The competition angle you bring up is completely accurate. You may not be old enough to remember pre- breakup AT&T, but the line "We don't care cause we don't have to, we're the phone company." says it all.😂
I don't see anyone talk about the animations and overall presentation. The older games were more gritty and used real things like scrolls to give updates. There are two animations that I hated seeing in Dynasties. The jumping sword attack and the exaggerated leg kick. They don't look bad in fantasy, but they look terrible in a historical setting.
They look bad in both. Total War's combat animations since Shogun 2 has been arcadie and goofy AF. I never scroll close enough to actually watch the fights because they're just so damn cringe.
These attacks were literally copy and pasted for warhammer lol. There I understand the rought animations because you have such a diverse cast of characters and weapons, that would be impossible to animate every possible matchup, but in troy/pharao its hard to justify, its just humans fighting mostly with spears, axes, kupeshs, nothing much besides that
@@charlesmiv3842it has become an Orwellian nightmare. People are being locked up for memes and posts online, meanwhile illegal immigrants and paedophiles are allowed to run free doing whatever they want. All paid for by us tax paying citizens.
i feel like CA just needs to listen to its community bring the suggested games like Empire TW2 MTW 3 Great war TW ect instead of making a bronze age game that no one really asked for
There might be another reason why they haven't created MTW3. They might have lost the ability to do it. From the top of my head, I know that some high ranked programmers have been left CA since RTW2. Imagine if current CA released MTW3 now and it fails? That would spell the end of the company. I dont know if they want to risk it.
BINGO! You just hit the nail on the head. They can't do naval battles anymore, they can only do mods on the antiquated Warscape engine modified to the scale of claustrophobic Warhammer maps. It's been said recently that their talent pool for coders and devs are the entry level kids that get a few months on their resume before going to other studios.
That’s kind of what I am thinking as well they have been using the same engine since empire and it’s starting to show its age and I don’t think they are capable of creating a new one without hiring back good talented programmers
My main issue with the video was that PA never really stated anything new. We all know from past videos what he thinks and feels and that he does not have any hope. He remakes almost this same video every year or so.
A medieval 2 remastered with the mod support of rome remastered would be dope. Modders could create a map all the way to the Majapahit or beyond. Hopefully they'd not ruin the ui this time too
@@ObjectiveAnalysis It wasn't. It's one of the best Total War they made for sure (and FotS is amazing) but it has enormous problems that are standard in all Total War games made on the Warscape engine. Units feel floaty, battles are over too quickly, maintaining a battle line is impossible (and unnecessary), entire unit types are redundant (in Shogun 2 it's archers, which are a waste of a unit slot except in a defensive siege), diplomacy is so bad you may as well not even waste your time opening the diplomacy window, the AI is programmed to be as annoying as possible, and so on and so forth. Shogun 2 re-skinned to be a Medieval game would be a disaster. A Medieval game needs to be way more slow paced, with castles that can actually be defended.
@@Aethelhald So expertly said. I love Shogun 2 but it's battles are so damn quickly finished, it's awful. I can't enjoy the fighting for more than 3 seconds before an entire army has routed. And while I appreciate the realism of a mass route, it happens SO FAST in Shogun. The battles in the game are accurate to how some real battles went but as you implied a battle could last hours, days even. And especially in the Medieval days, you expect a knock down-drag out fight. Med 2 gets that so, so much better. I legitimately can't quit Med 2 because it's the last Total War game that got physics mostly right and got pace spot on. I know some folks hate though that in Med 2 it takes more than 1 second for a unit to get into movement. But to me that's what makes it so much better. A block of humans wouldn't respond instantly like they do in Total War games after Empire.
I had this whole thing. Typed out and decided to delete it. I'll just say this. Expecting something different from people who have not philosophically, or spiritually changed in anyway what-so-ever. Any game you get, it doesn't matter what the setting is. They don't want to make the kind of games that got them successful. Their design philosophy, the way they treat these core og fans and engage with criticism in-general. The compony is a shell of it's former self. Even the new fans, they don't respect enough to give them a feature rich complete game. To say nothing of the issues old guard fans have with the elements of the new games. They could, at least, give the new fans the service of actually giving them a well-rounded complete product on launch. They can't even seem to do that. "We'll launch it broken and incomplete and maybe fix it later" gaming era.
CA lost me when they killed 3k for such a stupid reason, promise a 2nd version, and then if rumors are to be believed, killed the 2nd version. I prefer companies that don't lie to their customers like that. And if i do buy newer games, it will be towards the end of the life cycle and always on sale out of spite.
Yeah I haven’t bought a Total War game since Shogun II came out lmao, and I do not regret that decision. It’s been muddling along for a long time, but the trouble started with Empire, was still janky with Napoleon (more features + better graphics, but the map was tiny), and then there was the DLC nonsense with Shogun (the blood DLC for example). I don’t feel like I’m missing out on anything. I just play the originals with mods. No need to support CA any further with my hard-earned money.😁 (What a sad state video games have sunk to though, especially TW.)
The main thing is we need to pressure CA to recapture the spirit of Rome 1 and Medieval 2. The respect for the period, the joyful yet serious soundtrack, the immersion in a time period. No more shallow comic-ization of time periods. Let me play history
It was actually already done, Thrones of Britannia was made, so there you go the great medieval 3 everyone hopes they'll make was made and it flopped. So yeah it's over, it was over a long time ago.
Total war needs a new engine, a new AI and to reconect with their audience and take risk to try and make new things like they did for example at the time with the empire total war.
I think a smaller scale game could work (remember when they did that terrible spartan total warrior). Now Im not saying make a new warrior game, but we could get a Hannibal or Caesar game in the style of Napoleon that is more about feeding your army, and fighting desertion than controlling a huge empire, where you only hold on to a few settlements at any given time and forage for food and resources.
I agree with a good part of PA’s video but I just don’t agree with the view on (i will be honest i could be understanding this in the wrong way) that all Warhammer players enjoy and got it simply because they are consumers. I will agree a lot of the WH playerbase are too forgiving to CA, and that WH is bleeding into historical games and ruining it, however I think that at least in WH3’s case, it is genuinely a very fun game with loads of content and very fun campaign mechanics. I think it’s popular not for 0 reason but is genuinely a good game, however I do think that it still has it’s fair load of issues such as how it is bleeding and taking away from historical games now, and battles being not as grand anymore, morale basically not mattering, etc
Unfortunately they have shown they're colours and where there priorities are time and time again and after so much of this they have genuinely shattered far too many fan's trust. I genuinely don't think they can come back from this if they don't put 200% into a medieval 3 / empire 2 title nothing else will suffice these HAVE to be there next MAIN release and they HAVE to absolutely dedicate all resources they have available and NOT constrain them selves on a "quick release" to knock it out of the park to even have a chance to bring things back. Unfortunately I don't think this is what will happen given the track record currently and I think this is due to losing some key members of staff that had both passion and a high position in the company to actually implement that passion/detail into the games, not saying there's no passion in the company but I believe the issue is that upper management is deprived of it. I don't think competition is going to solely be enough to force the necessary correction's needed, they need to ACTUALLY start listening to the fans/customers/consumers as they are the one's who ultimately dictate whether ca and saga stay afloat and pay the bills.
Imo as a company grows the more the bean counters and marketing take over from the entrepreneurs, designers and engineers. That's when the death spiral starts
Yeah, highly skeptical. I think entire west is done, from top to bottom. Look at last 20 years, majority is utter trash, like > 99.9%, only few gems. This is relatively much higher than the east (inc. eastern europe, like poland's larian studios with divinity original sins 1 + 2 + baldur's gate 3). See the fking difference. Politics + greed vs passionate, skill and intelligence.
Reminds me of the death of crpg games. One of the devs of obsidian entertainment, creator of fallout new vegas, said that the death of crpg was caused by business aka retailers rather than the lack of interest by consumers. He said that it was because at first after the boom of fps in the early 2000s, retailers began to think that fps is the future and ppl will lose interest in crpg games, which caused retailers to stock up less on crpg and thus cause the "death" of crpg, becoming a self fulfilling prophecy. Of course with the rise of steam, things change and we no longer have to depend on the retailers stupid vision. Baldur's gate 3 prove that crpg can be popular. Pdx gsg prove that deep strategy games can be popular. Consumers should voice out more.
I am one of the few people who really liked Pharaoh and the dynasties update has really restored my confidence in the future of the Total War series. CA did seem to make great efforts to give players what we wanted and were kind enough to give us all the new content - of which there was a lot - for free. There has been a lot of negativity in the historical Total War community in recent years and this is understandable given the way that things have gone. But Dynasties was a big step back in the right direction in my opinion. And we can only hope that CA have learned valuable lessons from all the recent turmoil. Hopefully too the historical community can get behind the next game and give it a chance. Pharaoh was relentlessly attacked even before it was ever even released and it is a good bet that most of those who criticized it either never played it all, or never gave it a chance. It is actually one of the best Total War games in my opinion and I'm cautiously optimistic that the next historical title will be very good too.
I think people are way too doomer pilled and it’s because they view the OG historical titles with rose colored glasses. Rome 2s battle changes didn’t just come out of no where. When shogun 2 came out people were complaining that the battles were way too micro intensive and way too quick. Which led to CA implementing the battle philosophy that we still see today. People complained about variety in play style. There is only so much variety you can do in a historical title. In a real life setting there is always going to be a meta way of doing warfare. However, CA bringing in a fantasy setting to the series allows them to create radically different play styles for each faction and have it make “sense” in the universe. Finally, the market for historical is probably larger than fantasy. Look at the player counts Across all of the paradox games, and those titles don’t even have real time battles. The total war conversation has devolved to new games bad, old games good without really analyzing the player feedback over the years that got us here. It would be far more productive for both new gen and old gen players to view in total wars in totality and discuss what each of them does well, what works in fantasy?, what works in historical? Basically I just want a more healthy discussion than just saying that everything new is garbage and doesn’t belong.
"they view the OG historical titles with rose colored glasses" I love when people say this because it's an argument you literally can't argue against because its so vague and pointless. Yeah people are nostalgic for the games that were the peak of the series why is that a bad thing? Nobody has said they were flawless. You could apply this "nostalgia goggles" argument to literally any game you want and it holds the same weight "Oh you just like Dark Souls more than Dark Souls 2 because of rose tinted glasses!" It's such a pointless statement and completely empty of any actual point. "The total war conversation has devolved to new games bad, old games good without really analyzing the player feedback over the years that got us here" Rome II is when people really soured, I remember it, if it wasn't for the setting and the massive boost of new players coming in from the advertising and hype the game would have died a death. It was released broken ffs. People have also been complaining that the engine wasn't suited for melee, even in Shogun II (A game that was massively polished and superior to anything that came after it) the engine held back the melee combat. This has been common knowledge since Empire and now people just ignore it not realising that the combat has only gotten worse since Shogun II's very good attempt to make it better.
