This Is EXACTLY WHY The Total War Fanbase Is So Divided

[@TheTerminatorGaming]

Can we all agree we just want a good game? Medieval 3, Empire 2 or something completely different, it doesn't matter. AS LONG AS IT'S ACTUALLY GOOD!

[@ThomasL12.]

hear me out, Rome II isn’t bad anymore. using DEI it’s my favorite game. Everything feels so impactful. I remember nearly every military action in my campaigns, everything feels meaningful. that’s what makes a good total war. Shame they can’t do that with a base game. I hope the next historical is like that.

[@murder13love]

Even somewhere inbetween, a world map, a fun map and FIX THE GAME lol, no magic, no gods or dragons... just a good old fashioned bug free world domination game!

[@Blastoice]

​@ThomasL12. It isn't but the AI is shocking. I hate how they don't create empires. They'll get like 5 territories and fight back and forward with each other. They'll never expand into a world power and I feel like the game is easy

[@agi474]

I think a new title without a new engine would be another big disappointment, another boring and unimpressive reskin like what was done with Pharaoh. However, there is a demand that has lasted for more than a decade to update Medieval 2 and Empire. Therefore, CA should at least focus on fulfilling this demand until it has something really new and relevant to present!

[@DARKH0BBIT]

Exactly!! for me what been sorely lacking is depth we need to get a game that has actual DEPTH again. One aspect they should go back to is how empire had city management done. I loved how empire did the city/region management treating it as per city rather than per region with the unique buildings being they're own entity. I'm not a fan of the province system they keep rehashing lately it feels hollow. I will admit Warhammer has done well with the diplomacy aspect at least it feels a bit more fleshed out and with some more tweaking and additional options the system can definitely be used for the next historical. Sieges need to be overhauled properly, I feel like Rome 2 is a good base line I think they did pretty good on this (when it wasn't a buggy mess). we need to be able to attack a city from any angle, by land and/or sea, city's got to have layers but needs to be believable, I feel like taking a city has never had that drastic/dramatic feel to it and I think the cause for that is that it's usually a quick single battle then its done then off to the next. so my thinking is maybe having a skirmish battle that involves the outskirts and slightly in the city (but not the city center) before the siege might help add another step to taking a city but I can see this becoming annoying potentially aswell so hard to say maybe have this only for major settlements but I do think there needs to be something else to give a siege more depth. I would also love to have a system that allows me to build the garrisons for city's manually like move an army to a city and place some troops in and or recruit units and send them to the garrison. I think this would make the player feel more tied to the survival of the garrison and it's simple and adds some nice depth that otherwise isn't there

[@Mattyice831]

I know it’s popular to talk down on pharaoh. One of the main points being why should we praise CA for adding back features that already existed. However, if you’re being charitable and are optimistic you can interpret it as CA Acknowledging that they understand what historical fans want. The fact that they worked in a lethality system that turned to the max completely changes the dynamic of combat to feel more like the older titles shows they know what people want. There is a difference in being toxic just because you don’t like the newer titles and making productive arguments to help steer the series to a better path

[@BarneyGoogl]

I don't really care what games people enjoy, it is what it is. Although part of me dies every time I see the gate bug happening, and another part of me dies when I realise that's been a thing for 15 YEARS! I'd be so happy with another engine that was full of new bugs that I haven't been enduring for over a decade, at this point lol

[@Talon18136]

Same 😂

[@liam01911]

What is the gate bug

[@chico9805]

​@@liam01911 If you have to ask, you're on the wrong channel.

[@CATBOY402]

Naval battles are probably one of my favorite parts and it feels weird to not have them in the game. I keep finding myself drawn to older titles to enjoy that missing piece of combat.

[@nomooon]

And an amphibious battle where ships and land armies fight side by side.

[@CONSTANTINEXI63]

It's horrible that they removed in in medieval 2

[@skruffy7790]

I kinda want another historical gunpowder total war game.

[@123afish]

We need a Total War Victoria 1815-1914

[@bigthoughts2644]

30 years war would be a wild game Edit: but CA sucks and won't create a new engine and so it will fail.

[@jaywerner8415]

@@bigthoughts2644 I recall rumors that they did, but we shall see.

[@joelramirez8269]

Victoria total war ending with the first world war

[@jaywerner8415]

@@joelramirez8269 That would be the DREAM.

[@LegendofTotalWar]

Agreed. Just want a good game. I gave Troy a decent go and just didn't like it at all. When Pharaoh was revealed it seemed too much like Troy and I just wasn't on board. I have no problem with people liking Pharaoh but it just wasn't for me. The setting had nothing to do with it. Great video

[@zacharymohammadi]

W take from a W youtuber

[@Prushinthespirit]

Bold words from someone who buillt his channel solely on cheesing the hell out of broken games. You're very adaptive when it comes to playing along, I'll give you that.

[@LegendofTotalWar]

@@Prushinthespirit this has been my stance on it the whole time.

[@KakashiKyle9]

It's based off that shallow Warhammer engine so it loses so much potential. If wh 1,2,3 were made off the Attila foundation, it would probably be better than the already said and done wh 123 games right now.

[@Ausplainer]

​@Prushinthespirit "solely built his channel on cheesing broken games" I'd expect this kind of cope from someone judging a game they didn't play by summarising a creator they clearly don't watch.

[@szymonrozanski6938]

If we ever get a Medieval 3. Its going to be absolute garbage. Why? Because units will have Healthbars instead of model based hp.

