HOW MUCH LONGER CAN TOTAL WAR SURVIVE THIS?!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 вер 2024
- Something is rotten in the state of Creative Assembly, and it's not the fans tossing excrement at their figurative windows. Whether it be SEGA or Creative Assembly making the decisions, by doubling the prices of seasonal content like Shadows of Change and making it seemingly the standard price of such DLC, fans of the Total War Warhammer series are up in arms about what this means not just for the future of Warhammer III, but also for Creative Assembly's price versus content strategy.
This comes on top of CA's announcement of Total War Pharaoh, a title that has received a ton of pre-launch criticism for being uninteresting or a clone of A Total War Saga Troy, meaning Creative Assembly is seemingly sticking to a formula many disliked, while also shying away from bringing much-wanted time periods AND innovations to the forefront.
And so, with Medieval 3 or Empire 2 being nowhere in sight, Creative Assembly has finally brought the ire of both sides of the Total War spectrum, the historical AND the fantasy fans - and seemingly everyone in between. It is time for Creative Assembly to become much more open about their plans present and future, and for the company to realize that there is a limit to what they can charge for content.
Let me know your thoughts on this topic and this video in the comments, and remember to leave a like and subscribe to the channel :)
BECOME A CHANNEL MEMBER: / @andystake
Consider supporting me with a Super Thanks! :D
OR please consider supporting me on Patreon: / andystake .
Don't forget to like, comment, and subscribe to help me befriend the algorithm ;)
JOIN THE DISCORD: / discord
#totalwardrama #totalwardlc #totalwarpricing #totalwarwarhammer3 #shadowsofchange
CA ironically feels creatively bankrupt to me. I'm a 2 decade veteran, first playing Rome 1 and Med1. There's newxomers like Manor Lords, Gloria Invictus and others coming who are innovating and reimplimenting the lessons and breakthrus CA blazed ahead with. For example, the formation movement of 'back stepping' and other more interesting ways to command troops like Bannerlord.
Yes indeed. We can only hope that two things happen - these games become even better than the Total Wars of old (if not on their first entries then the subsequent ones), and that CA sees the popularity of a game like Manor Lords and Bannerlord, and emulates the dedication and passion for detail and player agency there.
@@rory6860 Field of Glory II (Battles) + Field of Glory: Empires (Grant Strategy) with ancient setting; Field of Glory II: Medieval (Battles) and upcoming Field of Glory: Kingdoms (Grand Strat) with medieval setting.
How can you say something is out of creativity if you haven't played any of the new entries..
@@daarksideyt Manor Lords is a city builder game with huge battles like TW. There are some battle video previews and they look and feel like typical TW battles, but with few new mechanics.
@@daarksideyt the point is other games are starting to catch up to CA when it comes to interesting battles and RTS mechanics but are leaps and bounds ahead when it comes to nation building or city building that leaves you wondering why bother with total war which is basically a glorified arcade game at this point. game engines are at a level now we want more from the map side of the game especially when the battle mechanics are largely the same as when the total war saga started.
I am still playing Medieval 2 and Empire after all these years since their release. I might buy any "new" releases when they are on sale in about 10 years.
They're still fantastic games!
Pharoah sale in 2033 - 40%. And its dlc about mythological creatures - 33%. Enjoy.
@@FreelancerCZ lol this is so real
Wahammer is honesrmy good
There are a few main things it offers beyond other total wars
Monstrous infantry, magic, and flying
Theres also more prevalent singe entity use (think a million flavors of war elephants with various roles)
Heros and single lords can be a bit devisive to historic fans but they're not that out of wack in power
So the gameplay is massively altered from core total war
Pirate them
I want a Empire 2 so bad
More provinces and nations ☝🏻
yeah should be a uption to have emirgent nations on, or to pick youre nations even if its under union of some sort
I used to want it to, but now I dread the day I will be disappointed by it. CA is not what it used to be
me too broo
@@paniniutensalat1624or if they leave making it to one of those small studios they have
I really want to love CA and all their work, but I have to admit that the last TW game I really enjoyed was Attila. I still consider myself as a Total War gamer and try to bring others to try it out, but honestly I play it less and less. And that's just sad. Rome 1, Medieval 2, Mods like Divide and Conquer, Modded Empire and Attila were far beyond other gaming experiences for me, but now I'm getting the feeling, that is over.
Yup, it certainly feels that way. Personally I'm enjoying some amazing Medieval 2 mods these days, but more on that another day ;)
Warhammer is still great tbh if you havent tried it defintly worth a try for me the last historic game i actually like was shogun 2 like rome is hot garbage and i dont think attila does enough on the battles to fix it but warhammer is a great series tbh
I think Warhammer 3 with mods is super fun myself community bug fix +SFO makes Warhammer a very fun game
@@aleksjamnik5360 I like Warhammer . 2 being the last one I played. but it lacks interesting sieges . It's river Crossing maps are a joke. It feels less tactical or strategy related and more like you playing with units rather than commanding armies.
Im enjoying a very cool Empire TW mod and I also have in my sight the Pike n Shot mod for shogun 2. Looks great
The $25 price tag for Chorfs *could* be excused, since it was a full race pack. Compared to the $20 race packs of the Wood Elves and Beastmen, the excuse of "wages for Devs go up so prices should too" is justifiable. But with radio silence from CA, persistent bugs in the game, nonexistent patch schedules, and Shadows of Change having content that shouldn't be justified at higher than $15 when compared to the $10 Lord v Lord packs from Warhammer 2.
If they were more transparent with what was going on, listened to the playerbase who are bringing up legitimate issues with the game, and actually patched their game more than once per DLC cycle, the fanbase wouldn't be collectively throwing feces at them.
no
Why was the Wood Elves dlc more expensive again? Wasn't it because of the (mini) campaign that nobody was waiting for?
It was a full race pack with 3 Legendary Lords and a "full" Unit Roster. The mini campaign may have been part of it along with the Beastmen being the same way. The Tomb Kings and Vampire Coast in Warhammer 2 were the same price ($19, I thought they were all 20 but was incorrect) as they were also full race packs.
Man Attila was such a good game and it never got the love it should have!
It was really sad to watch Attila die, I love the setting, and I feel like it was done dirty.
I still remember half the chat of any Attila stream being people begging them to fix bugs (like some villages being unable to upgrade to four building slots), because the only times Attila would get bug fixes would be during a DLC release. It was clear that Attila was pretty much abandoned by the end of 2015/early 2016, and I was so disappointed to hear that Empire Divided was for Rome 2. In my opinion, this was a massive missed opportunity since Attila allows for religious conversion, and the crisis of the third century had roman paganism falling in practice, with the rising of Christianity, Manicheanism, Sol Invictus worship, and the Cult of Mithras. Not to mention that diseases are a base Attila mechanic which could have gone really nice with the plagues happening at the time.