Ah yes the good old "it's just nostalgia bro" canard rears it's ugly head again, do you know how I know it isn't nostalgia? because I'm still playing Medieval 2 campaigns to this day despite having owned the game since release, same with Rome 2 DEI and Attila with mods. The modern games suck, that's it, that's the actual take, they just suck, I'm done with total war unless CA reverses course, but I am also under no delusion that this will happen, because their majority player base now are the warhammer fantasy types so they'll keep making arcadey IP slop from this point on.
@@mullerreus145 it’s not a vague and pointless argument. It’s one thing to prefer old games over new. But to call new titles objective Hog slop is in my opinion a more pointless argument. I’ll give a personal example, I prefer the “golden days” of call of duty, and I don’t play the newer titles. However, I recognize that the newer titles to do a plethora of things far better than the old ones. I don’t like them but I’m not running around calling them bad and can recognize how they have innovated. You can not like warhammer 3, but if you can’t at least recognize how it has at the very least innovated on the campaign side of things since med 2 then you are stuck in the nostalgia trap. All I’m trying to say is that people should look at in total wars and look at what they do well. Instead of saying old good new bad or vice versa
@@seraphx26 I prefer the older titles just like you, but maybe for different reasons. however, I also can recognize that the new games do not objectively suck and in many ways are far superior, especially on the campaign side. Also the historical market is larger than the warhammer one. Look at paradox games concurrent players and those games don’t have real time battles. A decently polished historical title in a setting that people actually want will be far more lucrative than warhammer. I know people do not care about pharaoh, but them going out of their way to implement a lethality mechanic and attempting to make battles feel more realistic shows that CA heard that players want that old combat feel. But you wouldn’t recognize that if you stance is just old good new bad
I think where TW really failed was when they failed to create a good simulation of combat, starting from Rome 2. I'm not talking about gameplay depth or mechanics. That's an argument I've already lost. It's not an argument you can win. Way too many bad faith simpletons seeing it as an attack on their shitty game if you take that route. But rather it's in the small things like two units attacking each other and the combat looks flaccid. One person in a unit attacks an enemy, and the blow doesn't look like it landed, but as far as the game is concerned, it did hit and dealt damage. This is the case in Warhammer 3, anyway. It's small things like this that really add up, because it makes the combat simulation look arcadey and... well, not very good. I'd argue this is why people like me that are routinely labeled and dismissed as "toxic historical fans" do not like the newer Total War games. The newer titles failed at simulating battle and combat the same way that older titles did.
Ya know.... maybe we should start saying "classic" Total War rather then "historical"? Historical or Fantasy are just the SETTING of the game, it has nothing to do with the Gameplay or Mechanics (so many TW games have LotR mods). And that is the ISSUE alot of people have with modern Total War, their are so many little things that have been removed, replaced or added that they just don't like. Hell they have gotten to point where they are pulling a EA MADDEN where they are reintroducing features and calling them NEW, HOW DID WE GET HERE?! For better and worse id say their biggest mistake was changing how Damage works between units, instead of just being a simple dice roll where everyone dies in 1 hit (unless they block or parry of course)/kill animation, now we have a CARTOONISH HP BAR which shows the Total HP of the REGIMENT, not the individual soldiers. The Second Biggest mistake was tieing Generals/Admirals to their Army or Fleet, Now every city has a GARRISON you have to fight on top of any enemy army that happens to be present. The Third Biggest mistake was changing how Cities and Provinces work, it goes without saying but the Current "region/Province" system is very Limiting in what you can do with a city, not to mention you can't build anything on the campaign map anymore like the old watchtowers and forts. From what iv heard CA "iterates" from game to game in Total War, which now that I think about it, means the DECADE of "questionable" decisions they have made with Total War is probably going to take another DECADE to "iterate" away from.
The 1 hp mechanic is horrible and the battles have been improved significantly opposed to how it is in the old games were the only "tactics" you can use is flanking the enemy.
Legend i think is right in the whole video and a really goodp oint he made is that despite the opinion that warhammer and star wars and fantasy setting will automaticly attract way more players is wrong since historical games even years old have a large player base and i fully agree with him and am confident if say a good medieval 3 or even a decent one where issues would be targeted like pathfinding sieges they sould bring back fepth of characters the game would sell easily in millions and just absolutely smash the playerbase of warhammer 3 i also think that we must not argue with each other between those who love old tw games and those who love new tw games like legend says no one is true fan we are all fans i love both the histroical games and warhammer games all for different reasons like alot of players do i think that a new good game in a series would attract most fans of tw of warhammers and of old historical but also draw in way more players who love history and i know some people are in love with paradox games but i just cant play them since not being able to change course of campigning with battle strategies is just a dealbreaker for me and total war has this potential it has the battles that i think could easily draw in wide wide playerbase yes total war is dying but its part of a process now its time to hit back with a good game and at the very least with a try of a good game cause apathy is the worst and if they wont even try its already lost
After Atilla Total War everything became just shit to be honest. The Saga thing was/is just a money grab in disguise. There is not a single playable Total War game for me after Atilla. For me fantasy ruined Total war. Total war was always about history. In 2016 they just lost their identity. They wanted to make money from a nerdy franchise like Warhammer because they knew its fans would easily pay over and over again for half finished games and they did. Now many historical fans are abandoning total war and they are right to do so. CA doesn't listen to their historical fans anymore. Actually they don't listen to any of their fans at this point. The downfall of Total War needs to be studied. Seriously. They are completely out of touch with their audience and reality itself. I see people praising CA for doing the bare minimum with Pharaoh Dynasties after the disastrous launch and attacking other people who are not content with the bare minimum that CA offers. These people should "stand up" for what we deserve but instead they are content with a few "improvements" and they keep buying CA's games. Honestly there is no future for CA. In my eyes they are absolutely doomed.
Come off it. Warhammer 2 (and, getting there, 3) are the best Total War games that have yet been made. (Source: I've played all of them, starting with the demo of Shogun before the main game was even released that had me queueing outside the video game store before it opened on launch day). Sure, I get that as a historical-only player you want them to go back to historical games - so do I! Give me Empire 2! - but you're shit-talking not just the Warhammer GAMES but the PLAYERS too, just because you're personally uninterested in the subject matter? Who do you think you are?
@@XVRK_Edits OK, well, I think you're a cunt. That's my opinion and I also will say whatever I want. Is that helpful? No. But you've shown you're uninterested in helpful contributions so we're both happy.
the warhammer games fit their setting, thats all. they should be seen as their own thing and a exception and not be used as a blueprint for more total war games (but maybe star wars or LotR). sadly CA seems to stick to the warhammer formula BUT (and thats a big but) this is just the newest problem in a long line of problems. Total war died with rome 2 and attila following. THAT'S where the formula changed for thr worst and ever onwards. These two HISTORICAL games marked the beginning of the end and the first warhammer game stabalized the company and SAFED (financially) what was left of total war. U can hate the warhammers all u want but deep down everybody knows that the moment people bought rome 2 and attila the franchise would die down the line. To summarize again Warahmmer came not at the expense of historicals, but because of their failure and if we are ever to see a good historical again its because the warhammer games make it possible in the first place!
I actually enjoyed a lot Pharaoh Dynasties, it still has more unit variety than older historical TWs. And this has never been such a strong argument before, ironically it started to come up a lot more only after warhammer
I agree, more with this, Total war and creative Assembly is right now on a thin line that can break if not careful. Total war has not fallen but it's next upcoming game will be the deciding factor of, if Total war will survive or will it start to fall.
Thanks for coming back man!! I watch your videos every week during down time at work. How Far has Total War fallen😢, and I’m a Shogun OG! The mods and modders are the only thing keeping this franchise alive and they should band together and establish their own company or something. Hell I’ll donate some money if need be.
TOTAL WARS WISHLIST: I'd like to see way more detailed bigger maps, that don't show enemy movement, unless scouted out, or guards posts put in place, like in one empire mod. Same too on the world map. Scouting can be assigned to generals ruling over areas. This might make Viking raids worse. Or on battle maps, march towards an ambush spot only to find you've been seen too, and you have to deal with evasive movements. Or smaller hills that can be fought over, or hide units for more surprises. And I definitely want generals to have different fighting styles, from eager and aggressive to always in defence mode. And I want to be able to recruit units from peoples I wiped from the map, but still had some very good approaches, so cultures become more diverse. And more CK3 but way simpler.
fantasy vs history is a red herring. strategy vs arcade is the real question the player base changed starting with warhammer because warhammer is a better platform for arcade style mechanics, then they brought these arcade mechanics through to 3k and pharoh and now people feel like history side is dead it makes sense, if what you liked was the startegic chess like play, well then of course you hate it when 1 general walks up uses 1 spell and flips your whole chess board. thet need to go back to the grand startegy genre, but more people play arcades so in a capitalist world...here we are
I think you still can get a common ground between the two It's hard but I think it's possible to please most of the community with a good strategy and action-based game like a mix of Warhammer's over-the-top characters and historical total war strategies
@@peterjacoby8019 Oh.....maybe it wasn't done well? I don't know about that mode but I mean one side isn't supposed to overshadow the other so you have to use both of them I'm order to win Also, I mean......there will always be some people who hate new things and changes regardless, you can't make everyone happy
there was never any strategic chess play in total war games , the games arent that deep and every single battle can be won with hammer and anvil , all other tactics are either people roleplaying or trying to make the gameplay feel fresh by playing in a different manner , warhammer simply embraced the inherent arcade nature of the battles in total war , campaigns are a whole other topic but most if not all of them lack any need for SIGNIFICANT (they require some but not a lot) brain usage , you are either sniffing glue or just blind to the reality of total war games as a whole , now you could say that ˝but with mods you had to x˝ mods dont count because they change the game from its natural state to something that it very much isnt , and turning up the difficulty doesnt do much either other than give the player penalties while giving the ai free shit and improved units etc etc
Simply they need to hear community, new total war have better graphics but dont have that good old gameplay. They dont keep good things and add new, they lose old add new and thats their tragedy. Still w8ing for Medieval 3, Rome 3, Empire 2 and WW1.
a little stupid but fun rp thing i would do during rome 1- I would retire armies in provinces as a reward for the many years of service, i cant tell you how many max xp legionnaires i would disband in my frontier settlements. Thinking to my self, now they know ive recognized their efforts. when i lose generals the regions they die in will be exterminated and the conquering army replacing the population as last slap in the face of the Guals who had the gal to resist medieval 2 usually early on turn 10-30 i make an army and conquer egypt no matter who im playing as, i would do that to ultimately spread my religion to the holy land then turn Jerusalem into fortified settlement focusing on high quality troops. then i trade most of my land in Europe to who ever is fighting the #1 [power in the world while i supercharge my economy in what is essentially peace. hell in later turns i give ai factions money and watch the ai truly shine as they love me and end up waging wars aginst each other. i have even funded massive proxy wars between the moors/byzantine empire and watched as the moorsbecames super aggressive landing armies along the Italian coast conquering Mulan and fighting back the tied of Venetians as i inject another 60k gold and see them mass armies in home regions to reinforce the invasion of italy and ultimately byz. i just downloaded attila and played for about 3o western roman empire (Love the challenge- played then with bi exspansion of rome 1) mins... i like it so far but im worried to find its shortcomings fingers crossed it has non i dont write this for likes but i hope we all truly enjoy these games and the next total war involves the little things where the imagination dosent have to travel far to create depth or the illusion of it. MAKE TOTAL WAR PERSONAL!!!!