[@Fungus8mycrab]

I think that is a reason why I just want to have a Medieval 2 remaster instead of a Medieval 3. Because it'll be a dumbed down version of the game, with a lot of the mechanics and units removed from Medieval 2 and it'll use a game engine that should have been retired forever ago.

[@chack321]

do you not realize that the healthbar is literally just the cumulative model HP? There are so many valid reasons to be worried and you pick one that isn't even real?

[@SplendidFactor]

Each model has its own HP, the overall HP bar is just the sum of all those together. It's why in Warhammer you can have a unit that has half HP but still have full model count.

[@Fungus8mycrab]

@@SplendidFactor Yeah I thought it was cool at first, but after playing a bunch of the older total war games I do miss the days of Model Based HP, like what we got in Medieval 2 or the first Rome: Total War

[@Ausplainer]

Then turn them off....

[@Sharnoy1]

When we finally get Med3 or Emp2 it's just gonna be a huge pile of disappointment. I have known this for years and I'm just getting more sure every time CA gives us a new title. It truly saddens me but new TW is dead to me.

[@dailyprophet6641]

My issue is the lack of innovation. Its just another reskin. Modders do more for free. The terrain is irrelevant now. They dumbed it down so the battle AI can be reused. I should love the bronze age but they offered so little. Instead of doing research for the future on a new game engine and features they stagnated.

[@nomooon]

Unfortunately, there is no competitor in this genre, so they can just afford to be lazy and still dominate.

[@adrianthompson5250]

If you say terrain is irrelevant, you either haven't played Pharoah or you aren't paying attention.

[@jaywerner8415]

@@nomooon oh their are plenty of competitors in Genre. The problem is Total War is Unique in how it operates. Like the closest comparison that comes to mind is Star Wars Empire At War.

[@nomooon]

@jaywerner8415 by competitors I meant specifically 4x grand strategy with a detailed tactical phase, either real time or turn based. Besides star wars empire at war, are there any other? Because I would like to check them out

[@jaywerner8415]

@@nomooon Hmmmm not sure, like I can think of games that have "tactical battles" such as the various CIV Likes such as Endless legend/Endless space or.... was it HumanKind? But I haven't really played any of them. Battle Star Galactic Deadlock is interesting with its Simultaneous battle terms.

[@alejandrocartagenaalgarra1509]

Bronze age it's great, unfortunately Pharaoh doesn't make justice to this period. I don't understand why it's bad to expect and demand good games.

[@j0hncarp]

have you played pharaoh dynasties?

[@martinromerostrack9138]

​@@j0hncarpBetter, but it doesn't do it justice. The setting is during the bronze age colapse, an event that literally wiped most of the ancient middle east clean of its civilizations, yet dynasties is super colorful and mostly about empire building (tho you can get the sea people and wreck things up) the thing should be more like Attila (crumbling civilizations, etc...) not saying it's bad, but when you know that the actual setting should be w grim... Well, it kind of loses its charm

[@alejandrocartagenaalgarra1509]

@@j0hncarp Yes I did, and it's a little bit better than Pharaoh at release, but it's not a giant improvement. I'm tired of that old and overused argument from Reddit.

[@j0hncarp]

@@alejandrocartagenaalgarra1509 whats the overused argument? I think its perfectly valid to ask if people actually played the game before saying "it doesnt make justice to this period"

[@alejandrocartagenaalgarra1509]

​@@j0hncarp I get your point, but I have seen a lot of people trying to discredit any kind of critic to Pharaoh/Dynasties using that argument. Of course, I understand that there's people that haven't played the game and are always affirming that Pharaoh it's shit etc. But also a lot of Pharaoh fanboys can't take any kind of critic and they argue that the game it's perfect. They believe that Pharaoh it's the best historical Total War with the best campaign and best battles. For me it doesn't make justice, because Bronze age it's a complex historical period that required a better engine to represent melee combat and required more complex campaign mechanics that are limited to due to the election of the warhammer branch to make a historical game.

[@cal2127]

modern total war is so streamlined theres no strategy anymore

[@jamreal18]

Rome 2 magic abilities, remember...

[@michanycz7166]

​@@jamreal18 Those abilities started in medieval 2 crusades campaign. Richard, Saladin, etc.

[@murder13love]

I definately dont bash the players, but the game is awful. Having to rely on mods to play decades old games is what is getting me pissed at company. I would absolutely love an Empire 2 or Medieval 3 BUT even a game somewhere in between would be fine! A world map, not a small map but ultimately my reason for putting down total war is that the gameplay just sucks, it is so so dated! The same issues from a decade ago still exist and it has become so obvious that the franchise has just become a cash cow and it isnt even working. 1 good game would bring me back.

[@XVRK_Edits]

Most people want Medieval 3 and Empire 2. CA should make one or the other. Every other possible choice should not be even considered, before these 2 games are made. For me it is that simple. Personally i want a Rome 3, but i know that Medieval and Empire must be done before that.

[@starsmil9687]

Rome 3!!!! YES!!!!!!

[@Pch_00]

Lord of the Rings too

[@cegesh1459]

Who are gehse "most"? I would love a TW set in a different part of the world for once. Yes medieval would be neat, but there is more I would also love to see.

[@Manunido]

@@cegesh1459like where exactly ? Pretty much everywhere else has been covered already too

[@nomooon]

@@cegesh1459 Europe + North Africa + Middle East + Central Asia setting still offers the most unit variety, at least from Rome time to Medieval time.