I'm fairly confident in the sole justification of Empire Divided being developed for Rome 2 instead of Attila was purely because Rome 2 had more players.
Attila still runs absolutely horribly even today, even on my 2,300 dollar computer. (yes I tried the thrones of Britania fix, it didn't work for me), which hurts even more since Rome 2 runs like a dream in comparison.
The people hoping for a "return to form" with Medieval 3 or Empire 2 are probably being unrealistic. If either were to be made, they'd probably be closer to warhammer/troy style battles vs. Medieval 2 or even Shogun 2. Most of the people who worked on Medieval 2, or heck, even Empire, are probably not even working for the company anymore. Medieval 2 came out 17 years ago, Empire came out 14 years ago, and Shogun 2 came out 12 years ago. It's clear that the average TW fan will fork out money for whatever, no matter what. CA will occasionally overstep and screw up (DLC prices too high, abruptly cutting support for a game (Three Kingdoms)), but the playerbase will come back.
It's also clear that "old style" historical TW is as low on the priority list as CA can make it. Not out of spite or anything, but because Warhammer prints so much money. At this point we're nearing a decade since the last full blown historical total war (that wasn't a saga title).
Thanks for the mods
atleast both fantasy and historical fans can unite around in being angry about this insane price for this new dlc I was a bit put aback with chaos dwarves but still sucked it up with it being a new race backs but this is insane.
the fact the main games and dlcs has never decreased in price even the first game still cost as much as a new released game which is insane.
I like the dlc system for warhammer it allows CA to really dig into the universe to bring about really obscure stuff and so many characters people love to see we would never see otherwise but asking my to pay as much just shy of a AAA game is insane to ask for 11 units
honestely think they should go with warhammer and Medival 3 just 2 massive games and stop making a new game every year and rather focus on making them the best games thru dlc i think that its kinda obvious to me that a game a year doesn't really work anymore with the more modern live service model.
i do think that AAA companies will continue to increase price which will see a real raise to indie games we already have small teams making insane games like Hades, Baldur gate 3, stardew the list goes on.
Yeah for sure. Make some massive games and then work on them, but then again, the DLC price is an issue. If they had kept it at 15 USD per DLC I think it would've been a different topic, though. But personally, I would like to see much larger expansions in favor of the content drip that's currently kind of happening.
The BG3 studio is hardly a small studio.
Why is there a division between fans? I only started playing TW:W this year.
@@wonderwiseS2 Because of the different approaches of the fantasy and the historical games. The historical are focusing of less but makes it more accurate. Fantasy give you more opportunities with different species, but give less focus. So it is Quality or Quantity.
Warhammer have a lot of good points, but theres a lot of good things missing even from the old Total War Games. Economy is simple, Tech trees are simple, battleanimations didn't match with each other. Diplomacy was simpler befor.
I enjoy both. But it is not the same and warhammer is not simply better. But historical fans wait now to long for a new game.
@@abbald Oh i see, makes sense.
The first game i played was Shogun 2 and i remember having spies and a family tree of sorts. My issue with Warhammer is that i have an hard time getting immersed, it's just battle after battle.
I honestly don't care if it's fantasy or historical i just want a good game.
Total War is having the same problem the Sims had until very recently. There is no competition for them to outdo, so CA has the monopoly on massive real-time battle strat gaming. The only other game to even approach what Total war has to offer is M&B Bannerlord.
Which i find to be weird since total war generally sells well. Like there is sn audience for these types of games so why is CA the only game in town (no pun intended)
@@lastword8783 I imagine its rather difficult to create a similar experience Total War gives without running the danger of being accused of stealing code.
Back in the day there was A game set in arthurian britain, had very similar gameplay to total war, only with a slighlty more narrative spin to everything.
There's a new game called Knigths of Honor, which mixes Total War battles with Paradox-like campaign. At the moment it has worse battles than Total War and worse campaign than Paradox, but the game looks really interesting and there's a lot of potential to improve in the future.
@@MaMastoastthose ganes were honestly underrated and its a shame they didn't get the attention they deserved
As a fan of the Warhammer games and a longtime fan of the history games, CA has dropped the ball on the historical titles. Bronze Age warfare wasn't all that diverse with most major empires competing in an arms race to build the most chariots. We need another Medieval or Empire, hell I'd be happy with another Shogun at this point.
Exactly. What historical players want are tactics, opportunities, and innovative gameplay. The Bronze Age goes inherently in the opposite direction due to the nature of more simple times and archaic strategy, weapons and armor back then - unless CA fundamentally changes TW, but that's not happening.
@@AndysTake Completely agree, the only bright spot would probably be the bronze age collapse with the introduction of the sea peoples, but they will probably make that DLC or something. I'd imagine it like TW Attila except every major faction is getting screwed.
if the chariots werent looking like the worst version in the series it might be palletable, but with the battles they´ve shwon chariots look like complete dogshit
Before Pharoah was released I was totally convinced of a Med3 or at least something more ambitious with a return of naval combat or a new take on forgotten features.
Though now I think its pretty clear with how many different teams there's been and how they've gone that we are no longer really a target audience to think about, and haven't been for a while now.
It looks like they are hedging their bets on a potential upcoming younger or wider demographic, and don't have much in common with the teams and visions of the period many of us started with. It may be a bit sad to realize it at first, but it probably makes sense to them. Though instead of feeling bitter about it or anything, it may be better to just mentally move on from total war, and settle for the older titles with new mods now and again as the company has moved on from us. They as a company will definitely survive and thrive without their older audience, and frankly I don't even think those games like Med3 are even a thought on the table anymore
Man, that would be depressing.
Truth
Someone else will fill the demand. It shouldnt be that hard to make our own game. It doesnt need to have the greatest graphics. As long as the scale is big and based on history with a focus on authenticity and accuracy (within reason) i'll be happy.
I had the same thoughts, thought what game in this style can replace it. It's a one of a kind, tho the TW from the Golden era is staying in the past. Every game they getting further from its Roots and I don't enjoy the game like I used to
Pharao is absolutely not a game for a "younger" audience. The time period and the calamity it depicts are not something some teenagers would easily know about.
Not to mention the fact we will have to pay for a blood mod. Which after seeing Warhammer 3s release with Slaanesh and Khorne maps feels even more ridiculous
Yup for sure.
That is one of the all time evil corporation move in gaming ever. The fact that we have to pay for blood in a literal war game
Still don't buy it, and it's the only DLC I'm not going to buy.
This is just greed, and will kill the series and company. I've gladly bought every DLC & pack until this started, and have been a customer since Shogun 1 dropped.