Terminator’s version: My hair hasn’t fallen out in my thirties… yet. Maybe hair plugs in my thirties for a sequel is coming up next. Then maybe people will finally like me.
I also get a sense that CA seems to be averse to getting into a release cycle that is shogun-rome-medieval-empire-shogun-rome-medieval-empire-etc. ad infinitum. like the past decade has been an attempt to escape that obvious cycle. and on an artistic/creativity level I can understand that. And they named themselves Creative Assembly, so probably they feel the need to be always very creative... which they might interpret as also being always innovative and explorative (always something new, no repeats or sequels). But the reality for many game developers is that a sequel cycle works. Paradox has great success with it and is unappolegetic of making a 3d or 4th version of a good game. Console strategy developer Koei, on it's 15th (?) version of Romance of the 3 Kingdoms is an extreme example, and might even have been that CA rival had they not restricted themselves so long to console platforms. the "we don't want to do the same thing more than 2 times" applies better to movies, music and theatre than video games. especially if you lock-in a game concept that works at it's core (and for the audience) and can be built upon as technology progresses. The Civilization series is another such case, no one is making essays on why it would be creativily or philosophically bad if there is a Civ7. And yet, it appears CA has the criticism of being called "UNcreative Assembly" (because they made a Shogun III or Empire II) as their greatest existential fear. And thus, they do not make a Medieval III, but desperately look to the Bronze Age, because that is again something new, so no one can doubt the creativity of Creative Assembly who are very creative.
As a total war player from med 1 I concurred with PA and your take. A paradox player as well with CK 2/3 and EU4. Both series satisfy my itch in different ways but both lack in their separate ways. I'm hoping someone will come along and make a game that combines both well. Atm I've been trying Field of Glory Kingdoms & FoG medieval combo. The dividing line between historical and fantasy is false, it's gameplay, mechanics and the spirit of the game that divides. I've played heaps of third age mod and enjoy it and would play a lotr total war game if the gameplay had EU4ish diplomacy with updated shogun 2 battles.
Did you know there's a mod that combines the battle of total war with the campaign gameplay of CK? It's called Crusader Wars and I've spent more time playing CK3 with that mod than all of my original playtimes combined. It really scratched that Medieval3 itch. Plus, siege battles will be added soon.
If I had to guess its over for the historical side. I would guess CA's largest and easiest profits came with the fantasy side. I felt as soon as the fantasy side was introduced the two sides could not co-exist for the long term. I think the best hardcore history peoples can hope for is SEGA steps in and splits the development teams into two different brands. Or maybe allow a joint historical development/venture with Paradox or Slitherine or Microprose; that would be awesome :D. Don't get me wrong, I hold no ill will against the fantasy players, I've just seen the handwriting on the wall as soon as the first warhammer was even mentioned. And if I were a corporation I would definitely try to keep the fantasy side alive, to me the fans would be less dogmatic and given that its fantasy the ability to split and splice make believe story lines gives an untold wealth of games to make. Anyways, appreciate the video Mr. TheTerminator : )
I don't think it's just a lack of competition. When a company gets big they become beholden to the shareholders and only care about short term profits. They don't even need to release good games, just fire people and show they reduced overhead and the shareholders climax and throw more money at the company. This is happening in every industry, it's not about company long term health, just short term margins that allow a ceo to cash out and move on to the next company.
A simple formula for historic titles is to go a paradox route I.e, expand on campaign map depth because it will always lack the roster variety of factions.
Biggest problem is the programming put into more modern TW games. Attila for instance: I can work around some things but it is so absolutely completely infuriating to watch any one of your troops route and LEAVE a city theyre defending as opposed to retreating to the center for a last stand. Ive brought fights down to the wire and i just straight up feel cheated after these moments. Another thing is how the archers function. The constant rearranging they do and the lack of guard mode drives me absolutely insane. And of course the lack of ability to moves regular units individually is utterly absurd
I really miss the King Arthur Role Playing game series. Im not active in any total war community, but i mostly play older titles aka rome Medieval 2 and Shogun 2, but personally what draws me to say Warhammer or Three Kingdoms is the powering up your character draw. For me a lot of the base games dont appeal enough for me so i play them modded, besides Shogun , i agree that game mechanics would draw ppl, that is far more important than Historical accuracy if you want to draw new ppl, gameplay and mechanics matter a lot, I remember Xcom was far more niche before the newer games came out and they got me into the turn based strategy genre as an introductory title
The biggest issue is that Total War has no proper competition on the market. The moment someone else makes a proper TW styled game set in Medieval times you'll see CA suddenly listening to their fans.
I think what really blows it anytime I boot up a new TW game is it feels the exact same as every other game. As in even the new games have the exact same features as the old ones. It just feels like the same thing with new skins. It gets boring so fast.
Depends on what ca does. Bare minimum they need to have a new engine and rome 3,medievil 3 or empire 2. They just need to look at the old games. What worked, what didn't and merge them into a awesome game.
I miss the Family tree, having natural traits like, defend for a defender trait. Nicknames like William the Crusader had good vibes, Marriage and princesses were good.
Why don’t they do like a greatest hits in their mechanics? Each game has done something great like population and character traits in Rome, recruitment and crusade mechanics in Medieval 2, the way gunpowder weapons feel like in Empire, diplomacy in 3 Kingdoms, etc. They have already done these things, just put them together in one historical game and then they can try new things with stuff they have not quite gotten right like sieges, naval warfare and religion. I’d buy that game just for the inclusion of their past successes.
I believe and hope that total war is moving towards the better. sure it's been a bit of a bumpy road. but it seems to be going in the right direction. i have played total war since medieval total war 1 and have all games up to total war warhammer 3
they should employee the guys who make the Historical first games...and make them directors...if u have a winning team there's no reason for change it...but what i know....
Letter from an Old guard Good day sir/maam Yeah we are OLD and we are aware of it, most have families to take care now we have jobs and LESS time to play on games. Yes im old enough now to be called dad or uncle But I love what I have and never giveup on what I love It's heart breaking to see what you love go broken and uncertain.yes I love historic total war and it is my respite on military service. What can an old guy like me against the said new/modern audience..... Perhaps nothing What can I offer is my unwavering loyalty.Just give as hope, I dont care about if it is unstable or created by old engine I just hope for little sympathy Its my little happiness on my life before being a soldier, old man, dad, or uncle. I began as a child as well. My kids dont seem to understand my stance because they like warhammer but I want them to understand the history, sometimes this game teach them to be more than a gamer it teach you and them history, culture, management and things that will lead you to dream other than fantasy Hope you have a good day young ones and greetings to old people like me that still playing the historic total war series
Damn, this is one hell of a loaded topic. It was a great video that I wouldn't even know where to begin. I'll share a few thoughts, been a fan of Total War since Rome. I agree that this company, like many others, has managed to monopolize this niche of a genre. Competition always makes things better and it's unfortunate that no one has come close to it. Things would be different if they had what Starcraft/Warcraft had with Command and Conquer and Age of Empires. But what I don't agree with, and it's not directed at you, is the resentment towards the evolution into fantasy. Like Civilization, I think the evolution of the base formula was necessary and Warhammer changed the company forever. However, I think they should've capitalized on their success and split into two developers: one for fantasy and one for historical. Maybe then there would have been competition and this would not only please both sides but stop the hostile division you pointed out. I agree that the new Total War has bled into the past where modern historical attempts don't feel like the old games because of the evolved company. However, like you said, there is no way CA will drop fantasy. It prints money. I believe they will attempt sci-fi next. I think this is fine because the company will continue to evolve. But they should definitely use their success towards rebuilding a developer that can re/make games of the past. I can't believe they actually pivoted towards an FPS. As Legend would say. Idiots. They could've spent that money to do what Microsoft did with AoE Definitive Edition. Not a bad attempt with Rome. Should've happened sooner, as in there should be a Medieval one out already too. Lastly, on a different note, I definitely agree that they've dropped the ball with their player immersion because of the hybrid attempts. I have clocked in hours upon hours over in CK3 due solely to the fact that it allows me to roleplay and that feels immersive. Something you can't do with modern Total War. For them to have sacrificed the ability to make identities out of your generals will always be my biggest gripe. Painting the map as a Tomb King is fun, blotting out the sun with Wood Elves is fantastic, but nothing beats being able to tell your own story and you can't do that today. There's thankfully some cool stuff that should be used to modernize the old games. Like, your point about the resources from the Saga games and 3rd party games. The combined diplomacy changes scattered across the modern Total Wars. etc But, man do they need to bring back the shit that made the game feel heavy too. Because WH feels light after you run out of the adrenaline hit from watching some fantasy action. Which is ironic since Warhammer is meant to go hard. Either way, I agree that Total War ain't dead til the fat lady sings. I feel for the purists but there should be no reason to be cynical. It's barely been a decade of fantasy total war. It probably will be a decade or more before it comes back. I had my fun with fantasy and yes, it doesn't scratch my itch for historical. I'll just come back when they make something that does. Meanwhile, I'll enjoy playing a Viking over in CK3, because the beauty of gaming is the vast number of games that target an era. Right now, Paradox scratches that itch. I'm very glad you mentioned their games Terminator. They're a treat and everyone who's a purist should give them a try.
Yes, it has...Pharoah is a joke....they need to go back to their roots... Rome 1 and Medieval 2. Release Medieval 3 with all this modern nonsense out... and make a battle feel like a battle with routing units and not a battle massacre simulator. Bring back collision. We've been saying it for years.
If CA wants to get back on its feet, they revisit Empire and Napoleon, update, fix them and merge them as one game. Do the same for Rome 2 and Attila. Once they fix these games I m pretty sure tge fans would be grateful.
[ TOTAL WAR HAS FALLEN] [ HISTORICAL TOTAL WAR HAS FALLEN] [ MY VERY IMPORTANT FAITH IN CA HAS FALLEN] [ TW: PHARAOHS HAS FALLEN] [ MY GRANDMA HAS FALLEN (AND SHE CAN'T GET UP)] [ FALLING HAS FALLEN]
I'm more in line with Legend's take on the situation. Personally I don't see the need for such a huge distinction between historical and fantasy total war games. At their very core they still operate the same. It's just the themes and characters are different. I absolutely loved Rome, Medieval, and Shogun. But I also love Warhammer. It's not impossible to find common ground, people are just too stuck in their ways.