[@cottonbuds6520]

folks get mad at folks wanting a sequel to their favoured Total War game folks get mad at folks for not caring as much about their favoured TW game not getting a sequel the rest of us are just quietly wanting a good game even if it is not in our desired setting

[@Jalil-x7e]

Rome Remastered is actually pretty good game because this is the only game that uses robust mechanics and have removed game limit caps. I am surprised it is not above other games actually. There are really impressive mods made and being made atm for RR. Base game is not great but mods are some of the best in the franchise

[@jaywerner8415]

Every time that game gets discussed the first thing that comes up is the UI looks like ASS! And it does, looks like it built for a PHONE or TABLIT, not for a PC. Other then that, its still just Rome 1 with Modern TW controls.

[@Jalil-x7e]

@@jaywerner8415 Which shows that most users dismiss that game without understanding its main strengths. UI does look like ASS and the base game is just Rome1. But that is not what this game is about. It is about the MODS. The modding capabilities have been enhanced for that game like no other game can match. That is the whole point of Rome Remastered and why so many people are dying for CA to release Medieval2 Remastered. Rome 1 had limits of 20 factions and 200 regions. Rome Remastered has unlimited faction and region cap. I mean go check out the mods that are being made for that game. I can list some: 1. RIS: Largest and most detailed rome era campaign with 200+ factions and 1900 settlements 2. WW2 mod which covers the entire world map (not released but in progress) 3. Extended cultures which covers all of Old world 4. Chivalry Remastered. Medieval mod, which has over 80 medieval factions, 700 regions and 3 different medieval campaigns. This are just a few but more being developed. The game limits were lifted in 2022 so it takes some time for modders but it is coming up pretty fast.

[@Vileurple]

I stream Pharaoh all the time and cover the mods and have been playing since vanilla. I've had to field so many of these questions and happily defend Pharaoh (in it's current state) but having been playing since the inception I have a better POV on how far it's come. I've turned a few people :D Snippit from my 400 hour review view. What Went Wrong: Pharaoh launched in October 2023 amid player discontent following the Warhammer 3 Shadows of Change DLC fiasco. Priced at $60 with a limited map, Pharaoh's initial reception suffered from this timing and pricing, mirroring the backlash from Warhammer fans. The base game felt underwhelming at launch, not because of CA Sophia’s lack of passion, but because it seemed like the game was hampered by budget constraints. What Went Right: Fast forward two months, and Creative Assembly made things right. They reduced the price, refunded players who bought deluxe editions, and even gave out the High Tides DLC for free. This was a much-needed gesture to rebuild trust. The Dynasties update expanded the campaign map, added more factions, and improved the overall experience.

[@itshenry8977]

Bronze age Total war is good and fine, it's actually one of the good settings. I'd argue It's campaign and battle mechanics that are lacking, the overall vibe is lacking and the fullness of the game is lacking. Total war does not posses the privilege of ceaseless DLC's like Paradox, becouse Paradox games could be excused by those DLC's containing WAY more depth than some reskined swordsmen or unlocked culture CA gives you.(not that i support DLC policy either, it's a spat in the face of consumers). We need a game that takes itself seriously and is HONEST, we do not need any post satirical nonsense (this is ruining the movie industry and by extension gaming, although there are times where it fits- example Deadpool). Honestly all they have to do to make a good game is bring back population, division of armies, growth of cities and colonization of new ones, interaction with the campaign without the terrible slot system in the newer titles, 3 kingdoms diplomacy, smart battle AI, realistic and impactful events, Watchtowers/castles, marriage diplomacy is a MUST in any medieval title, Stats should not be as obvious

[@khal7702]

Paradox is way worse with their DLC than CA

[@nomooon]

@@khal7702 as bad as selling blood as a separate DLC in every title? or selling Greeks as a separate race DLC in Rome Total War 2 ?

[@nsawatchlistbait289]

Bro people bash Pharoah for the lack of tactical elements like the pre Rome 2 era TW games, nobody bashed Pharaoh for the setting

[@xiuhcoatl4830]

That's objectively not true

[@nsawatchlistbait289]

@xiuhcoatl4830 yeah OK

[@MrAdamArce]

Maybe a dumb idea, but what if CA kept a development team for specific themes that are successful? A team that makes medieval themed total war games, 1 that makes colonial, 1 that makes fantasy, etc. They can overlap and collaborate but their primary goal is their assigned themes. It's just weird they keep making new themes without revisiting their old successful ones

[@Talon18136]

I’ve said this as well it’s a good idea plus they need to marry the old formula with the new one somehow

[@cal2127]

i genuinely think they fired off their historical team when they went to warhammer engine

[@banzai2547]

Setting is not the problem, gameplay is.

[@MrAdamArce]

@banzai2547 agreed, but each setting has unique gameplay elements. The teams work on the mechanics, designs, etc. unique to their theme, and any common elements can be shared between themes. So mechanics involving magic or guns may not be as important to the medieval or Roman setting, but all of them benefit from improvement to mechanics such as unit pathing or collision mechanics, and so on. This requires both large investment to ensure everyone has the tools needed and trust that the people you hire to do a job will do their job without you hovering over them

[@Mrkabrat]

"What is united must divide, and whats divided must unite" Romance of Three Kingdoms I think

[@Quecojo]

My issue is just that it is Troy reskinned. Battles sucked in troy. So I imagine they suck in Pharoh. I just really want CA to use a different engine or a different code base.

[@Eruner279]

Troy and Pharaoh battles play and feel way different.