Honestly all I want is for them to let me move individually units around the campaign map without a general. I don't know how many more total board games I can go without that feature. Campaigns feel so rigid without that flexibility.
I see a trend where old, experienced, and dedicated companies when it comes to their games become more corrupted over time. The thing is back when CA was starting, they really need to make their game great to give a good impression. As time passed and they became a staple, they probably just used games as a probable cash grab. though I think they still cared about their products, they care more about the revenue they get from it
thats the thing money corrupts everything :(
The trend is that the peak of game development has come and gone. The huge leaps, innovation, creativity and passion of the 2000's is over. RTS is dead.
CA makes me think that they are trying to pull off a Valve approach of radio silence into a firework! . . . They just forgot to set the rockets up and lit the boxes alight inside of the trucks. Because the way they handle their grand releases makes you think - at least in the Pharaoh case - that they wanted to release a DLC, but got confused. Maybe that's why we get DLCs for indi game prices for Warhammer 3 now? They aren't malicious suits trying to leech every last penny out of their fanbase. . . They just made happy little accidents happen. You know, like a car crash on a highway kind of little accident!
I am pretty sure, they thought Pharaoh would be a hit, and appease the historical fans, that is how far they have fallen .
I honestly feel bad for the team behind Pharoah. They’ve been responsive to feedback and seem pretty damn passionate about what they’re doing. The banners, unit cards, better visual effects from previous showings, etc. were done in response to criticism and they’ve also brought back stuff like bodyguard units. CA Sofia is a different team from the baseline CA, and I hope that Pharoah is good enough to enjoy a moderate success so that the wrong lessons aren’t taken from it.
Speaking of mainline CA, I’ve heard recently that, apparently, there are only 4 dudes on the main WHIII DLC Team and *1* doing balancing/bug fixing. If this is true then it’s truly catastrophic mismanagement from the middle and higher ups, not the fault of the devs. No wonder the content scale and bug fixing is fucking wonky, there’s barely even a skeleton crew working on it! They need more people and resources to actually make content and bug fix at a decent rate.
This also means that the “paying devs” thing falls flat; hell it’s just disgusting in general that that was said. That statement’s intent is very sinister: it’s trying to get us angry at the developers instead of the bloated and idiotic management by making us think the *devs are somehow to blame* when they have very little input or say in this kind of pricing. The ones behind it are the bloated suits and BA and MA bastards who ruin everything they touch with their fetish for short term profits, everything else be damned.
Another thing lending credence to the mismanagement is the fact that Hyenas is a thing. There’s no way that guaranteed DOA hunk of shit was the idea of anybody but a gaggle of corporate suits. For those wondering, Hyenas is going to be, and I’m not kidding you, a live service hero shooter *where you steal Sega themed merch.* I’m willing to bet that the game is going to be shut down within a year of launch at the absolute best, and there’s no way it’s not gulping up money to fuel its development.
I always say the same.
Empire deserved way more love.
I feel that CA's new games don't have the personal aspect anymore.
Like, I miss the family tree, playing through generations of the family you're playing with, building up the dynasty. Caring about a certain general as his father and grand father were legendary warriors etc...
I dont like now, they give you one faction leader to work with, whom you play with throughout the entire campaign.
I dont think I'm explaining myself very well 😅 hopefully you get what I mean haha
Dont know Troy but 3Kingdoms allowed you do this, as for Warhammer is a bit tricky since most characters are either immortal, live really long or their children werent flashed enough to people care.
As a qualified accountant I wanted to give my thoughts on the reddit post because I believe it is misleading and people might be forming conclusions based on potentially inaccurate information. The post states that comprehensive income has decreased from £9m to £6.8m between 2021 and 2022 and this may be leading to increased prices in an effort to show higher profit.
The problem with this is that comprehensive income includes a tax charge for the year and the tax charge can be impacted by a lot of things that are not necessarily related to current year performance. I can prove this, look at the profit before tax in 2021and 2022. They made profit before tax of £5.4m in 2021 and £6.7m in 2022. The profit before tax in 2021 and 2022 is very similar yet the tax charge is wildly different even thought the tax rates and rules are largely the same. Therefore there is clearly a lot of other things that are impacting this tax charge which aren't related to current year performance.
This then leads to a profit after tax (comprehensive income) of £9m in 2021 and £6.8m in 2022 so it looks like they are making less profit but that is only because of the tax charge. If you want to compare year on year performance you need to look at profit before tax which increased between 2021 and 2022 (figures above). In reality they are more profitable than they used to be, not less.
Thank you for this explanation!
I’m also an accountant and run my own healthcare clinic. I agree with this fellows post. It’s more helpful to examine profit before tax to compare year over year performance. Looks like they experienced about 21% increase in profits before taxes.
They got lucky with their lower tax payment for the year 2022 because their cost of sales (the accumulated total of all costs used to create a product or service) increased by about 19%. Their employee wages and salaries increased by 12% which is a good thing.
A higher tax payment could’ve made their profit about even or reduced from the previous year.
CA didn't realize that when their players get to rank 7 they gain the "unbreakable" trait. We've gained too much experience with these bad practices before and had to draw a line in the sand. No SoC unless it's being sold for a reasonable price. No more TW titles unless they show it's properly being supported.
CA actually has the groundwork for great TW games.
- TW3K/ Troy: TW game that balances Fanasy and Historical
- TWWH (especially immortal empire mode)- combining multiple games into 1 single giant map. Imagine they release TWMedieval Europe, TW Medieval Middle East, and Total War Medieval Asia as3 separate games but with each title. you have separate modes that combine maps of multiple games together. now If u want to play an entire map. you have no choice but to buy all 3games
- TW3k introduced a time period system where you play on the same map but with a different time period and tieing some periods with DLC. you can easily do that with European countries who fight each other all the time
Disagree. No need to balance Historical and Fantasy, you do not mixe the two. The main pb with Troy is that historical players hate single entity heros and fantasy players hate having disguised human as mythical creatures.
It's either a full historical with realism in sight or a full fantasy for me. Mods will do the rest if one need a reskin for fantasy units.
Buying 3 full price games for just a map extension is a total rip off. Release a game and then maybe map extensions as DLC but do not use the excuse of a new game and minor changes to make it the same price as the base game. Also NEVER use this for an Empire title. (but they already release Rome 2 without Greece playable so maybe Empire 2 with only Europe in the base game is possible 🤣)
The only good idea is multiple starts for a same map as multiple time period. For exemple Empire 2 with different campaign on the whole map such as pike and shot era, early 18th century, American revolution, French revolution and Napoleonic Wars.