Return on investment or ROI is everything to stock companies. I’m not sure additional competition would actually accomplish what you think. The reason is there is a finite bucket of money people will spend on games. Given that only a few short years ago RTS type games were almost dead there is not an unlimited pile of money to be spent on these types of games. Once you start demising that pool of money, market share has a direct impact on ROI and most stock companies will not invest if the ROI they need to stay solvent is unrealistic. That said as much as I would love a new Empire or Medieval I can’t think of what they might add that hasn’t already been done in one of the many excellent mods to make that kind of investment viable. You mentioned games like Ultimate General American Revolution and while I do like certain aspects of that game, I like just about any total war better. Instead of spending all of this energy complaining what will likely never happen why not celebrate the fact CA is still making these games at all. I mean seriously programmers, developers, graphic artists, sound design, 3d animation developers and the host of other skills needed to pull off games at this scale are people too. Constant criticism of their work without really understanding the dynamics of ROI and business in general only acts to discourage. Do it enough and these creative people move on to greener pastures. As a community we do these people a huge disservice by not celebrating these wonderful games. As someone who also has been on board since Medieval One and owns every total war game and dlc published I have enjoyed them all, sure some more that others but that has more to do to the period in history that the game design. I also purchase total war games to send the developers a message that I support their continued involvement is producing single player games on a grand scale. On another note I like what they have done with the recent historical titles. The graphics are two orders on magnitude better than earlier games thanks in large part to the war hammer titles. The economy is also much more robust and difficult to manage than 19:29 earlier titles, while the combat is as good as it has ever been. Sometimes I get the feeling people think money needed to pay for the games we want grows on trees. Games like the ones you mentioned takes years to development and huge investments in capital just where do you think that comes from? The problem every development company faces is how to keep the lights on and a steady stream on funding capital, hence why spinoffs and dlc are so popular. They bring in cash, not huge profits but company and development sustaining funds needed to keep the doors open. Never underestimate the importance of ROI on producing any produce. Without sustainable, reasonable ROI no product would ever get developed without expected profit investors, stock holders and corporate boards would not take the risk is the first place. Again celebrate what we have, what they have accomplished, after all people always accomplish more with honey than sandpaper1
For me tbh the game design is a big issue. Rome II seemed to be a turning point. So on one hand improved graphics was a step forward and it was even exciting. But somehow the game eventually felt empty to me. And then I realized that it is like in fine art and toys that we play as kids. Style is very important and the older games like Rome I, Med II, Shogun II - they had it, they were a finished artistic product where mechanics properly supported the visuals. But as in classical art and toys that you build with your dad you need to leave some work for the imagination and for that you need to keep this balance between detail and the big picture. Just as modern animation the TW series went too much into detail but lost the big picture and the artistic style and the mechanics don’t catch up. So right now at pharaoh stage they are stuck somewhere where the models and maps are so detailed that there’s nothing left to imagination but the graphics are simply not good enough. For example Thrones of Brittania for all its wrongs had the visuals right. But newer historical games don’t get that. They are very detailed but look clumsy. And the game mechanics are simply not in depth enough to support the visuals that are already bad enough artistically. They got the balance in Warhammer somewhat, but that’s a totally different story. And to be honest, the game also felt empty to me, because of overwhelming detail and variety that you can’t relate to or comprehend
PA dismiss the newer games because he simply doesnt care for the Warhammer franchise. The TW WH branch games are successful indeed, but why should someone with no interest in WH not dismiss that? The failures of Troy and Pharaoh proves theres no overlap in action gameplay fans and historical fans either. Its been 10 years of WH games, theres no indication of changes so he is right to move on.
I said goodbye to historical TW long time ago and i was with it since the first Shogun (I still remember reading a preview of first Shogun in Polish game magazine and i could'nt wait for it). I hope someone else will pick up this formula, since IMHO CA can't pull it any more.
Yeah, the games need to really try and focus on things. For instance I believe all historical games require population mechanics, food, and maybe sanitation (so long as it's not as annoying to manage as it was in Attila due to some buildings just have insanely high squalor values compared to what they gave you). They need a court system and family tree, and good diplomacy. Beyond that depending on the style of the game, so for instance if you want a 3K style of game, in that you have a romance mode and a historical one. You need to be extra careful about the balance for the historical mode. Crossbows, guns, slings, arrows, they all need to behave in an understandable and realistic manner. Also you really should try to nail finer details in a historical game, so no jumping attacks, smoke from firing guns or setting things ablaze. Shieldwalls that look like they'd actually protect you, correct firing angles, etc. Also a historical title should have naval, because even a mediocre naval is still preferred over no naval at all, at least for me. I'd also like to see supplies for armies, and war weariness as things you can have in game, proper settlement battles, especially ones that change as you level up the settlement. Trade should be both internal and external and should be relative to the amount of resources you have. Later units should be locked behind tech or buildings, maybe even both for some. I also think you should have it where recruitment of higher tier units is restricted, in that after unlocking them you either can only train so many, or only have so many available and need to wait for more. In sieges walls should mean something, they really should be worth holding if you can do so. And when it comes to campaign mechanics, I do think every faction or culture/race should have mechanics that make them different from others. It should be just a little bit extra for these people that makes them different to encourage replayability, but not at the expense of making the core mechanics every faction has being shallow. Ideally you'd have both, allowing for generally solid core gameplay and mechanics across all factions but with some additions to differentiate each culture, faction, or race. Also having many of these things or other things be options you can change before starting a campaign would end up making things a lot better for more people, giving players more choices almost always is a good thing.
He does not express apathy at all, he's simply saying that based on Warhammer, he doesn't think that CA can even create a proper historical Total War game anymore. Plus he believes CA is more interested in PR damage control. I don't disagree with him on the last part. For modern companies, not being relevant anymore is killing and it's quite clear that Total War has gone from one of the core series of PC gaming in prior years to seeing a huge drop in player/fan interest (and interaction). Just releasing PR messages saying you want to do things better isn't going to get all players back. Big companies in this position usually suffer from greed and thus bad company practice and culture. It takes a massive restructure that can take years to improve standards. Next they absolutely need to make a successful Total War game and make a lot of profit on that (to counter the losses of Hyenas). Maybe they can do it with a W40K: Total War release, but they absolutely cannot afford to slip up. Personally I think it's an uphill battle. We've seen similar situations with Starbreeze and Overkill with regards to Payday 2 and Payday 3. You need to do everything perfectly to climb back to where you fell from grace and in my opinion... I don't believe CA can do that. But, they have a chance and clearly Sega is giving them a chance, so they are free to prove me wrong.
The competition is not within the subgenre, but I know many that are like myself that just went to EU4, to Civ 5, to games in totally different genres, to other platforms like PS5 or switch, etc. I was playing Medieval and then Rome, Knights of honor, and Medieval 2, mods for Rome like total realism and EB, but then I literally built a new computer for Empire and it was such a disappointment. Shogun 2 was great and a big glimmer of hope that warscape engine can be salvaged with more work and improvements, but then Rome 2 followed. So I was looking for better games, tried Nobunaga's ambition spheres of Influence, tried EU4 and basically moved on. Occasionally replaying a campaign of Rome or Medieval 2 or Shogun 2, but thats it since a decade ago for me TW is over. I tried 3 kingdoms, Troy I got for free on EGS, tried Warhammer 2 its just no games for me.
Let's be real, the franchise would have fallen a long time ago if it weren't for modders.
No point to repeat it since you said it first...
so true
Literally only reason i play.
i got attila because i used to play it when i was 10 or so, now 70% of my time in the game is from mods
Ya but even the mods have problems that are so bad it ruins the game. I rage quit DEI all the time because of stupid mechanics that make no sense
Pretty Good Summary
Aww thanks mate, appreciate you ❤️
@@PixelatedApollo1 I'd just like to say thank you both for not ruining your channels with politics. That's all
@@jlih6271cringe
The competition angle you bring up is completely accurate. You may not be old enough to remember pre- breakup AT&T, but the line "We don't care cause we don't have to, we're the phone company." says it all.😂
@@jlih6271 denying and supporting gen0cide would definitely ruin these channels
I don't see anyone talk about the animations and overall presentation. The older games were more gritty and used real things like scrolls to give updates. There are two animations that I hated seeing in Dynasties. The jumping sword attack and the exaggerated leg kick. They don't look bad in fantasy, but they look terrible in a historical setting.
1000% I’ve talked about that in previous videos as well. Attila was really peak presentation for me
They look bad in both. Total War's combat animations since Shogun 2 has been arcadie and goofy AF. I never scroll close enough to actually watch the fights because they're just so damn cringe.
These attacks were literally copy and pasted for warhammer lol. There I understand the rought animations because you have such a diverse cast of characters and weapons, that would be impossible to animate every possible matchup, but in troy/pharao its hard to justify, its just humans fighting mostly with spears, axes, kupeshs, nothing much besides that
CA loves england so much that they intend to fall together, country and game. A beautiful story.
How is England “falling”?
@@charlesmiv3842 Ask the invaders in Londinistan
@@charlesmiv3842it has become an Orwellian nightmare.
People are being locked up for memes and posts online, meanwhile illegal immigrants and paedophiles are allowed to run free doing whatever they want.
All paid for by us tax paying citizens.
@@greeffdevan Oh, so a racism thing? Got it.
@@greeffdevan Oh, so it's just a xenophobia thing? Got it.
i feel like CA just needs to listen to its community bring the suggested games like Empire TW2 MTW 3 Great war TW ect instead of making a bronze age game that no one really asked for
Lots of people asked for a Bronze Age total war
I asked for Bronze Age but I didn't ask fo cavalry
@jamreal18 Many people ask for cavalry. That's why they add it. lmao, and now people are complaining lol
Pharaoh is a super fun game now
The writing is on the wall and they're not doing it
But I did ask for the Bronze age game for a long time since troy so I'm happy :3
Creative assembly symbolize the downfall of great britian
I think rome is a better example. Britian never really fell it more disolved.
@@Thegamingdino133 You could say the same about Rome
@@ChaosReaper426 Not really, romes collapse was more violent and messy
@@Thegamingdino133 Sure thing, buddy. Just about time for afternoon call to prayer INSHALLAH
@@nixx0334 what? Your feeling alright buddy.
2 more faillures like Pharaoh and they are done. Hyena really hit them hard
you already have them: rome2, atilla, thrones, troy, three kindoms, and 3 warhammers.
@@diegomedina2359 warhammer in there? what? thats what is keeping them afloat
I don’t even know what hyena total war is😂
I don’t even know what hyena total war is😂
@@diegomedina2359 You just don't like Warhammer 3
There might be another reason why they haven't created MTW3. They might have lost the ability to do it. From the top of my head, I know that some high ranked programmers have been left CA since RTW2. Imagine if current CA released MTW3 now and it fails? That would spell the end of the company. I dont know if they want to risk it.
That is a fear of mine as well. Probably shows exactly what happened with Rome II.