[@parthiaball]

The thing is TWPD *is* a good game. It's okay if you (you generally, not specifically talking about you Termi) don't like it, that's fine, but the game is absolutely solid and most of the fans who play it find it quite addicting, but indeed it's true most fans haven't picked the game up. There are several reasons the game flopped like the Hyenas/ WH3 SoC drama, and some other stuff. Two problems that's directly the game's fault is the pricing of the game and the initial release having a limited map/ immortal lords, which was fixed later. Regardless, it's absolutely worth it to most of the people who chose to get it. The game probably won't get a huge surge of players because of all the Q3/Q4 2023 CA drama that lead to people thinking WH3 and TW in general might not survive, and Pharaoh was caught in the crossfire. With that said, I'd say the loud people that want nothing but M3 and/or E2 are a much bigger part of this than stated here. I want those games, but since around the time of WH1/ ToB, so much of the fanbase has been non-stop about wanting M3/ E2 and complain if it's anything else. If it was a minority of players, it wouldn't have become such a big thing over the past decade as it has. It's gotten toxic enough to the point that, despite wanting those games, I almost feel like I'd be fine with CA not making them out of spite (not like CA's in a good place to make either of those right now in any case).

[@psychodoxie6987]

I want a total war that starts in 1440 so that you can say bring back rome as the byzantines or turn the tide of the 100 years war and also so that you have late medieval armies and then it ends in 1700 when musketeers with bayonets became popular

[@Duke-3508]

I think what they did with Pharaoh basically bringing it back from the dead (even if it was only slightly) is impressive, but it’s not what people want. I get people like it and are playing it but I see Rome 2s numbers and other TW games are sitting higher and can’t see how CA doesn’t make Empire 2 or a Medieval 3. Those games have to be made for a TW comeback then they can make other stuff. I personally want those two games but I can see the other side’s opinion too and wanting CA to move on.

[@James-hm4mk]

Tbf they launched well and Rome has DEI which is exclusively what I play on it, which was recently updated. That mod team is awesome

[@Duke-3508]

@ facts the mods are really holding the games well but the base gameplay was good to (Ik they had their bugs but what game doesn’t) DEI is great. Darth Mod and Empire 2 mods are great.

[@emrecanarduc4378]

Creative Assembly ? more like Creatively Bankrupt !

[@ermirohri]

Mods have destroyed TW because those good mods made CE lazy to resolve all the problems they have created

[@ReptilicusTV]

Thanks for the shoutout - didn't expect a shitpost meme to generate a big response but that's all it was - it ain't that deep. We all just want a good historical game - even a "less appealing" time period can generate interest if the gameplay is good enough - though there will always be exceptions.

[@MedjayofFaiyum]

Agree

[@robdean9216]

One era CA hasn't explored yet is the Late 16th century, early 17th century. Knights, muskets, big naval battles, tumultuous religious wars and long, smelly wigs.

[@gentlesirpancakebottoms6692]

The way TW has been going in recent years I don't think I want a Medieval 3. A modern Medieval TW ofc needs to do things different than medieval 2. And needs to innovate. And for me that is where the problem lies. TW lack the means to innovate in a meaningfull way. Everything turns into Warhammer aracady mechanics. Which I don't mind for Warhammer and the fantasy setting. But what works well with Warhammer doesen't lend itself well to historical settings. TW has become this boring and predicable copy pasted formula with different skins. The tech tree worked really well in Shogun 2 which takes place over just a 100 year period within a single country. But the same type of tech development would be terrible for a European/Middle-Eastern Medieval setting. And the more organic and immersive family tree and tech following city growth and development from Rome and Medieval 2 (wich CA has completely abaonded) works better. I'm well past the point of being "divided", I've more or less opted out and feel mostly apathy these days. And every mention of Medieval 3 only makes me think of how they will manage to ruin and diminish what was so great about Medieval 2 and fail to improve upon anything where it was needed, completely missing the mark. What would rekindle my interest for a historical TW and the franchise in general however would be something new and yet familiar like a pike & shot era TW. Or if any sequel were to be made I think Empire is most deserving since the original game had so many great ideas and ambition but sadly fell flat. It deserves a proper do-over.

[@buinghiathuan4595]

I understand that feeling. I like 3k ( and R2 DEI) and it seem like the Western side of the fandom love to ignore or bashing 3k. Oh and i think 3k design is a good fit causes it base on RoTK, not the directly from historical events itself

[@nsawatchlistbait289]

I don't know man. You are unaware of the situation I guess but Pharoah isn't as good as Shogun2 or Empire or Medieval2 for one reason; because Pharoah is Warhammer (worse than Rome2). The same game but set in history and therefore the slop consuming toy fans did not buy it Nobody says you cannot enjoy these dumbed down nu-TWs, but please don't expect fans of the OG TWs to enjoy them. In my case, I only started playing TW in 2020. There's more tactics involved in AoE2 than in nu-TWs However there are those weird dudes who want to make the OG-TW players switch to nu-TW games intentionally gaslighting us by continually telling us that it is the "setting" or "theme" that we hate. Mods set in the bronze age, mods set in fantasy worlds have all been so successful in the OG-TW games that you'll find the best of such mods still in development for Medieval2 and Shogun2, so please stop the misleading us

[@TheTerminatorGaming]

I’m not the one misleading dude I agree with everything you’ve said here and am fully aware of the deal with Pharaoh

[@nsawatchlistbait289]

@TheTerminatorGaming k bud

[@KAISERaw17]

Misleading? Sure guy

[@nsawatchlistbait289]

@@KAISERaw17 yeah OK

[@jaywerner8415]

@@TheTerminatorGaming That is one of things thats always funny when ya think about it. Everyone DUMBLY blames "the setting or Theme" but never stops to consider how the game actually plays or how the Mechanics WORK/Come into Play. TW has most certainly been "gamified" over the years, and I doupt we will ever see that depth again. That is what bothers me more then anything else.