@@jeanhubertgazon Both 3Kingdoms and Troy has modes for both historical and fantasy elements, sure Troy was a weird mix between the two imthe beggning
@@heitorpedrodegodoi5646 Yes today they fixed that more or less, but for a long time it was an awful mixe. Also, the modes are not perfectly flesh out and don't change a lot appart from single entities.
I agree that 2 distinct modes are the best way to reconcile both history and fantasy on the same title, but it has to be a core aspect of the game for the devs, and each side must be fully fleshed out. Not just a last attempt to please everybody by patching bodyguards and removing all heros abilities 😑. So both Troyes and 3K are not a great inspiration... more like counterexamples
Hah, this is totally besides the point, but it just amused me how you showed price in Czech Crowns (?) like any of us know what that means x). Yea, I know you made verbal clarifications, it's just funny.
I'm more upset about the content of the dlc than the price. If we got 3 LL's, 3 generic lords, 3 generic heroes, and 5-6 units for each faction, and then either 2 LH's or 2 "simpler" LL's I'd have bought it with maybe a bit of grumbling. Price went up 150%, and if you compare the dlc to The Twisted and The Twilight, it's comparable content, (at least in quantity) and that sold for 10 bucks at release
You know what would calm the fans. Ca saying "Hey we know you want medieval 3 and it's being worked on but we aren't ready to show anything about it." At least giving the fans confirmation that youve listened and are working on it would be great. And this goes for both empire 2 and medieval I just used medieval as an example. Sure you have your impatient fans but telling us you hear the loud and obvious desires of your fans would give ca a bit of breathing room at least.
Definitely!
I mean, it's obvious. If their driven by greed they will do Med3 bc they know that's what fans will buy. Pharao is just a Troy reskin to make easy money, it's absolutely not their new big announcement.
What I need is more : "we've listened, we know that Med2 was the prime of the series and that TW went downhill since Rome 2 so we will take as much inspiration from Med2 as possible to make the game complex and strategic again"
At this point I would wait and see the let's plays and reviews before I would buy medieval 3
In light of how greedy CA is, it is baffling to me why CA hasn't given us medieval 3 allready. I mean so many people want it and would pay anything to get their hands on it.
Don't you realize that this is NOT the good period to make a Medieval 3 ? CA already hit rock bottom with Troy mixing historical and fantasy and went downhill since Rome 2 by being unable to keep any good feature for more than 2 titles and cutting off all that made the greatness of older games.
They certainly don't need to rush Med3, they need to take the time to create a great game and listen to the fan screaming that Med2 has to be the inspiration (and not Rome 2, like every game since). They need to bring back everything that was good and add even more. I will gladly wait years if it can give me this quality.
@@jeanhubertgazon Its not like anyone is asking them to rush medieval 3... Its been an obvious direction for years and years.
@@MaMastoast What ? Half of the comment section is just "Pharao bad, we want Med3". People are complaining and are asking CA to release Med3 as soon as possible. And since CA has been quite busy recently with all their game, I bet they just started to think about it. Releasing it next year or in 2 years would mean the game has been rushed.
I am here playing 1212AD mod in Total War Attila. Still gives me the satisfaction of playing a medieval total was game.
Is the campaign for that complete now?
Of course they are silent on this. Because no matter how they put it, there is no way this DLC is worth CHORFS'. It's a scam and they know it.
I don't know if it went under your radar but they just updated Attila to disable in-game chat, like a slap in the faces of the community who have been crying for fixing the performance over the years.
Hot take, Warhammer and it’s mechanics should not have bled into the mainline Total war games, especially single entity units and fantasy elements which in my opinion ONLY work in Warhammer.
That’s not a hot take at all, but the nature of game development means that if a mechanic, asset, feature or whatever is created it must be used as often as possible to squeeze as much value out of it as possible. Once you alter the engine to support single entity units there will always be pressure to find ways to put them in future games to get more and more value out of it. Even if it doesn’t make sense to do so because the people who are making these calls aren’t the ones who understand what makes sense and what doesn’t, they’re just the people looking at balance sheets and wondering why they paid someone to create something that is only used once.
@@Mankorra_Gomorrah could just use it for their ever increasing number of Warhammer titles, and left it out of the Historical games, like branch it off
@@oprime0078 but then you’re losing 50% of your potential *value*
@@Mankorra_GomorrahWhat you say ? Features must be reused as much as possible ? You mean that Total War should include every feature that worked INCREDIBLY well in old title in every new one ? That's nonsense my friend 😂
What about the ~50 features that were cut off or appeared in only 1 title and that every player still mourn til this day ?
@@jeanhubertgazon you joke but the answer is obvious. We think of “Total War” as a single, continuous game series. In reality that is not how it works, Rome and Medieval 2 operated on one engine, Empire and Napoleon operated on a different engine, I believe Rome 2, Attila, Shogun 2 and the warhammers all operate on yet another engine. The people that are making decisions at CA never paid to create a population mechanic or any of the mechanics that you talk about except for naval combat.
CA used its own money to pay for the creation of the Rome engine and then used that engine again to make Medieval 2. They then get bought by Sega and a new engine is created that leave out pretty much everything you talked about but adds in some new stuff and allows them to handle firearms. The features that were lost never return but basically everything that was added by Sega stuck around for at least 2 to 3 games because Sega paid for it and Sega is still in charge.
Naval combat had a good run but it is incredibly expensive to do, more so than the land combat, so it seems like they feel they got their moneys worth out of it and it is now more expensive then it’s worth. Plus naval combat in warhammer would probably be genuinely painful to play so I’m not upset it’s missing there.
Let's be honest here: CA is so into the WH franchise that they will not make a game like Medieval II or Empire ever again. Since Rome 2 they capped the game by forcing us to have a general in the army, something tolerable when he has his own guards and can be used as another unit. The problem is with Troy and now with Pharaoh, they're making generals single units and also, we don't play with countries anymore in a long period of time, but a single "hero".
They oversimplified the game because they're searching for a wider audience who just watch big battles and don't care about management.
Since Rome 2 I noticed how they capped many things like forcing 4 or 6 slots per city as if it wasn't enough space for more buildings... why? Oh yes, simplification.
Don't get me wrong, I don't hate new people getting into Total War, but Indislike how CA is making it, specially when WH fans probably don't even care about historical games.
Limited building's slot is more complex than Rome 1 or Medieval 2 building system, player actually need to think and choose right building & building combination, it is more strategic than older system, where You can build buildings without any upkeep or limitations
BTW, limited building's slot was introduced in Shogun 2, a game before R2
Disagree, they will do Med3 and Empire 2, bc money. However you're absolutely right about simplification. That's disgusting, the game turns into a battle simulator. No more formations, not as much impact of moral, terrain, fatigue. Your men will fight to the last as long as you've a general with some skill points.