Goes to show how valuable and rate total war coders are. Is total war too hard to code for or something, why hasn't anyone make a competitor?
well thats what they deserve for not rewriting their game engine in 30 years
BINGO! You just hit the nail on the head. They can't do naval battles anymore, they can only do mods on the antiquated Warscape engine modified to the scale of claustrophobic Warhammer maps.
It's been said recently that their talent pool for coders and devs are the entry level kids that get a few months on their resume before going to other studios.
That’s kind of what I am thinking as well they have been using the same engine since empire and it’s starting to show its age and I don’t think they are capable of creating a new one without hiring back good talented programmers
My main issue with the video was that PA never really stated anything new.
We all know from past videos what he thinks and feels and that he does not have any hope. He remakes almost this same video every year or so.
The main point was to help people understand that they are not alone, and that there is some good news with games like "Master of Command"
With Medieval 3, CA needs to improve Medieval 2 and not change it.
Add mechanics and contents and not replace it.
A medieval 2 remastered with the mod support of rome remastered would be dope. Modders could create a map all the way to the Majapahit or beyond. Hopefully they'd not ruin the ui this time too
@@jamreal18 they should just reskin shogun 2. That game was RTS perfection.
@@ObjectiveAnalysis It wasn't. It's one of the best Total War they made for sure (and FotS is amazing) but it has enormous problems that are standard in all Total War games made on the Warscape engine. Units feel floaty, battles are over too quickly, maintaining a battle line is impossible (and unnecessary), entire unit types are redundant (in Shogun 2 it's archers, which are a waste of a unit slot except in a defensive siege), diplomacy is so bad you may as well not even waste your time opening the diplomacy window, the AI is programmed to be as annoying as possible, and so on and so forth.
Shogun 2 re-skinned to be a Medieval game would be a disaster. A Medieval game needs to be way more slow paced, with castles that can actually be defended.
@Aethelhald that's spot on
@@Aethelhald So expertly said. I love Shogun 2 but it's battles are so damn quickly finished, it's awful. I can't enjoy the fighting for more than 3 seconds before an entire army has routed. And while I appreciate the realism of a mass route, it happens SO FAST in Shogun. The battles in the game are accurate to how some real battles went but as you implied a battle could last hours, days even. And especially in the Medieval days, you expect a knock down-drag out fight. Med 2 gets that so, so much better. I legitimately can't quit Med 2 because it's the last Total War game that got physics mostly right and got pace spot on. I know some folks hate though that in Med 2 it takes more than 1 second for a unit to get into movement. But to me that's what makes it so much better. A block of humans wouldn't respond instantly like they do in Total War games after Empire.
I had this whole thing. Typed out and decided to delete it. I'll just say this. Expecting something different from people who have not philosophically, or spiritually changed in anyway what-so-ever. Any game you get, it doesn't matter what the setting is. They don't want to make the kind of games that got them successful. Their design philosophy, the way they treat these core og fans and engage with criticism in-general. The compony is a shell of it's former self. Even the new fans, they don't respect enough to give them a feature rich complete game. To say nothing of the issues old guard fans have with the elements of the new games. They could, at least, give the new fans the service of actually giving them a well-rounded complete product on launch. They can't even seem to do that. "We'll launch it broken and incomplete and maybe fix it later" gaming era.
CA lost me when they killed 3k for such a stupid reason, promise a 2nd version, and then if rumors are to be believed, killed the 2nd version.
I prefer companies that don't lie to their customers like that.
And if i do buy newer games, it will be towards the end of the life cycle and always on sale out of spite.
Yeah I haven’t bought a Total War game since Shogun II came out lmao, and I do not regret that decision. It’s been muddling along for a long time, but the trouble started with Empire, was still janky with Napoleon (more features + better graphics, but the map was tiny), and then there was the DLC nonsense with Shogun (the blood DLC for example).
I don’t feel like I’m missing out on anything. I just play the originals with mods. No need to support CA any further with my hard-earned money.😁 (What a sad state video games have sunk to though, especially TW.)
I have thousands of hours with it. course i used like mcu and shit ton of mods to make like dynasty warriors with gotta catch em mod etc.
@@bombyouup62 no I mean the map was never finished and we never got all the scenarios promised.
The main thing is we need to pressure CA to recapture the spirit of Rome 1 and Medieval 2. The respect for the period, the joyful yet serious soundtrack, the immersion in a time period. No more shallow comic-ization of time periods. Let me play history
Total War never dies, well not until I get my medieval 3. Then we can pass judgement.
if they botch M3, THEN ITS OVER
When it comes out, right after winds of winter, it is going to be more disappointing then your first son coming out a different color
It was actually already done, Thrones of Britannia was made, so there you go the great medieval 3 everyone hopes they'll make was made and it flopped. So yeah it's over, it was over a long time ago.
if medieval 3 will be like troy-pharaoh than they might close the franchise today
@@riverblack565 true
Total war needs a new engine, a new AI and to reconect with their audience and take risk to try and make new things like they did for example at the time with the empire total war.
I think a smaller scale game could work (remember when they did that terrible spartan total warrior). Now Im not saying make a new warrior game, but we could get a Hannibal or Caesar game in the style of Napoleon that is more about feeding your army, and fighting desertion than controlling a huge empire, where you only hold on to a few settlements at any given time and forage for food and resources.
DEI team along with other mod teams saving total war
lol, I never thought I would be cheering for anything DEI XD
Total War, the only place where DEI is a good thing.
I agree with a good part of PA’s video but I just don’t agree with the view on (i will be honest i could be understanding this in the wrong way) that all Warhammer players enjoy and got it simply because they are consumers. I will agree a lot of the WH playerbase are too forgiving to CA, and that WH is bleeding into historical games and ruining it, however I think that at least in WH3’s case, it is genuinely a very fun game with loads of content and very fun campaign mechanics. I think it’s popular not for 0 reason but is genuinely a good game, however I do think that it still has it’s fair load of issues such as how it is bleeding and taking away from historical games now, and battles being not as grand anymore, morale basically not mattering, etc
Unfortunately they have shown they're colours and where there priorities are time and time again and after so much of this they have genuinely shattered far too many fan's trust. I genuinely don't think they can come back from this if they don't put 200% into a medieval 3 / empire 2 title nothing else will suffice these HAVE to be there next MAIN release and they HAVE to absolutely dedicate all resources they have available and NOT constrain them selves on a "quick release" to knock it out of the park to even have a chance to bring things back. Unfortunately I don't think this is what will happen given the track record currently and I think this is due to losing some key members of staff that had both passion and a high position in the company to actually implement that passion/detail into the games, not saying there's no passion in the company but I believe the issue is that upper management is deprived of it. I don't think competition is going to solely be enough to force the necessary correction's needed, they need to ACTUALLY start listening to the fans/customers/consumers as they are the one's who ultimately dictate whether ca and saga stay afloat and pay the bills.
Competition drives innovation.
I wonder what Shillanator will do once Total War "finally" falls. Hope this never happens.
Who?
Shill? Lol, dude he got lambasted for not being positive about Pharaoh dynasties. He's extremely critical of TW.
What total war needs to have is a good competitor, then they will get their shit together
Idk man, I don’t think the free market can save this one
@@charlesmiv3842 it will either mercy kill it or it will die alone
Imo as a company grows the more the bean counters and marketing take over from the entrepreneurs, designers and engineers. That's when the death spiral starts
Yeah, highly skeptical. I think entire west is done, from top to bottom. Look at last 20 years, majority is utter trash, like > 99.9%, only few gems. This is relatively much higher than the east (inc. eastern europe, like poland's larian studios with divinity original sins 1 + 2 + baldur's gate 3). See the fking difference. Politics + greed vs passionate, skill and intelligence.
The challenge is on the table and has been clear for years Total war Empire 2 with the whole world and make it unforgettable with naval battle´s.
Reminds me of the death of crpg games. One of the devs of obsidian entertainment, creator of fallout new vegas, said that the death of crpg was caused by business aka retailers rather than the lack of interest by consumers. He said that it was because at first after the boom of fps in the early 2000s, retailers began to think that fps is the future and ppl will lose interest in crpg games, which caused retailers to stock up less on crpg and thus cause the "death" of crpg, becoming a self fulfilling prophecy. Of course with the rise of steam, things change and we no longer have to depend on the retailers stupid vision. Baldur's gate 3 prove that crpg can be popular. Pdx gsg prove that deep strategy games can be popular. Consumers should voice out more.
You keep playing Promontory and I keep thinking of Daniel Day-Lewis running with a musket in hand to save that love interest character.
Empire 2 is their last hope!
With naval battle and from 1700-1900....
Don't live in a dream, will never happen. Empire 1 is good enough . Many great mods for Empire 1.
@@RemusKingOfRome The game is decades old, and France only has one province.
@@chico9805Still better than modern CA lol
@@RemusKingOfRomemods aren’t enough to save empire 1
only way forward is if people talk about it. So dont be afraid to talk about how you feel about the franchise, its okay to have diffrent opinions
I am one of the few people who really liked Pharaoh and the dynasties update has really restored my confidence in the future of the Total War series. CA did seem to make great efforts to give players what we wanted and were kind enough to give us all the new content - of which there was a lot - for free. There has been a lot of negativity in the historical Total War community in recent years and this is understandable given the way that things have gone. But Dynasties was a big step back in the right direction in my opinion. And we can only hope that CA have learned valuable lessons from all the recent turmoil. Hopefully too the historical community can get behind the next game and give it a chance. Pharaoh was relentlessly attacked even before it was ever even released and it is a good bet that most of those who criticized it either never played it all, or never gave it a chance. It is actually one of the best Total War games in my opinion and I'm cautiously optimistic that the next historical title will be very good too.
I think people are way too doomer pilled and it’s because they view the OG historical titles with rose colored glasses. Rome 2s battle changes didn’t just come out of no where. When shogun 2 came out people were complaining that the battles were way too micro intensive and way too quick. Which led to CA implementing the battle philosophy that we still see today. People complained about variety in play style. There is only so much variety you can do in a historical title. In a real life setting there is always going to be a meta way of doing warfare. However, CA bringing in a fantasy setting to the series allows them to create radically different play styles for each faction and have it make “sense” in the universe. Finally, the market for historical is probably larger than fantasy. Look at the player counts Across all of the paradox games, and those titles don’t even have real time battles. The total war conversation has devolved to new games bad, old games good without really analyzing the player feedback over the years that got us here. It would be far more productive for both new gen and old gen players to view in total wars in totality and discuss what each of them does well, what works in fantasy?, what works in historical? Basically I just want a more healthy discussion than just saying that everything new is garbage and doesn’t belong.
This comment deserves more likes.
"they view the OG historical titles with rose colored glasses" I love when people say this because it's an argument you literally can't argue against because its so vague and pointless. Yeah people are nostalgic for the games that were the peak of the series why is that a bad thing? Nobody has said they were flawless. You could apply this "nostalgia goggles" argument to literally any game you want and it holds the same weight "Oh you just like Dark Souls more than Dark Souls 2 because of rose tinted glasses!" It's such a pointless statement and completely empty of any actual point.