[@Manunido]

I don’t even think it’s necessarily Pharaohs itself but Troy left a very bad taste in a lot of people’s mouth whether from the game itself or Epic release. To then release another game in essentially the same time period put off a lot of people

[@dailyprophet6641]

Played Troy for a few hours only, was not going to buy the next title unless things improved. CA only wants to milk an old cow!

[@agonsfitness7308]

I hate the word TOXIC. It's so overused. I prefer passionate, bombastic or domineering.

[@jaywerner8415]

Agreed. Toxic implies you are Radioactive or poision. No, the TW Critics are not "toxic" they are Passionate for the Series and Franchise they love.

[@Ryan.2]

Its all fun and games until CA makes a TW Medieval 3 or Empires 2 and it turns into absolute shit.

[@cal2127]

just imagine that in the warhammer hero engine

[@xiuhcoatl4830]

I hope it is, and likely it will be

[@changer_of_ways_999]

I'm as eager to get Medieval 3 as anyone. I've been playing since Medieval 1. However, it's REALLY annoying that every post on Facebook, KZbin, Steam and Reddit seems to have someone begging for it, as if the Devs and everyone else haven't seen it that last 40,000 times someone posted it.

[@jupiter4509]

I actually enjoyed Dynasties compared to base game Pharaoh, as i bought pharaoh after they lowerd the price. Its not what i wanted but it was it was still enjoyable and i think its ok to like a game even if it is simple

[@deansheppard1104]

11:39 couldn't have said it better, it's not the end of the world if the game doesn't release in the best state possible ( especially total war games ) but when CA markets the game has a big historical title which is gonna have support , reworks and fixes and then not a year latter they decide to cut all support because of their other games failures and just release a big content update without fixing the core issues then yeah, historical fans are not gonna invest time on a game that is gonna become outdated very quick with core gameplay issues. Regarding the setting i dont think thats the problem,bronze age is a really cool time period and actual fans who care about history are gonna enjoy it since its pretty authentic and we have 0 games exploring the time period, heck people were complaining about Attila larping has "history nerds" when that game had one of the best representations of roman cultures and the barbaric invasions, has soon has you do a "Roman" game which is not set during the late republic/principate era with stereotypical romans in lorica segmentata people will dislike the "setting" even tough is arguably more interesting and fits better total war gameplay and concepts

[@emrecanarduc4378]

nothing ever happens in CA , billions must play the old classics !

[@Harrier_DuBois]

The setting of Pharaoh wouldn't be my first choice but if the game was good I would get it. After playing Three Kingdoms I gave up on Total War, the battles felt so boring with the horrible UI, but the main problem is the series just is not innovating - and we all know exactly why, because they have a captive market, who have no alternatives. What I want is better AI so the campaigns are not so tedious. Difficulty scaling should not come down to just boosting the stats or economies of other factions. There is a lot more they could do but this is my main issue.

[@jlickley1118]

to me pharaoh dynasties felt rather generic. instead of leaning into and the tactics and tech of the time and figuring out a good fun balance they went back to shoehorning in cavalry. one thing that really made the era really stand out from all the other total war games and more interesting they ruined for me. why spend money on the game when I can pretty much play a game near enough like it that I already own. also naval battles would be nice to see again as well as the seemingly slowly shrinking battle maps returning to a reasonable size. go back and play empire then go to their latest games and see what I mean.

[@nomooon]

It's obvious that the game was not done with love for the Bronze Age.

[@patrol2omega]

I love Pharaoh Dynasties after giving it the chance for a couple of months. CA is coming back. The campaign has a LOt of things to learn and experiment with. It is fun to experiment with different factions, regions, mechanics, etc.

[@deansheppard1104]

I didnt like pharaoh battles being the same has Warhammer with no collittion and the weather gimmik. The other issue is that they gave a one last content update and are not giving support to pharaoh anymore which was not a saga total war and supposed to be an actual historical title with dlc and fixes, i would love to invest my time on pharaoh but the gameplay has core issues with CA will not fix soo it's a shame.

[@awegjlappenaeofgihn]

Empire 2, shogun 3, Rome 3 and medieval 3 are the titles im waiting and looking for (but always in fear they will fail it) I have so many ideas for Rome 3, but i dont think that will ever be realized 😂

[@pizzaman6784]

13:16 I know 699 AD, 745 AD, and 804.37 AD are probably coming out soon, but you could probably mix it up a little bit.