The new campaign mechanics are so lazy. Just "wow a new currency, you can buy forgettable things with it". "Wow look trade allow your faction to have vision on your commercial partners" bc, I guess other faction's merchant don't have eyes 🤓
In my opinion Warhammer (I-III) Total War is the way to go in terms of quality - however the DLC pricing and age setting/deciding is a real letdown, personally I would prefer Empire II but I can understand those too who want a Medieval III
plz dont buy the dlcs at the new price
If CA were smart they'd already gone for a grand strategy scale Empire 2 +/ Victorian era game with Sofia working on map expansions. I'd gladly pay for that.
I did not played Medieval 2 20 yrs, but that battle music under your video gave me goosbumps! Now i must watch that part again to hear your talking too..
As someone who is trying to get a job in social media management or marketing recently I really want to reach out to companies that I love like the creative assembly because this is a studio that is passionate about both history and strategy games (two subjects I also adore) & I’ve been a fan of their works since Rome Total War 1 was released, I would encourage them to communicate with their fan base more through steam & Reddit forums, as well as Social media and UA-cam, it can be so beneficial to any company to not leave fans in the dark
I remember when dlc added MAJOR stuff to the game. If they want to do DLC add nippon (fantasy sengoku Japan) or Tilia (fantasy renaissance Italy)
Great video Andy. I think you raised some good points and have made a serious attempt to be fair and give CA the benefit of the doubt for some things. That said I have all but given up hope. I think we have a better chance of Vicky 3 bringing back standing armies than we have of CA making Mediaeval Total War 3.
Sad times 😢
I had some interest in Warhammer before the Warhammer Total War came out but when I heard about it I was very skeptical, Total War was grounded games so I did not think it would work in Warhammer, I was wrong and really enjoyed it, it was when the second one came out that I really started to love the series and it is to this day my most played game on steam, we will see if 3 will surpass it. So I love the series and am very happy with the DLC, I have every single one not always bought day one but I wanted them all even the ones that was for factions I didn't play.
I would want them to keep doing DLC and uppdates for some more time as it has made the game very grand.
That said, I don't like how they just doubled the price, and now pricing lord packs the same as completely new factions. I still want the DLC but with my limited funds and not wanting to reward greed I am not sure what to do, I will see if I can find it at a sale at some point. If they kept this price but gave us more per DLC I guess it would be more alright. That will not happen and price will not go down as in the end consumers have no power here, some people will always buy so a standard price for a game being 80 euro is not far off.
I have not bought a historical Total War game in a long time, Thrones of Britannia was the last one and I did not enjoy it, the other recent ones have not interested me, I would love to play Medieval 3 but I am afraid they will botch it, Empire 2 would be fun, want to create a Swedish Empire again. I have not complained to much about the lack of historical games because I really enjoyed Warhammer but I do understand the pain, I also want that.
I was also sceptical about Warhammer at first but now Warhammer 2 is my most played game on Steam. I have almost all the DLCs for WH1&2, but didn't get a single one for WH3. The content/price ratio just doesn't justify it for me. I prefer spending that kind of money for an entire new game, rather than 3 new lords for a game that already has around 90 of them.
edit: I have Ogre Kingdoms, but it was a 'free' DLC for pre-ordering WH3
@@SereglothIV I got the Chaos one it was worth it for me, Chaos Dwarves I really wanted but it was gifted to me before I could get it.
But same price for a lied back is steep, I will get it at some point but not at full price.
Players: just make Medieval III or Empire III and you will make a lot of money and make us happy
CA: I KNOW...
Players: Really?
CA: I know... we need to make a stone age total war set in the Philippines
A big part of why the TW games quality has been so inconsistent to say the least, is because the industry has a high turnover rate for staff, either through the individual choices of staffers based on their career progression or their passion for games urging them to develop different types of games, to company decisions as the industry developed which either pushed people away to other companies or in many cases saw major publishers do regular layoffs of staff after project release to keep costs down. This means many staff are either striking out on their own to make entirely new studios, leaving due to unfair practices and the numerous workplace harassment cases, or just straight up being chucked out the door to maximise profits.
It's not entirely clear to me if policy or individual's decisions is most apparent here; I don't see any seriously troubling things happening in CA's past (The most damaging being Rome 2's release and the Blood DLC debate), but there were a lot of less experienced staff being taken on between Shogun 2 and Rome 2 as I recall and that was believed to be the reason why, when many of these new staffers were put on to work on the main titles, so much collective experience of the series mechanics and code was seemingly forgotten or ignored.
This may have been in response to either staff turnover, or part of a plan to expand the size and scope of the company and its strategy, that is less clear.
And a quick aside about pricing, while the expansions could be fairly expensive based on RRP alone as many "Expansion Packs" were £15-25, they were almost exclusively physical releases until at least 2008, inflation was a lot lower and the value of the £ here in the UK was a lot higher, $2 to the pound in the early 2000's. Main releases were only £30-35 on initial release on many platforms, so the average cost of a full game (Which on average would have 1 to 2 Expansion Packs in its lifetime) came out at about £50 for PC players, less if you didn't bother with Expansions or played primarily on console which always relied less on expansions/DLC, but was also more affordable when you consider our money went further in the pre-2008 economic climate
Gotta love the historical vs Warhammer fans derby.
I don't even bother buying new stuff from them, I just use patches that unlock everything.
I'm still not over what happened to Rome 2, not sure I trust them with Mediavel 3 anymore....
Heck at this point just some more remasters of the old games would probably be appreciated...
I vaguely remember something about a new engine being introduced soon, I don't know if Pharoah is on that, but if it is then it could be a decent development tool for Medieval 3's mechanics, and if that goes well then that would in turn be a good bit of development for an Empire 2.
That being said, the very limited focus on individual characters rather than nations is concerning. I can only hope that it leads to a lite version of Crusader kings dynasty mechanics if that's the direction they're pulling in.
I'm personally still trying to figure out how I can even play wood elves without having to buy a different game
Ca makes.. and made a lot of Mistakes. But they are not only bad.
Ca don't listens to their fans? - Wrong. Back a while a UA-camr by the Name of "LegendofTotalWar" made a Petition, and marketed it's purpose to CA and Voila... you can now play Wahrammer 3 Multiplayer WITHOUT owning all three Warhammer Titles.
From the last 6 Minor Patches there are dozents of Gameplay Change in Warhammer which were suggested by the Player Base. Voila the 2nd.
The Troy and Pharao Disaster is another Story and there they reaaaaaally messed up.