"The total war conversation has devolved to new games bad, old games good without really analyzing the player feedback over the years that got us here"
Rome II is when people really soured, I remember it, if it wasn't for the setting and the massive boost of new players coming in from the advertising and hype the game would have died a death. It was released broken ffs. People have also been complaining that the engine wasn't suited for melee, even in Shogun II (A game that was massively polished and superior to anything that came after it) the engine held back the melee combat. This has been common knowledge since Empire and now people just ignore it not realising that the combat has only gotten worse since Shogun II's very good attempt to make it better.
Ah yes the good old "it's just nostalgia bro" canard rears it's ugly head again, do you know how I know it isn't nostalgia? because I'm still playing Medieval 2 campaigns to this day despite having owned the game since release, same with Rome 2 DEI and Attila with mods.
The modern games suck, that's it, that's the actual take, they just suck, I'm done with total war unless CA reverses course, but I am also under no delusion that this will happen, because their majority player base now are the warhammer fantasy types so they'll keep making arcadey IP slop from this point on.
@@mullerreus145 it’s not a vague and pointless argument. It’s one thing to prefer old games over new. But to call new titles objective Hog slop is in my opinion a more pointless argument. I’ll give a personal example, I prefer the “golden days” of call of duty, and I don’t play the newer titles. However, I recognize that the newer titles to do a plethora of things far better than the old ones. I don’t like them but I’m not running around calling them bad and can recognize how they have innovated. You can not like warhammer 3, but if you can’t at least recognize how it has at the very least innovated on the campaign side of things since med 2 then you are stuck in the nostalgia trap. All I’m trying to say is that people should look at in total wars and look at what they do well. Instead of saying old good new bad or vice versa
@@seraphx26 I prefer the older titles just like you, but maybe for different reasons. however, I also can recognize that the new games do not objectively suck and in many ways are far superior, especially on the campaign side. Also the historical market is larger than the warhammer one. Look at paradox games concurrent players and those games don’t have real time battles. A decently polished historical title in a setting that people actually want will be far more lucrative than warhammer. I know people do not care about pharaoh, but them going out of their way to implement a lethality mechanic and attempting to make battles feel more realistic shows that CA heard that players want that old combat feel. But you wouldn’t recognize that if you stance is just old good new bad
I think where TW really failed was when they failed to create a good simulation of combat, starting from Rome 2.
I'm not talking about gameplay depth or mechanics. That's an argument I've already lost. It's not an argument you can win. Way too many bad faith simpletons seeing it as an attack on their shitty game if you take that route.
But rather it's in the small things like two units attacking each other and the combat looks flaccid. One person in a unit attacks an enemy, and the blow doesn't look like it landed, but as far as the game is concerned, it did hit and dealt damage. This is the case in Warhammer 3, anyway. It's small things like this that really add up, because it makes the combat simulation look arcadey and... well, not very good.
I'd argue this is why people like me that are routinely labeled and dismissed as "toxic historical fans" do not like the newer Total War games. The newer titles failed at simulating battle and combat the same way that older titles did.
@@CapitalTeeth Shogun 2 was perfect imo
@@ObjectiveAnalysis Shogun 2 was the last proper total war game
Love the last of the Mohicans track!
Ya know.... maybe we should start saying "classic" Total War rather then "historical"? Historical or Fantasy are just the SETTING of the game, it has nothing to do with the Gameplay or Mechanics (so many TW games have LotR mods). And that is the ISSUE alot of people have with modern Total War, their are so many little things that have been removed, replaced or added that they just don't like. Hell they have gotten to point where they are pulling a EA MADDEN where they are reintroducing features and calling them NEW, HOW DID WE GET HERE?!
For better and worse id say their biggest mistake was changing how Damage works between units, instead of just being a simple dice roll where everyone dies in 1 hit (unless they block or parry of course)/kill animation, now we have a CARTOONISH HP BAR which shows the Total HP of the REGIMENT, not the individual soldiers. The Second Biggest mistake was tieing Generals/Admirals to their Army or Fleet, Now every city has a GARRISON you have to fight on top of any enemy army that happens to be present. The Third Biggest mistake was changing how Cities and Provinces work, it goes without saying but the Current "region/Province" system is very Limiting in what you can do with a city, not to mention you can't build anything on the campaign map anymore like the old watchtowers and forts.
From what iv heard CA "iterates" from game to game in Total War, which now that I think about it, means the DECADE of "questionable" decisions they have made with Total War is probably going to take another DECADE to "iterate" away from.
Nailed it.
The 1 hp mechanic is horrible and the battles have been improved significantly opposed to how it is in the old games were the only "tactics" you can use is flanking the enemy.
At this point I am only exited for mods.
Really liked your point about competition. Happy to see your hat's still in the ring.
Legend i think is right in the whole video and a really goodp oint he made is that despite the opinion that warhammer and star wars and fantasy setting will automaticly attract way more players is wrong since historical games even years old have a large player base and i fully agree with him and am confident if say a good medieval 3 or even a decent one where issues would be targeted like pathfinding sieges they sould bring back fepth of characters the game would sell easily in millions and just absolutely smash the playerbase of warhammer 3 i also think that we must not argue with each other between those who love old tw games and those who love new tw games like legend says no one is true fan we are all fans i love both the histroical games and warhammer games all for different reasons like alot of players do i think that a new good game in a series would attract most fans of tw of warhammers and of old historical but also draw in way more players who love history and i know some people are in love with paradox games but i just cant play them since not being able to change course of campigning with battle strategies is just a dealbreaker for me and total war has this potential it has the battles that i think could easily draw in wide wide playerbase yes total war is dying but its part of a process now its time to hit back with a good game and at the very least with a try of a good game cause apathy is the worst and if they wont even try its already lost
After Atilla Total War everything became just shit to be honest. The Saga thing was/is just a money grab in disguise. There is not a single playable Total War game for me after Atilla. For me fantasy ruined Total war. Total war was always about history. In 2016 they just lost their identity. They wanted to make money from a nerdy franchise like Warhammer because they knew its fans would easily pay over and over again for half finished games and they did. Now many historical fans are abandoning total war and they are right to do so. CA doesn't listen to their historical fans anymore. Actually they don't listen to any of their fans at this point. The downfall of Total War needs to be studied. Seriously. They are completely out of touch with their audience and reality itself. I see people praising CA for doing the bare minimum with Pharaoh Dynasties after the disastrous launch and attacking other people who are not content with the bare minimum that CA offers. These people should "stand up" for what we deserve but instead they are content with a few "improvements" and they keep buying CA's games. Honestly there is no future for CA. In my eyes they are absolutely doomed.
Come off it. Warhammer 2 (and, getting there, 3) are the best Total War games that have yet been made. (Source: I've played all of them, starting with the demo of Shogun before the main game was even released that had me queueing outside the video game store before it opened on launch day). Sure, I get that as a historical-only player you want them to go back to historical games - so do I! Give me Empire 2! - but you're shit-talking not just the Warhammer GAMES but the PLAYERS too, just because you're personally uninterested in the subject matter? Who do you think you are?
@@BittermanAndy Mate just shut up. Its my opinion. I will say whatever i want. Get that in your head. "Who do you think you are?" haha. Just stop.
@@XVRK_Edits OK, well, I think you're a cunt. That's my opinion and I also will say whatever I want. Is that helpful? No. But you've shown you're uninterested in helpful contributions so we're both happy.
the warhammer games fit their setting, thats all. they should be seen as their own thing and a exception and not be used as a blueprint for more total war games (but maybe star wars or LotR). sadly CA seems to stick to the warhammer formula BUT (and thats a big but) this is just the newest problem in a long line of problems. Total war died with rome 2 and attila following. THAT'S where the formula changed for thr worst and ever onwards. These two HISTORICAL games marked the beginning of the end and the first warhammer game stabalized the company and SAFED (financially) what was left of total war. U can hate the warhammers all u want but deep down everybody knows that the moment people bought rome 2 and attila the franchise would die down the line. To summarize again Warahmmer came not at the expense of historicals, but because of their failure and if we are ever to see a good historical again its because the warhammer games make it possible in the first place!
love the Promentory playing in the background
I actually enjoyed a lot Pharaoh Dynasties, it still has more unit variety than older historical TWs. And this has never been such a strong argument before, ironically it started to come up a lot more only after warhammer
I agree, more with this, Total war and creative Assembly is right now on a thin line that can break if not careful.
Total war has not fallen but it's next upcoming game will be the deciding factor of, if Total war will survive or will it start to fall.
"As long as Atilla TW's lifeless body can be strapped to a horse, Total War will never fall! - The Terminator
Agreed, I love PA, but you're on point, I think. Hopefully we can have positive discourse
Thanks for coming back man!! I watch your videos every week during down time at work. How Far has Total War fallen😢, and I’m a Shogun OG! The mods and modders are the only thing keeping this franchise alive and they should band together and establish their own company or something. Hell I’ll donate some money if need be.
5:23 money?
Now the only missing piece here is Melkor’s react to TheTerminator’s react to Legend’s react to PA’s video.
Medieval III needs to be Medieval II but given an upgrade with some new added content and a big world map.
LITERALLY!
29:46 whats that map?
Is that from a mod where u can play as south-east asia factions?