[@Chuck12312]

It’s like when a historical game hasn’t been released for a while, we become united as a historical community but when one does come out ,, we are no longer united and becomes toxic real quick, it’s going to happen if empire 2 came out , as med 3 fans want medieval and not gunpowder or if med 3 came out it would be divided as some might enjoy it and some might complain whether because it wasn’t good enough or the setting didn’t suit them

[@Rynewulf]

Oversaturation is such a major issue. Theyre rushing out way way way too many games, which is why Britannia and 3 Kingdoms and Troy and Pharoah all flopped in a roy, from being underbaked, rushed and way too close to each others releases

[@Alkron1]

That “I like pharaoh” image is exactly what happened to me 😂 (and a edit here, I doubt seriously we will EVER get a medieval 3 or empire 2, and even if we do it will be like the modern games, sorry to burst bubbles)

[@MrTJ12345678]

I can listen to this therapeutic gripe on Total War all day. I'm certain a lot of us total war fans, especially the long time fans, are in a similar boat just reminiscing and yearning for that epic feeling that Total War blessed us with back in the day. Total war was the series that really made me want a gaming pc in the first place. It's particularly difficult for long time fans like us to look at total war games objectively since we already have nostalgia working against us with biases on our favorite historical time periods. I would pay stupid money for a shogun 3 or medieval 3 or empire 2. I believe its like call of duty though; we all had our favorites and we want a "newer" version of the ones we loved (for me that's modern warfare 2), but it also could be that we are just captivated by nostalgia

The fact that there are more people playing Warhammer III and Three Kingdoms right now according to this list (9:25), is evidence of why we deserve Total War and CA to be as bad as they are now. When we see that a masterpiece like Shogun 2 is not in the top 3 with Medieval 2; that Empire and Attila are not higher than they are (since Attila is better than Rome II in mechanics and has the best DLC of those two games, Charlemagne DLC)... that's all you need to see to know how bad the community is. I sincerely can't disagree with you more, although I share some of your arguments (like that we all want a good game with good mechanics); But CA and Total War deserve all the hate they have right now, because they themselves turned their backs on their own community base, they have ignored since Shogun 2 what people really wanted: first we wanted a Victorian Era Total War after the success of Fall of the Samurai (they gave us Rome II), then we wanted a Medieval III after Rome 2 and Attila (they gave us Warhammer, Three Kingdoms and Britannia), but in neither case did they listen to us. The company that doesn't give itself the courage to listen to its consumers, doesn't deserve anything good and although I am a fan of Warhammer in other games like Space Marine 2, Vermintide or Dawn of War, in the case of Total War it has been the worst thing that could have happened (if it had only been a few titles apart, and after having completed it, they had already returned to traditional titles, there would be no problem at all), because it has destroyed the perception of what people really want. However, numbers don't lie and this list (9:25) is all we need to know about why we deserve everything to go wrong (the worst critical community that exists).

P.S: I have nothing against you TheTerminator, the fact that I disagree with you does not imply that I do not like your channel, do not take it personally... I'm just upset with Creative Assembly and its current community with a lack of critical sense as demonstrated by this list (9:25).

[@xiuhcoatl4830]

Thrones of Britania was your Medieval 3 and You wasted it. Good thing is that if Med 3 is released, it will suck

@@xiuhcoatl4830 Comparing this incomplete product called Throne of Britannia to something on the scale of a future Medieval 3 is a bad joke; if it had been an Attila DLC, it would have received a different treatment (because it literally was a DLC, with almost the same battle scenarios and mechanics as the Attila Total War, but sold as a separate game and with a smaller map), however doing it the way it was is a total insult to the fans of the franchise. The worst part is that what Charlemagne's DLC offered was closer to a Medieval 3 Total War in scale, mechanics, variety of factions, and everything else it offered, than what Throne of Britannia was. The only thing I agree with you on is that Three Kingdoms, Troy and Pharaoh are irrefutable proof that Medieval 3 would be a mess if it came out tomorrow, due to the lack of improvements that have been shown in those three projects (and that only a certain amount of improvements have been seen in the three Warhammer games). However, those three "historical" games that I mentioned, which have nothing to do with history, are more influenced by Warhammer than by the classic games and I'm sure that if CA had maintained the same philosophy of its old products, if after Attila they had given us a Victorian Era or a Medieval 3, it would have come out in a more satisfactory way than following the Warhammer philosophy.

[@xiuhcoatl4830]

Main Attila campaign had more variety than Charlemagne. Gotta love how SO called historical fans think Medieval 1 and 2 are accurate when they have even more errors and inaccuracies than Pharaoh.

@@xiuhcoatl4830 Hahahahaha, now I definitely can't take you seriously anymore, after this comment: first because I was comparing Charlemagne with the Throne of Britannia, not with Attila as you say and second because you think that the Pharaoh game respects history better than the two Medieval Total War (as if fighting with Warhammer-style heroes was historical, to mention just one thing of all). XD

[@MedjayofFaiyum]

At least you got a complete Bronze Age game rather than a half finished one.

[@Rynewulf]

As a kid I would have exploded with joy at a 3 Kingdoms Total War, a Troy Total War and a Pharoah Total War, I even played some mods trying to do that, but as an adult I havent even finished Attila yet. I dont have the money to buy juiced up pc gaming rigs for the increasingly requirement heavy games, or the time to play 1 new entire Total War game every year. Thats part of why Rome 1 and Medieval 2 were good: they could actually start and run on affordable pcs, and when a new game came out even though I couldnt afford it I could at least turn to the free modding community. Pharoah with its big update did a Rome 2 and became a much better game than on release, and one day I might get to even play it before CA is tore apart by Publisher vultures

[@mr.morningstar2023]

CA could have just made 2 medievil factions or rome factions as dlcs. Some factions in pharaoh have chain armour plate armour, hardened skin armour and simular weaponary added one mine for iron reasorce. The fact that they did not is lazy. But people have problem with units being unresopncive on the battlefield and other problems like one city creating 10 arnies with 0 food to support them and other bugs like that.