And the pricing? I Live in Germany and should pay 23€ (25€ without deal). And i calculate ALL my Games by one major Factor. I only pay 1€ per Hour i'm playing the Game (DLC). So the real Question is: Do i get my Hour per Euro for the DLC? If yes (which we will see one or two Month after Shadows of Change Release) i will leave a positive Review, but if NOT they will get a bad review.
And last but not least... no one.. literally NO ONE ever mentioned the free Content they gifted us Warhammer Players. Are you all to fearful to talk about the FLC Content?
- One entire Race, Free (Bretonians witch 3, in words FOUR lords)
- One Undead, One Dwarven and one Ork Lord. free including their mechanics
- Two generic Heroes, free
And that was only Warhammer I should we take Warhammer 2? Okay lets do it.
- 1 Bretonian Lord, 2 High Elven Lords, 2 Lizardmen Lords, 2 Dark Elven Lords, 1 Skaven Lord, 1 Dwarven Lord.
- Map Pack Steps of Isha
So yeah CA might have been a little shady, but they are also doing a huge amount of good things. Good things no UA-camr talks about and why? Because Good news don't create likes. This is the real shame. UA-camr using their Influence and keeping one side of their so called Stories, hidden. And why? Because they want more likes.
Medieval 3 Total war done right.
The only setting where your computer won't die if you have battles with accurate army sizes.
Add ck2 elements, a ton of states inside the HRE and it will be amazing.
CA needs to get back to its roots. Teams of developers who have a passion for the genre, as far as historical gaming is concerned. I'd be contacting the guys who build the bigger, better known MODS for their historical titles if i was in their shoes. Imagine what a team like that could do if they were able to work on it full-time.
They can still carry on with the watered-down, mass-market stuff if they want, but give us back our legions.
We need a true competitor in this space to push CA
TH:WH3 DLC being half Baldur's Gate's price is absolutely mindblowing. What the what...
I'm just going back to their old games like Shogun 2, Empire and heavily moded Rome 2. I got loads of DLCs and almost all the Total War games but until something will change I'm done with CA.
I sincerely hope CA is just building up budget to produce more standalone games but ffs, this is getting out of hand.
One thing that i think they are doing with Warhammer 3 compared with 2, is that in W2 the not full new race DLC's only had lords for 2 races, so if someone doesnt like both, they can just skip it, and to people that like only one, the pricing wasnt that bad, but with W3 they are doing 3 races, so they get a wider range of players that might want the new lord or units for their race of choice, but since its a 3 for 1 the price goes up, and someone that only wants one of the lords like me, it isnt a good deal at all
Yea, you might only be interseted in 1 of em, and that 1 faction wont get that much new stuff.. aaand you are prolly gonna have to wait a year before seeing any more stuff. I was really looking forward to seeing what new toys cathay got.. turns out, not a lot
I’ve been with the series since Rome1 so we could say I’m one of those ancient fans😅 I honestly don’t know what CA doing at this point and I really dislike their approach of treating the fans. This DLC focus and trying to cash in as much as possible feels really disappointing to me. Obviously it’s not illegal in any way and they do whatever they want with this product but I’m not buying it.. literally. I’m just sticking to playing Rome2, Medieval2, Shogun2 they’re still making me having a lot of good time. It’s beyond my mind why we still haven’t got Medieval3, CA would have such and easy job to just make what the fans ask for and make a lot of money - this would just have to make a quality, content rich game but I guess that’s too much to ask in today’s gaming industry. As for Pharaoh, it does seem fun and I really like the time period but he’ll in no way I’ll pay that price for a re-skin of Troy. I could easily pay for it but I have principles and I won’t support such practices.
Not my Total War and not my CA. As far as I am concerned Napoleon was the last TW title.
Im still playing medieval 2 with all the mods out there like EB2 tsardoms or stainless steel and I consider myself a total war veteran and I agree CA just keep shitting on us since years
6:40 The greatest point. I have a deep respect for chinese game developers. They know their fanbase want fan service contents and they deliver exactly it.
90% of bad company decisions I can trace back to things I learned in my one class of business economics in first semester on how you SHOULD run a business.
Inclusive milking cash cows as much as possible whilst also keeping investment in it low, making new products arbitrarily more "accessible" because more potential customers = more potential money etc.
I have as much qualifications with that one semester of classes under my belt as those CEOs
CA is scared to invest in TW Medieval 3 or TW Empire 2 because if they do a new sequel they need to give at least the same game elements that the originals and with the actual game engine will be difficult.
If CA wants to placate the fans and make the investment. The roadmap, which I think they will choose will go something like this.:
1 - We likely will have a Total War Napoleon 2 focused on europa and maybe, north africa and mediterranean middle east without any naval battle
2 - With the Napoleon 2 europe map we will have a TW Medieval 3 with naval battles (Maybe not from launch and somewhat bugged)
3 - Some eastern Total war with a map focused on china with japan and maybe india as DLCs, similar to TW Medieval 3 but more polished.
4 - Total War Rome 3 with a map similar to Total War Napoleon 2at start but similar to Warhammer where they would add middle east and Asia as DLCs.
5 - Finally Total War Empire 2 with naval battles and Europe, Africa (probably only north africa) and Asia has starting map with America as DLCs.
6 - Total War thrones of britannia remastered edition
total warhammer 3 is company's cashcow
that's why i play pirate version
there's no way in multiverse i'm paying base game's price more than once
I buy only mtw2 remastered , mtw3 or empire 2 nothing else can attract my attention to total war anymore
I for my part am interested in a Bronze Age-total war and so are other people (though I have absolutely no idea how many), so the setting of Pharao is not the problem for me. It's the half-assed approach (3 factions at launch?! Come one!) After hearing of the "Age of Bronze"-mod for Rome 2, which despite being far from finished already looks ten times better than Pharao, my last bit of interest for the game died. Same goes for a potential Medieval 3 by the way. I wouldn't be interested because I don't think anything that CA would develop at this point would so much as reach the 1212 AD -mod. Still, plenty of people are asking for it, so it might be in CA's best interest to make that their next historical title.
Stop buying the old games too. Punish them for not caring anymore
Still waiting for Warhammer 3 to be cracked.
CA is the perfect exemple of why monopolies always fail. Creativity has collapsed. Communication is abysmal. Monetization policy is getting worse and worse.
It's all about content/price ratio and communication. Baldur's Gate 3 is an excellent example.
I was more than happy to pay the full price for BG3 and would buy it even if it was more expensive. But, as a fan of Warhammer Total War, the newest DLC is way beyond the point of me even considering buying it. I could have a full game for that price, but I'm supposed to pay that for just 3 new characters in a game that already has around 90 of them? I didn't even get the Chaos Dwarfs DLC, which had much better content/price ratio, but it was still too expensive for my taste.