TOTAL WARS WISHLIST: I'd like to see way more detailed bigger maps, that don't show enemy movement, unless scouted out, or guards posts put in place, like in one empire mod. Same too on the world map. Scouting can be assigned to generals ruling over areas. This might make Viking raids worse. Or on battle maps, march towards an ambush spot only to find you've been seen too, and you have to deal with evasive movements. Or smaller hills that can be fought over, or hide units for more surprises. And I definitely want generals to have different fighting styles, from eager and aggressive to always in defence mode. And I want to be able to recruit units from peoples I wiped from the map, but still had some very good approaches, so cultures become more diverse. And more CK3 but way simpler.
fantasy vs history is a red herring. strategy vs arcade is the real question
the player base changed starting with warhammer because warhammer is a better platform for arcade style mechanics, then they brought these arcade mechanics through to 3k and pharoh and now people feel like history side is dead
it makes sense,
if what you liked was the startegic chess like play, well then of course you hate it when 1 general walks up uses 1 spell and flips your whole chess board.
thet need to go back to the grand startegy genre, but more people play arcades so in a capitalist world...here we are
I think you still can get a common ground between the two
It's hard but I think it's possible to please most of the community with a good strategy and action-based game like a mix of Warhammer's over-the-top characters and historical total war strategies
@@REAPERthePRUSKIE don't you think that's what 3k's romance mode was? that didn't make many people happy far as i remember
@@peterjacoby8019 Oh.....maybe it wasn't done well? I don't know about that mode but I mean one side isn't supposed to overshadow the other so you have to use both of them I'm order to win
Also, I mean......there will always be some people who hate new things and changes regardless, you can't make everyone happy
there was never any strategic chess play in total war games , the games arent that deep and every single battle can be won with hammer and anvil , all other tactics are either people roleplaying or trying to make the gameplay feel fresh by playing in a different manner , warhammer simply embraced the inherent arcade nature of the battles in total war , campaigns are a whole other topic but most if not all of them lack any need for SIGNIFICANT (they require some but not a lot) brain usage , you are either sniffing glue or just blind to the reality of total war games as a whole , now you could say that ˝but with mods you had to x˝ mods dont count because they change the game from its natural state to something that it very much isnt , and turning up the difficulty doesnt do much either other than give the player penalties while giving the ai free shit and improved units etc etc
Simply they need to hear community, new total war have better graphics but dont have that good old gameplay. They dont keep good things and add new, they lose old add new and thats their tragedy. Still w8ing for Medieval 3, Rome 3, Empire 2 and WW1.
a little stupid but fun rp thing i would do during rome 1-
I would retire armies in provinces as a reward for the many years of service, i cant tell you how many max xp legionnaires i would disband in my frontier settlements. Thinking to my self, now they know ive recognized their efforts. when i lose generals the regions they die in will be exterminated and the conquering army replacing the population as last slap in the face of the Guals who had the gal to resist
medieval 2 usually early on turn 10-30 i make an army and conquer egypt no matter who im playing as, i would do that to ultimately spread my religion to the holy land then turn Jerusalem into fortified settlement focusing on high quality troops. then i trade most of my land in Europe to who ever is fighting the #1 [power in the world while i supercharge my economy in what is essentially peace.
hell in later turns i give ai factions money and watch the ai truly shine as they love me and end up waging wars aginst each other. i have even funded massive proxy wars between the moors/byzantine empire and watched as the moorsbecames super aggressive landing armies along the Italian coast conquering Mulan and fighting back the tied of Venetians as i inject another 60k gold and see them mass armies in home regions to reinforce the invasion of italy and ultimately byz.
i just downloaded attila and played for about 3o western roman empire (Love the challenge- played then with bi exspansion of rome 1)
mins... i like it so far but im worried to find its shortcomings fingers crossed it has non
i dont write this for likes but i hope we all truly enjoy these games and the next total war involves the little things where the imagination dosent have to travel far to create depth or the illusion of it. MAKE TOTAL WAR PERSONAL!!!!
Terminator’s version: My hair hasn’t fallen out in my thirties… yet. Maybe hair plugs in my thirties for a sequel is coming up next. Then maybe people will finally like me.
I also get a sense that CA seems to be averse to getting into a release cycle that is shogun-rome-medieval-empire-shogun-rome-medieval-empire-etc. ad infinitum. like the past decade has been an attempt to escape that obvious cycle. and on an artistic/creativity level I can understand that. And they named themselves Creative Assembly, so probably they feel the need to be always very creative... which they might interpret as also being always innovative and explorative (always something new, no repeats or sequels).
But the reality for many game developers is that a sequel cycle works. Paradox has great success with it and is unappolegetic of making a 3d or 4th version of a good game.
Console strategy developer Koei, on it's 15th (?) version of Romance of the 3 Kingdoms is an extreme example, and might even have been that CA rival had they not restricted themselves so long to console platforms.
the "we don't want to do the same thing more than 2 times" applies better to movies, music and theatre than video games. especially if you lock-in a game concept that works at it's core (and for the audience) and can be built upon as technology progresses.
The Civilization series is another such case, no one is making essays on why it would be creativily or philosophically bad if there is a Civ7. And yet, it appears CA has the criticism of being called "UNcreative Assembly" (because they made a Shogun III or Empire II) as their greatest existential fear.
And thus, they do not make a Medieval III, but desperately look to the Bronze Age, because that is again something new, so no one can doubt the creativity of Creative Assembly who are very creative.
As a total war player from med 1 I concurred with PA and your take. A paradox player as well with CK 2/3 and EU4. Both series satisfy my itch in different ways but both lack in their separate ways.
I'm hoping someone will come along and make a game that combines both well. Atm I've been trying Field of Glory Kingdoms & FoG medieval combo.
The dividing line between historical and fantasy is false, it's gameplay, mechanics and the spirit of the game that divides. I've played heaps of third age mod and enjoy it and would play a lotr total war game if the gameplay had EU4ish diplomacy with updated shogun 2 battles.
Did you know there's a mod that combines the battle of total war with the campaign gameplay of CK? It's called Crusader Wars and I've spent more time playing CK3 with that mod than all of my original playtimes combined. It really scratched that Medieval3 itch. Plus, siege battles will be added soon.
modding the games has been the only way I have been able to enjoy Total War for the past 3 years ngl
If I had to guess its over for the historical side. I would guess CA's largest and easiest profits came with the fantasy side. I felt as soon as the fantasy side was introduced the two sides could not co-exist for the long term. I think the best hardcore history peoples can hope for is SEGA steps in and splits the development teams into two different brands. Or maybe allow a joint historical development/venture with Paradox or Slitherine or Microprose; that would be awesome :D.
Don't get me wrong, I hold no ill will against the fantasy players, I've just seen the handwriting on the wall as soon as the first warhammer was even mentioned. And if I were a corporation I would definitely try to keep the fantasy side alive, to me the fans would be less dogmatic and given that its fantasy the ability to split and splice make believe story lines gives an untold wealth of games to make.
Anyways, appreciate the video Mr. TheTerminator : )
Thanks for the video.
28:02 what kind of map is this?
I love historic games but honestly I can't express how hyped I am for a star wars total war if done right it has the most potential
I don't think it's just a lack of competition. When a company gets big they become beholden to the shareholders and only care about short term profits. They don't even need to release good games, just fire people and show they reduced overhead and the shareholders climax and throw more money at the company. This is happening in every industry, it's not about company long term health, just short term margins that allow a ceo to cash out and move on to the next company.
Total war has fallen though. Just let it die so some other studio can actually make a good total war like game.
A simple formula for historic titles is to go a paradox route I.e, expand on campaign map depth because it will always lack the roster variety of factions.
The issues are deeper than what we are allowed to talk about on YT
As in?
@@TheTerminatorGaming i keep getting censored. must be hitting the nail on the head
Biggest problem is the programming put into more modern TW games. Attila for instance: I can work around some things but it is so absolutely completely infuriating to watch any one of your troops route and LEAVE a city theyre defending as opposed to retreating to the center for a last stand. Ive brought fights down to the wire and i just straight up feel cheated after these moments. Another thing is how the archers function. The constant rearranging they do and the lack of guard mode drives me absolutely insane. And of course the lack of ability to moves regular units individually is utterly absurd
I really miss the King Arthur Role Playing game series. Im not active in any total war community, but i mostly play older titles aka rome Medieval 2 and Shogun 2, but personally what draws me to say Warhammer or Three Kingdoms is the powering up your character draw. For me a lot of the base games dont appeal enough for me so i play them modded, besides Shogun , i agree that game mechanics would draw ppl, that is far more important than Historical accuracy if you want to draw new ppl, gameplay and mechanics matter a lot, I remember Xcom was far more niche before the newer games came out and they got me into the turn based strategy genre as an introductory title
Now I need someone to comment on this video to keep the chain going
The biggest issue is that Total War has no proper competition on the market. The moment someone else makes a proper TW styled game set in Medieval times you'll see CA suddenly listening to their fans.
I think what really blows it anytime I boot up a new TW game is it feels the exact same as every other game. As in even the new games have the exact same features as the old ones. It just feels like the same thing with new skins. It gets boring so fast.
Depends on what ca does.
Bare minimum they need to have a new engine and rome 3,medievil 3 or empire 2.
They just need to look at the old games. What worked, what didn't and merge them into a awesome game.
hey, can you tell me the songs name you use in the first mins of the vid? I know it from somewhere but i cant recall...
I miss the Family tree, having natural traits like, defend for a defender trait. Nicknames like William the Crusader had good vibes, Marriage and princesses were good.
I would never play a total war game now without overhaul mods
The customer is always right, i understand that not everybody will be happy, listen to the players & they will only succeed
Why don’t they do like a greatest hits in their mechanics? Each game has done something great like population and character traits in Rome, recruitment and crusade mechanics in Medieval 2, the way gunpowder weapons feel like in Empire, diplomacy in 3 Kingdoms, etc. They have already done these things, just put them together in one historical game and then they can try new things with stuff they have not quite gotten right like sieges, naval warfare and religion. I’d buy that game just for the inclusion of their past successes.
I believe and hope that total war is moving towards the better. sure it's been a bit of a bumpy road. but it seems to be going in the right direction. i have played total war since medieval total war 1 and have all games up to total war warhammer 3
they should employee the guys who make the Historical first games...and make them directors...if u have a winning team there's no reason for change it...but what i know....
Take a shot every time you hear the word "crossroad(s)"
Letter from an Old guard
Good day sir/maam
Yeah we are OLD and we are aware of it, most have families to take care now we have jobs and LESS time to play on games.
Yes im old enough now to be called dad or uncle
But I love what I have and never giveup on what I love
It's heart breaking to see what you love go broken and uncertain.yes I love historic total war and it is my respite on military service.
What can an old guy like me against the said new/modern audience..... Perhaps nothing
What can I offer is my unwavering loyalty.Just give as hope, I dont care about if it is unstable or created by old engine I just hope for little sympathy
Its my little happiness on my life before being a soldier, old man, dad, or uncle. I began as a child as well. My kids dont seem to understand my stance because they like warhammer but I want them to understand the history, sometimes this game teach them to be more than a gamer it teach you and them history, culture, management and things that will lead you to dream other than fantasy
Hope you have a good day young ones and greetings to old people like me that still playing the historic total war series
They made some good correction with Pharaoh, which gives some hope, but still not enough. If they f*** the next one, it'll be over
Damn, this is one hell of a loaded topic. It was a great video that I wouldn't even know where to begin. I'll share a few thoughts, been a fan of Total War since Rome.
I agree that this company, like many others, has managed to monopolize this niche of a genre. Competition always makes things better and it's unfortunate that no one has come close to it. Things would be different if they had what Starcraft/Warcraft had with Command and Conquer and Age of Empires.
But what I don't agree with, and it's not directed at you, is the resentment towards the evolution into fantasy. Like Civilization, I think the evolution of the base formula was necessary and Warhammer changed the company forever. However, I think they should've capitalized on their success and split into two developers: one for fantasy and one for historical. Maybe then there would have been competition and this would not only please both sides but stop the hostile division you pointed out.
I agree that the new Total War has bled into the past where modern historical attempts don't feel like the old games because of the evolved company. However, like you said, there is no way CA will drop fantasy. It prints money. I believe they will attempt sci-fi next. I think this is fine because the company will continue to evolve. But they should definitely use their success towards rebuilding a developer that can re/make games of the past. I can't believe they actually pivoted towards an FPS. As Legend would say. Idiots. They could've spent that money to do what Microsoft did with AoE Definitive Edition. Not a bad attempt with Rome. Should've happened sooner, as in there should be a Medieval one out already too.