[@davehas12]

It’s not the setting .. it’s the state of the series, game quality and CA’s shitting decisions. I love the Bronze Age but Pharoah is a massive disappointment and anti-Semitic to boot

[@patrol2omega]

Let's avoid drama and be realistic: most players haven't even tried Pharaoh Dynasties, yet they already have an unrealistic opinion of it. In my case I've tried out every single game since Medieval 1 came out. The one that I didn't like was actually Three Kingdoms

[@millerrotc1]

I want CA to make a game that the actual Devs are passionate about. No matter the setting. I think some of the leaks (both material current and from titles past) has shown that since the Sega takeover many creative decisions in how these games are steered in development are made several levels above anyone that actually plays the games. I think that's a big factor in some of the spark of Total War missing from some of the recent games.

[@123456gordon]

I think the reason for everyone being so "toxic" about TW in general is that every fan wants something, and CA has gathered quite a few different type of fans in the sense that some might like Warhammer only, others want historical, but a specific historical setting (say Med 3 or Empire), and so on. And it feels no one is getting what they want because there's always people left behind in a way. I don't considered myself an OG fan, I didn't start with Shogun 1. I started with Med 2 and skipped Empire and what not because I don't super like gunpowder eras too much, but even I have been asking forever for a Med 3, I can only imagine what it's like for people that's been around since Shogun 1 and perhaps didn't like WH and what newer games CA has been releasing these past years. They are in a shitty situation no matter what, and it doesn't help either that they as a company are going downhill with their own decisions.

[@GusingtonOne]

Well said, very mature comments. If only more people could be less vocal and more thoughtful like this.

[@CurtOntheRadio]

Not that I endorse bashing folks just for their opinion on a game, buuuut.......it isn't simply matter of personal choice without impact on anyone else: If a gamestyle proves popular and profitable then that's encouragement for the producer to further pursue it. So there is an impact on others, outside of one's own entirely personal choice over a game.

[@lucasdemelokronemberg276]

Imagine a Empire 2 like Ultimate Admiral age of sail! Landings, more enphasis in the MIGHTY age of Sail, would me soooo amazing! I really hope CA does it someday.

[@armandom.s.1844]

I do not have problems with Pharaoh Dynasties because of the time period at all, but I feel like since the last 12 years every new total war (except 3 kingdoms maybe) is just Rome 2 again with its same problems over and over again.

[@MrFracka]

It is nice to hear the last of the Mochicans in the background

[@BeingThePaul]

before troy a bronze age setting was among the top 5 most wished settings. now with pharaoh dynasties all the people who wanted that setting are happy and the others claim that noone ever wanted it. it's just crazy how people fail to consider that different people have different wishes. i never cared for the bronze age but its genuinely a good thing that these fans have their game now too. same with the pike&shot, i think it would bring boring combat, but if it comes out, a lot of people will be happy, and that's nice. in addition: it feels like the medieval fanbase (at least those who talk about it) has gotten so negative and toxic that the studio could get the impression they could never satisfy that particular crowd. medieval 3 will come out and there will just be a ton of videos like "we wanted something different"

[@cal2127]

age of bronze did total war pharohs setting better in an older engine

[@eduraavida0424]

Pharaoh is an DLC sold as a FULL WHOLE AAA GAME. I guess is OK to hate it ...

[@SergioSF]

These players could not touch on Total War:Warhammer with an 8 foot polearm. The franchise saved the Creative Assembly company from massive layoffs or downright going under. Even if they squandered all that good will and revenue with Hyenas. The realistic vs fantasy debate can bug off.

[@MarktheRude]

The matter of the fact is that CA is neither competent or capable enough of making Medieval 2 Total War from scratch if they had to do it today.

[@jakeholmannf]

No need to badh other folks' enjoyment of a game that isn't to your personal tastes. I think if folks enjoy Pharaoh that such is a-okay and I am glad for them! Personally I prefer Impressions Games' Pharaoh for visiting that time period/setting and probably won't buy Total War Pharaoh as it just doesn't interest me, but insulting others for their tastes isn't necessary. I do understand the desire for the other games folks are asking for though as there is a Total War drought for those wanting Medieval 3 or others. The drought just means I have a chance to buy and explore games/genres from other publishers and settings though, like my current one with Owlcat Games' Rogue Trader or so many others out there hehe.

[@paulyost6849]

I want a game thats not vanilla or simple, it definitely needs depth. It seems like the newer the games the cheaper they look and play

[@ww2killerk]

I love dynasty warriors, ROT3K, and three kingdoms. When CA shut down support for the game and stopped adding content it bothered the crap out of me. It’s not everyone’s total war, my first was Rome 1 when it came out but I just wished they added more to the game. Like a spring and autumn period dlc, or mongol invasion dlc.

[@FirstoftheAbyss92]

I suspect that the biggest Issue is that the historical total war and the fantasy total war are 2 fundamentally different games. Yes there is (most likely plenty) of overlap between the players of those games but that doesn't mean that fantasy total war player wants to play a fantasy total war disguised as a history and vice versa for the history players. for example the rock-paper-siscors gameplay is something that I find hugely off-putting in historical games but perfectly acceptable in fantasy. (for example heavy infantry should be a human wall, not something that gets shredded like wet tissue because their assailants happen to have "armour-piercing" axes...on the other hand it is perfectly acceptable to me that elvish swordmaster with centuries of experience shred those zombies as if they're not even there) And every attempt to get cheap and acquire both bases will fall short because many fans don't accept fantasy rules in their history and vice versa.