The second thing is communication and caring for the state of the game. Two days ago Larian Studios, the creators of Baldur's Gate 3, introduced a hotfix that created some kind of gamebreaking bug. They cancelled the update shortly afterwards, admitted they messed it up and apologized to the players, and had it all properly fixed the next day. And then there's CA, having the buggiest game ever, and updating it twice a year, alongside new DLCs. And for every bug fixed, there's a new one introduced. With no communication whatsover, only posting marketing for their new stuff and being oblivious to the issues the players have. 'Nakai is unplayable because he can't recruit his most important units? Whatever, take a look at this new DLC instead.' No, I'm not trusting them with my money anytime soon.
What I don't like about the whole franchise is that we've got Rome 2, Shogun 2, Medieval 2, Warhammer 3 ... but we never got an Empire 2!
The gunpowder warfare has so much more to offer than the melee focused combat of anchient and medieval tactics. I know that I am not the only one who is tired of the same era over and over again. The latest total war games have all been early/pre medieval oder fantasy. The last game that wasn't was Shogun 2: Fall of the Samurai and that is from 2012!
Well Warhammer has gunpowder
@@heitorpedrodegodoi5646 Yea ofcourse. But it's a fantasy setting and not very appealing to many historical total war fans. :D
I do like the Bronze Age as a setting. The problem withTroy was variety. Imagine if theyd expanded it to be Bronze Age: Total War, with Egypt and Mesopotamia fully represented.
This!
They can easily make a "Immortal Empires" version with Troy and Pharaoh, by just announcing that people would be excited because there will be a more expanded culture/units on hand.
Yet i don't know why they choose to don't do something like that. And not showing Mesopotamia on a Bronze Age game it's just a plain terrible mistake.
But, knowing CA, most likely will be a Mesopotamia DLC.
While it world be better, there is the problem of the further back you go in time, the less diversity you will see in tech. During the bronze age, most large nations relied on infantry, skirmishers and chariots... There will absolutely be more diversity ina global setting, but the period will never give you the kinda of variety something like an Empire 2 or medieval 3 would
@@Z-1991 I cannot understand a human who has the opportunity to make a game including Bronze Age Mesopotamia and yet chooses not to. Also, the Hittites!
@@MaMastoast They'd have to really make sure they made the factions unique. I think bronze age Egypt, Greece, the Hittites, and Assyrians, the Babylonians, etc, were sufficiently different from each other to provide an experience at least as varied as Rome 1.
@@waltonsmith7210 Egypt, hittites and assyrians are all chariot based aren't they?
You are right that it doesn't make a lot of sense the way CA ignores their historical fans, but they probably have their reasons and it's probably all about money. Bronze age Egypt is an interesting time period from a purely historical point of view, although it does seem that a lot of historical gamers are put off by it. But a game is all about good game play, and perhaps we can all be cautiously optimistic regarding Pharaoh, even if you don't like the time period. As for Medieval 3, we'll probably see it once all the Warhammer fluff is out of the way and hopefully it will be worth the wait.
"This entire fullprice game could has been a DLC"
Man if it come down to this i will lose all hope in CA, lets wait and see...
They can't make Rome 3 or Medieval 3 or Empire 2 without screwing this up and if they screw this up this is the end of CA.
"CA needs to remember what made these games grate", That is actually harder then it sounds, cus that is up to the people working at CA. I would not be suppressed if the people that made the old TWs we love are GONE and have been replaced with the (stereotypical at this point) Financially focused people who have no idea what FUN is. All they see is Dollar signs.
Indie games focus on making a FUN game first, then worry about pricing and marketing (UA-cam ads usually or content creators who cover indie games). AAA Games focus on MONEY first, then think about building a game around it. They usually cost twice as much as most Indie games and have a good chunk of their budget dedicated to marketing (most of which is just HYPE commercials that tell you almost nothing about the game).
As for Pharaoh looking like Troy, I mean CA usually makes 2 games on the same "version" of their Engine then makes a new "version". So its not TOO surprising that Troy and Pharaoh have a similar look. While this is Very subjective, im more concerned with how it FEELS, does it FEEL like "THIS IS TOTAL WAR!" or is it just "another total war game".
If you're right and the people who made the OG total war are gone, then this license is doomed. Sadly, there is a high probability for you to be right... 😞
CA should not hedge bets and take one big massive gamble for their future or devolve into nothing. First: knuckle down and make a new engine.
Second: New trilogy but of historical games that tie together in an even grander scale than IM thus allowing for DLC cash train. (Sorry this has to be in for CA and SEGA to do it.)
Third: My trilogy idea is basically the entire world in three time periods. Bronze age/Rome 3+Medieval 3+Empire 2 and of course Shogun and 3k mixed in since it's the entire earth. So basically however far back you want like Egypt till 1900 with some pre ww1 tech. The order they come out can be chronological or whatever but the last one ties them all into one huge Total War/Civilization type hybrid.
If you have to scrape the bucket at least put into something amazing! If done right it could save Total War for another 10+ years and tons of profit following the business model too. So mostly everyone wins.
Thank you for the content. However I take issue with several of your points.
The last historical TW was Troy, and before it 3K. Both have optional modes to play with Captain Retinues and are set in a dynamic warring time period. Just because they also offer the Single Entity super hero, that was obviously popular feature from WH1, doesn’t disqualify them as history or fantasy titles
To me, I see Pharaoh, not as a reskin, but as the second step to make a full stride in a tech/mech block. The five resource economy and the supporting province structure, now, in Pharaoh, with bandit buildings as seen in 3K. The terrain that will be vitality important for the weather system in Pharaoh are all there in Troy. Battle field tactics getting an additional tool in formation movement in Pharaoh put the cherry on top of the flanking changes, to the TW franchise, in Troy. And more
I never played Britannia, but lived off of 3k, so I don’t know if CA has been pairing a “Saga” title with a “Full” as income generating development stage. Perhaps that is why the Epic deal was good for CA. A key disagreement with your statements is that Troy was unsuccessful by whatever measurements you have access to, I’m still playing my free version on Epic, so those hours won’t show up on Steam. We have no idea what numbers are seen by the decision makers in CA, so I’m not going to second guess their decisions as that is not my role as a consumer.
My role as a customer is to find as much entertainment for the money I spend. I never got any of the WH titles, because it’s not my cup of tea. I didn’t get the 8P dlc of 3k, because I didn’t want a new time period, I want to add on to the existing game like Nanman and Bandits. I started playing Historical Troy to prep for Pharaoh, but realized I’ve been converted to a Fantasy player.
So since I don’t like the state 3K was left in, I plan of continuing playing Amazon’s in Troy on Epic until the end of year sale at steam, and purchasing the entire Troy package and waiting three or four years to do the same with Pharaoh. I would likely buy a new E2, but not a M3, and out of protest, never a 3K2.
