, which I certainly do believe we should call them out. It’s a newer fanbase with no actual framework of what total war has been, and fantasies of what it could be. The things they’ve taken away from them as customers. Good and interesting sieges, no naval combat, terrible numbers games with terrible unit design philosophies. I think the descriptor of “Consumer” fits quite well since they’ll lap up anything put in front of them.
Finally, your ideas for med3… it simply just wouldn’t work. The passage of time for these games are paramount for allowing interesting mechanics and different pathways for the campaigns. A static LL where customization comes from a contrived tree that adds numbers is the shit that made total war (Especially WH) absolutely garbage. How about making them actual generals. Btw, I am by no way opposed to single entity units. It’s just that the implementation of them introduced from troy and downstream of that game is awful. Why? For one it looks stupid. Some god among men mindlessly standing in a blob getting poked at all sides from some fuckass mob not reacting to anything. Secondly, It doesn’t facilitate tactical gaming. In troy and WH, you send your unkillable lord to blob up chaff so you can just sidestep the whole point of fighting lines. With leadership not mattering anymore, it always seems like that lord unit is the last thing to die on a battle. Lastly, it’s fucking boring. When you and every army gets some fuckass dude to essentially stall the game and remove tactical decision making shouldn’t be encouraged or facilitated. There’s been single entity units since shogun 1, and at least the Kensei tried dodging attacks. Why? Because ultimately it could die from a single attack since it was still just a man. That’s the kind of single entity unit I want. Seriously, people joke about CA putting in LLs of leaders of that time and you unironically go, “Yeah, that’s peak”.
Tl:dr Yes, Total War (and its fanbase) has fallen.
See all this falls flat on it's face as I have gone back to play Napoleon rather recently and everything you said about the AI can be said about the AI in that game. It's a extremely simple AI that doesn't know how to place it's arty properly be it on a land battle or a star fort battle, placing the arty outside the walls of all things. And the AI loves to just rush it's cav forward to die and allows the infantry to be picked off. Never mind the numinous sound bugs and CTD when I try to load the game, which you can find in the livestream I did of the game last week.
The UI is clunky but serviceable but it does need streamlining and would improve a lot from features that were introduced later on, such as the ability to easily move the entire army in one formation.
And you bring up shogun 2 where this is where the streamlining first started with the overhaul to the province system which all other games after used. A lot of naysayers like yourself suffer from rose tinted glasses, playing the games modded and forgetting what the base game warts and all is really like.
TLDR: The fanbase hasn't fallen, you're just incorrect.
@ I’m sorry, in my post did I say old tw ai was good? I said the AI for newer games have been deliberately sabotaged. *This is a fact.* Ex-devs have gone on record saying CA wants to keep their AI trash for casuals. They were also gimped for sieges specifically. This gimping is why siege maps are so barebones compared to med2 Whatever you posted is irrelevant. I don’t care about whataboutisms and other nonsense. You can come to terms that CA wants to keep their AI bad for their consoomer base or you can cope about it. Again, ex-ca devs are on record saying this to be true.
The regions system is certainly not ideal, as a facilitator of open-ended campaign options since we as gamers actually know what it can look like in rome 1 and med2. However, that system is in no way as restrictive as the games rome 2 and onwards was. At the end of the day, I can still build a province exactly to my liking, expand into provinces that affects my campaign and battles significantly, and have a fulfilling and engaging campaign with the systems afforded to us. This is not true for rome 2 and onwards.
All that to only harp on AI and regions. Shogun 2 was still good with it. Can’t say the same for the other games with its stats and spreadsheeting, arbitrary trees to increase numbers that were half assed into the copy/paste formula. The battle mechanics either stripped away or taken out like chain routs, stamina, and leadership. A new engine that does not have an actualized physics engine for the battles so guys just slide around willy-nilly on ice. Presentation so dogshit they can’t be bothered to give firearms reloading and have them fire in ranks. Having dudes poke at some LL as he stone faces them down unfazed because CA has gotten lazy and lost all passion.
I don’t think I’m wrong at all. Of course a fanbase who will lap up anything given to them would say otherwise. Again, they’re ok with purchasing blood, and paying $10-$20 for some fantasy faction that doesn’t even get them all the lords and units I bet.
I’m much newer to this franchise and I can see the trash from a fresh perspective. I’ve only been playing TW for a few months and I haven’t needed to use mods for shogun 2 and med2 at least. I’ve needed to for WH though. I needed to purchase every game in fact just to use the factions I wanted to play as. Thank fucking god I didn’t purchase it through steam and got some key for the games for only $10 each cuz ca does not need my money, nor are they ever worth the $60 price tag.
Tl:dr No matter what you say, TW is a shell of its former self, chasing fantasies of what it wants to be. And me? I can see this obviously by only playing these games a few months.
@@xenmaster2203 You seem very emotional for a series that you seem to dislike like, may I suggest touching some grass or even playing a different game instead of gnashing your teeth and wailing like banshee?
@@Lee-honour I like shogun 2 and I like Med2. And what I like even more is my two best friends who I’ve been with since starting High School. They like to play WH, so I got warhammer. Shitty games can still be fun with friends, just not because of the games.
I assume you start calling me emotional because you don’t know why the games from rome 2 onwards are bad? I’m guessing you don’t know that ex-ca devs are more happier in other companies, getting payed more for the same amount of effort. I’m glad they left and are being valued for their worth. CA doesn’t care about them obviously. They also don’t care about the quality of their games past rome 2. By proxy, I doubt they care much about their fanbase. Since they themselves propagate the division of fantasy v history discussions. CA encourages infighting of their own fanbases in their deepest of communities. Why? Because if they were to start fighting together on things that matter (like the mechanics instead of the setting), CA would be forced to come to grips with their laziness and terrible mechanics.
I don’t think you’re a shill necessarily but you come off as one. Since none of your posts actually talked about the very real mechanics that has turned these games actually trash. You talked about the ai I guess but it wasn’t of any actual substance. Just said the old games ai was bad. I hope that doesn’t mean you’re fine with them to keeping the ai gimped, right?
If you don’t want to engage with the post you can save us both the time and not reply. If you reply I will simply list off mechanics, systems, and interactions that I’ve noticed taken away from you as a gamer.
Tl:dr I like shogun 2 and med2. They took so much away from you and even I can see it.
Is doom totaled?
Very totaled, much doom.