Lastly, on a different note, I definitely agree that they've dropped the ball with their player immersion because of the hybrid attempts. I have clocked in hours upon hours over in CK3 due solely to the fact that it allows me to roleplay and that feels immersive. Something you can't do with modern Total War. For them to have sacrificed the ability to make identities out of your generals will always be my biggest gripe. Painting the map as a Tomb King is fun, blotting out the sun with Wood Elves is fantastic, but nothing beats being able to tell your own story and you can't do that today. There's thankfully some cool stuff that should be used to modernize the old games. Like, your point about the resources from the Saga games and 3rd party games. The combined diplomacy changes scattered across the modern Total Wars. etc But, man do they need to bring back the shit that made the game feel heavy too. Because WH feels light after you run out of the adrenaline hit from watching some fantasy action. Which is ironic since Warhammer is meant to go hard.
Either way, I agree that Total War ain't dead til the fat lady sings. I feel for the purists but there should be no reason to be cynical. It's barely been a decade of fantasy total war. It probably will be a decade or more before it comes back. I had my fun with fantasy and yes, it doesn't scratch my itch for historical. I'll just come back when they make something that does. Meanwhile, I'll enjoy playing a Viking over in CK3, because the beauty of gaming is the vast number of games that target an era. Right now, Paradox scratches that itch. I'm very glad you mentioned their games Terminator. They're a treat and everyone who's a purist should give them a try.
I like historical tile. I stop play WH. But do i think all doom and gloom? No. 3k is an shinning example where CA could still doing thing right
My biggest problem is the half finished releases and inconsistent support time on a game.
I still hope for an iron age sequel/dlc for pharaoh with the dynasty system and all
Alright, you gotta tell me what the map at 29:39 is supposed to be for.
Yes, it has...Pharoah is a joke....they need to go back to their roots... Rome 1 and Medieval 2. Release Medieval 3 with all this modern nonsense out... and make a battle feel like a battle with routing units and not a battle massacre simulator. Bring back collision. We've been saying it for years.
It’s pretty odd they haven’t announced anything…
If CA wants to get back on its feet, they revisit Empire and Napoleon, update, fix them and merge them as one game. Do the same for Rome 2 and Attila.
Once they fix these games I m pretty sure tge fans would be grateful.
[ TOTAL WAR HAS FALLEN]
[ HISTORICAL TOTAL WAR HAS FALLEN]
[ MY VERY IMPORTANT FAITH IN CA HAS FALLEN]
[ TW: PHARAOHS HAS FALLEN]
[ MY GRANDMA HAS FALLEN (AND SHE CAN'T GET UP)]
[ FALLING HAS FALLEN]
I'm more in line with Legend's take on the situation. Personally I don't see the need for such a huge distinction between historical and fantasy total war games. At their very core they still operate the same. It's just the themes and characters are different. I absolutely loved Rome, Medieval, and Shogun. But I also love Warhammer. It's not impossible to find common ground, people are just too stuck in their ways.
Return on investment or ROI is everything to stock companies. I’m not sure additional competition would actually accomplish what you think. The reason is there is a finite bucket of money people will spend on games. Given that only a few short years ago RTS type games were almost dead there is not an unlimited pile of money to be spent on these types of games. Once you start demising that pool of money, market share has a direct impact on ROI and most stock companies will not invest if the ROI they need to stay solvent is unrealistic. That said as much as I would love a new Empire or Medieval I can’t think of what they might add that hasn’t already been done in one of the many excellent mods to make that kind of investment viable. You mentioned games like Ultimate General American Revolution and while I do like certain aspects of that game, I like just about any total war better. Instead of spending all of this energy complaining what will likely never happen why not celebrate the fact CA is still making these games at all. I mean seriously programmers, developers, graphic artists, sound design, 3d animation developers and the host of other skills needed to pull off games at this scale are people too. Constant criticism of their work without really understanding the dynamics of ROI and business in general only
acts to discourage. Do it enough and these creative people move on to greener pastures. As a community we do these people a huge disservice by not celebrating these wonderful games. As someone who also has been on board since Medieval One and owns every total war game and dlc published I have enjoyed them all, sure some more that others but that has more to do to the period in history that the game design. I also purchase total war games to send the developers a message that I support their continued involvement is producing single player games on a grand scale. On another note I like what they have done with the recent historical titles. The graphics are two orders on magnitude better than earlier games thanks in large part to the war hammer titles. The economy is also much more robust and difficult to manage than 19:29 earlier titles, while the combat is as good as it has ever been. Sometimes I get the feeling people think money needed to pay for the games we want grows on trees. Games like the ones you mentioned takes years to development and huge investments in capital just where do you think that comes from? The problem every development company faces is how to keep the lights on and a steady stream on funding capital, hence why spinoffs and dlc are so popular. They bring in cash, not huge profits but company and development sustaining funds needed to keep the doors open. Never underestimate the importance of ROI on producing any produce. Without sustainable, reasonable ROI no product would ever get developed without expected profit investors, stock holders and corporate boards would not take the risk is the first place. Again celebrate what we have, what they have accomplished, after all people always accomplish more with honey than sandpaper1
For me tbh the game design is a big issue. Rome II seemed to be a turning point. So on one hand improved graphics was a step forward and it was even exciting. But somehow the game eventually felt empty to me. And then I realized that it is like in fine art and toys that we play as kids. Style is very important and the older games like Rome I, Med II, Shogun II - they had it, they were a finished artistic product where mechanics properly supported the visuals. But as in classical art and toys that you build with your dad you need to leave some work for the imagination and for that you need to keep this balance between detail and the big picture. Just as modern animation the TW series went too much into detail but lost the big picture and the artistic style and the mechanics don’t catch up. So right now at pharaoh stage they are stuck somewhere where the models and maps are so detailed that there’s nothing left to imagination but the graphics are simply not good enough. For example Thrones of Brittania for all its wrongs had the visuals right. But newer historical games don’t get that. They are very detailed but look clumsy. And the game mechanics are simply not in depth enough to support the visuals that are already bad enough artistically. They got the balance in Warhammer somewhat, but that’s a totally different story. And to be honest, the game also felt empty to me, because of overwhelming detail and variety that you can’t relate to or comprehend
Total War Attila will always be my favorite Total War Game! For me TW peaked in Attila, I know the optimization sucks but the game is golden!
PA dismiss the newer games because he simply doesnt care for the Warhammer franchise. The TW WH branch games are successful indeed, but why should someone with no interest in WH not dismiss that? The failures of Troy and Pharaoh proves theres no overlap in action gameplay fans and historical fans either. Its been 10 years of WH games, theres no indication of changes so he is right to move on.
People think there will never be a total war contender.....Manor Lords is definitely close
I said goodbye to historical TW long time ago and i was with it since the first Shogun (I still remember reading a preview of first Shogun in Polish game magazine and i could'nt wait for it). I hope someone else will pick up this formula, since IMHO CA can't pull it any more.
I wanna see Rome 3!
Yeah, the games need to really try and focus on things. For instance I believe all historical games require population mechanics, food, and maybe sanitation (so long as it's not as annoying to manage as it was in Attila due to some buildings just have insanely high squalor values compared to what they gave you). They need a court system and family tree, and good diplomacy. Beyond that depending on the style of the game, so for instance if you want a 3K style of game, in that you have a romance mode and a historical one. You need to be extra careful about the balance for the historical mode. Crossbows, guns, slings, arrows, they all need to behave in an understandable and realistic manner.
Also you really should try to nail finer details in a historical game, so no jumping attacks, smoke from firing guns or setting things ablaze. Shieldwalls that look like they'd actually protect you, correct firing angles, etc. Also a historical title should have naval, because even a mediocre naval is still preferred over no naval at all, at least for me. I'd also like to see supplies for armies, and war weariness as things you can have in game, proper settlement battles, especially ones that change as you level up the settlement. Trade should be both internal and external and should be relative to the amount of resources you have. Later units should be locked behind tech or buildings, maybe even both for some. I also think you should have it where recruitment of higher tier units is restricted, in that after unlocking them you either can only train so many, or only have so many available and need to wait for more.
In sieges walls should mean something, they really should be worth holding if you can do so. And when it comes to campaign mechanics, I do think every faction or culture/race should have mechanics that make them different from others. It should be just a little bit extra for these people that makes them different to encourage replayability, but not at the expense of making the core mechanics every faction has being shallow. Ideally you'd have both, allowing for generally solid core gameplay and mechanics across all factions but with some additions to differentiate each culture, faction, or race. Also having many of these things or other things be options you can change before starting a campaign would end up making things a lot better for more people, giving players more choices almost always is a good thing.
Instrumental song around the 1:30 min mark?
Sounds like last of the mohicans score
In my opinion it has fallen long ago. The battle it faces currently is attempting on not being just a memory.
Migrating to ck3. Bye TW.
He does not express apathy at all, he's simply saying that based on Warhammer, he doesn't think that CA can even create a proper historical Total War game anymore. Plus he believes CA is more interested in PR damage control.
I don't disagree with him on the last part. For modern companies, not being relevant anymore is killing and it's quite clear that Total War has gone from one of the core series of PC gaming in prior years to seeing a huge drop in player/fan interest (and interaction). Just releasing PR messages saying you want to do things better isn't going to get all players back.
Big companies in this position usually suffer from greed and thus bad company practice and culture. It takes a massive restructure that can take years to improve standards. Next they absolutely need to make a successful Total War game and make a lot of profit on that (to counter the losses of Hyenas). Maybe they can do it with a W40K: Total War release, but they absolutely cannot afford to slip up.
Personally I think it's an uphill battle. We've seen similar situations with Starbreeze and Overkill with regards to Payday 2 and Payday 3. You need to do everything perfectly to climb back to where you fell from grace and in my opinion... I don't believe CA can do that. But, they have a chance and clearly Sega is giving them a chance, so they are free to prove me wrong.
atilla with 1212 is closes we'll get a the med III we ask for
The competition is not within the subgenre, but I know many that are like myself that just went to EU4, to Civ 5, to games in totally different genres, to other platforms like PS5 or switch, etc.
I was playing Medieval and then Rome, Knights of honor, and Medieval 2, mods for Rome like total realism and EB, but then I literally built a new computer for Empire and it was such a disappointment. Shogun 2 was great and a big glimmer of hope that warscape engine can be salvaged with more work and improvements, but then Rome 2 followed.
So I was looking for better games, tried Nobunaga's ambition spheres of Influence, tried EU4 and basically moved on. Occasionally replaying a campaign of Rome or Medieval 2 or Shogun 2, but thats it since a decade ago for me TW is over.
I tried 3 kingdoms, Troy I got for free on EGS, tried Warhammer 2 its just no games for me.