But that is me. Its great to share your take on things, but try not to speak with authority about how the community or the developers think. Again take you for the content
I’m a Warhammer and Total Warhammer fan as well as a historical fan. All the dlc and games to me look pretty good, but if they’re gonna be like Paradox and make games basically unplayable with hundreds of dollars worth of dlc, than I’ll just stick to what I got
I'd argue is that there is a difference between CA and paradox in that paradox updates their games extensively over 5+ years after release with a lot of content for free in patches which is far better. The overall price tag is steep for a title that has even in development for years but they really do consistently make them better through time.
@@jr8260 I’d be inclined to agree with you, but look at Crusader Kings 3 or even more egregiously Victoria 3 have been. Decades were spent waiting only for mediocre titles with overpriced DLC
@davidsmith8826 yeah its not a great system, but I do think, at least for me, that I get a lot more for my money from paradox than I do CA. I also don't really know how they would fund the games development over years without doing so. I totally agree on the release states of ck3 and victoria3 being undercooked and inexcusable.
@@jr8260 That makes sense. I just don’t have that much of a disposable income being a teenager and all that, so it all kind of exists in a pile called “can’t afford”
But if it’s good for you than it’s good for you.
Anyway, thanks for being a little more civil than some other paradox fans
They have been money grabbing for a long time but fans awakened after playing Baldurs Gate 3.
how you can f.... up your working franchise in less than 10 years is a riddle to me
I am really not very pleased with Pharoah being a mainline title. Bronze Age Collapse is interesting and all and I mean it as someone with most of his degrees on history, but the unit variety and battlefield dynamic of the period are just not good enough after shogun, rome, 3k, WH, etc. Troy's battles really feel 'restricted' by the technological limitations of the period. This one seems not very different.
We don't even get many cavs. Like, really? Cav charges are some of the best things in these titles (after the first two at least), even in WH a good charge can be 'just right'. All we have now are chariots. After the Fall of Samurai, legions on legions fighting, horse archers, Line of Battle Ships, STEAMTANKs, bronze age chariots really can't scratch that itch for me, sadly. May still get it, but no way at this price.
i just want an empire 2 so i can play with mods, my monke brain cannot comprehend how to install them manually
They really, desperately need to just make another Medieval, Empire or Rome game. I love the Warhammer series but cmon lads, we've been waiting a long time for you to make a substantive historical game in a setting the fans actually care about.
Im lucky enough that Warhammer interested me enough from a fantasy standpont and brought me back to the series after Rome, M2 and Empire.
That said, I wont be purchasing Pharaoh unless all the reviews come in and its amazing (which I doubt).
I truly feel that if CA learned the right lessons from the Warhammer trilogy, they can knock a Medieval 3 or Empire 2 out of the park!
Despite some cynicism, I am optimistic that CA will make good games but Im terrified of the business practices that might (will) come along with them.
Well said!
tbh, I won't pay for another DLC unless there are sales and they add the new regions they have been "hiding" this whole time, trying to get so much more money from us.
Medieval 2 TW remaster and nothing else is important
or mtw3 and empire 2
@@SeferboyMed2 remastered will be great, cause it's Med2. Med3 will be Rome 2 but with a medieval reskin, which is garbage. There is still hope for Empire 2 being inspired by Empire and Napoleon, since it's a totally different style of warfare.
TW:M3 if done correctly could save this company.
If it's not already in the works and truly they are putting soul into the game like Shogun 2....I doubt they'll be around in a decade...
I’m still playing Rome 2 and extremely happy with it and it’s DLC.
If their is one thing Gamers are fed up with, among other things its LACK OF TRANSPARENCY. So CA being Silent on what they are up to is pretty BAD in this new decade. People are ALOT more forgiving when they understand what is happening and going on behind the scenes.
I hate the fact that TW games are still OG prices years and years after release. Also i agree 100% lets get a real historical title out there
While I am a Total War hammer fan... My two issues is them skipping their old fans... And strangling the new players.
The cost of this DLC is crazy and made even worse because the cost of this DLC is to cover the cost for other stuff they are doing... Like making a battle royal game.
So not even making any Total War content, playing politics for new tax breaks, and they know their new battle royal game is going to flop and instead shifted the price of cost onto the rest of the fan base.
Worse part? If they succeed in this DLC price jump then they shall do it again and keep the DLC price at $30 for any update.
As long as CA's fans continue to act like GW's own fans (shills), they'll never stop doing this. Where criticizing their games meant enemy number 1 by their hardcore fans. It's like Blizzard/Activision nowadays, why stop doing devious practices when your own community pays for it anyways? (I think they earned 600 million dollars on D4 alone). I'm actually genuinely surprised that TW reddit (known for being an actual shill for CA) is against this -- looks like even they have a limit LOL.
Is this perhaps the effect of Larian's Baldurs gate 3? People finally realizing they've been paying so much for little in return?
Yet it's so simple to make a good total war...
Take Med2 battle system, then review every title one after the other. Each time you say "wow, that a good feature" add it to the new title. Here you have what every title should have been at the very start, then build on this toward more strategic options and realism, NOT simplification.
It's easy guys, just stick to Medieval 2: Total war.
Warhammer should be renamed Greedhammer
CA is slowly walking the path of Blizzard and Bethesda when it comes to their games; The most tone deaf companies in existence to my mind. I've all but given up hope on ever seeing a Medieval 3. The mods for Rome 2 and Atilla is most likely the closest we'll ever get. Thank god for the modding community. Without them I probably wouldn't even be playing any TW game anymore. And that includes WH1, 2 and 3. Which are still suffering from age-old bugs that the modding community has fixed for them. Sounds like another company we know.
I've been playing TW games since Shogun: Total War, 23 years, and I've never been more depressed when it comes to these titles. With every single announcement the past 5-6 years I've grown evermore apathetic to their titles. Especially when they release and I get to play them.
I am in the minority of, its worth it.
Everyone: Plz give us Medieval II or Pike and Shot!
CA: OK... Here's your new fairytale Egypt game!
CA is not your friend, is a company, the company don't need or want comunication with the costumer, they only want and need your money. don't like that? don't buy the games, drama over.
I was fan of TW game since shogun 1(around 2000),and I want empire 2 with full world map so bad 😢
My man I agree with you 100% and I am so happy to hear I am not the only one who feels so exhausted with the crap CA have been putting out over the last years... This game franchise went downhill fast after Shogun 2.
I still want a 30 years war game
You will have to wait 30 years for that war game
i wonder if some this has to do with the recent changes in the warhammer game itself where they have basically abandoned the whole age of sigmar stuff altogether.