[@TangledVirus]

I only want Empire 2/Shogun 3 if there's naval battles. Otherwise then no.

[@vanmarcos7713]

Let's be honest, we all have a favorite game or show that we enjoy a lot even tho it objectively isnt better than other games or shows. I still haven't tried pharaoh myself, but i will get it soon, because i believe that in order to have a strong opinion on a game i should play it first.

[@evanhalloway7998]

I mean I want a good fun game set in a historical setting without the TONS of game UI and extra effects like constant units stats and banners and projectile trails and so on, I don't want a hero general that can single handedly wipe out entire units like in Troy, whatever happened to simple, gritty, fight to the last man, I want the game to be decided by my ability to build infrastructure, upgrade buildings with a specific purpose that advance technology (armorers, weaponsmiths, siegeworks, stables, monasteries, farms) I want to be more hands on in deciding how I build my cities and my armies, I don't want to just wait X amount of turns and then BAM you've researched a technology that gives your infantry 6% more effectiveness in combat... ok? Why do they get that buff? What piece of my troops equipment upgraded or have they trained more rigorously, I wanna see my troops transform gradually from a gathered militia to professional soldiers depending on what I built in that province. And correct me if I'm wrong but the Greco-Persian wars timeframe is an untapped total war market yes?

[@MichaelThomas-p6q]

I have a feeling most just played pharaoh, and saw it was bad, and didn’t notice dynasties has good gameplay and a big challenge.

[@GrandAdmThrawn]

Troy and Pharaou just suck. That is all. It has more in common with Warhammer and not Medieval 2 or Rome.

[@eduardoanzolch6078]

"Here is a funny story:"A Guy was at the Kitchen Drinking Coffee Stares at the Wall Clock the Horary was 13:14 Hours. He Stare at his Cellphone Clock 14 Past Ten. Danmation i'm Late!

[@battleship6177]

I just want a Empire 2 that is much more fleshed out and easier to mod. Empire is my favorite total war game especially naval aspect of it.

[@adrianthompson5250]

Pharaoh is similar in many ways to Thrones of Britannia. Both games were released a little undercooked, were set in time periods that many people were not interested in and also tried to implement new ideas and mechanics. As a result people played them a little and quickly decided to ditch them without ever giving either game a chance. Both games turned into some of the best historical Total War games (in my opinion) after being updated. Having said that, all the negativity that seems to be out there in the historical community is not a good look, but I am optimistic that the next edition of historical Total War will be a great game. CA should know what we want by now anyway.

[@adamkenyeres9036]

I also loved ToB

[@theARMYGamer]

WE NEED HISTORICAL, non-fantasy not even an atom of fantasy game Total war is just milking fantasy and Warhammer. There is zero move towards a true historical sequel. The question is why isnt there a Total War competitor?? Why is there not an FC vs Fifa type rivalry or BF vs COD? We need to support and fund a Total War competitor

[@sulthanakmalrakunsyah3890]

TBH, as a total war player as well, I hate CA decisions and what they make, but IF any players enjoy ONE OF THE total war title, it's good for them. I see my friend playing Throne of Britannia a lot, the other one playing Warhammer 3 non-stop on weekends, and another one enjoying Three Kingdoms and Troy, and me... enjoying Medieval 2. So, it's not that I hate them, I hate CA for what they did to TW Historical franchise and it's fans, not the players, let them be, let them enjoy their own taste, after all, we just love gaming.

[@M16Joe]

I think if they went flipped Core & experimental every other game then the hate wouldnt be there. But they did warhammer, warhammer, three kingdoms, warhammer, and pharaohs. Had they thrown a medieval 3 before kingdoms, then the old fans would not have as much hate for new fans. I honestly feel there should be three major studios working total war. 1 studio handling games that focus on melee (Rome, Medieval, Shogun, and Pharoah), one studio focusing on Gunpowder age (Empire, Napoleon, Victorian), and a studio focused on fantasy/magical (Warhammer, Elder Scrolls, D&D)

[@AltF49226]

1. as someone already mentioned, bronze age is great but pharaoh simply doesn't make justice to this period and is objectively at most a mediocre game 2. Majority of players simply wanted M3 or E2 for so long, and are pissed that CA seems to not listen to them at all in the last years 3. Last TW with some sort of a world map is Attila, which is soon to be 10 years old. We have to rely on an old games being modded to have some fresh experience, and we all know that in fact the last game to be relatively easy to mod is M2, which is almost 20 years old. Yet, CA delivers games, that feel like they offer only some small part of this mythical "full experience" that we want so bad

[@MedjayofFaiyum]

I just don’t care now about who likes and dislikes, perhaps total war has become about spectacle. But what I do dislike is the idea that the old total war games are completely immune to criticism, and if you praise new total war games you are in the camp of heretics.

[@log8427]

As soon as they released the first Warhammer game I said classic historical TW is over. They have no incentive to go back. They are a corporation their incentive is profit.

[@luismoronigajardoaros8602]

For me is simple some enjoy first gen total war game like med 2 and shogun 2, others enjoy second gen totar war like Rome 2 and Atilla, and others play total war games with warhammer formula like troy or the tww 3. The problem is the first gen players wants all players like and play the same games like them. And no like competition in opinions or videos. They are "me persons" and nothing more. I hope this is legible English is not my first language

[@shannon_kilpatrick]

Sorry, first gen total war isn't med 2 or shogun 2. First gen total war is the original shogun and medieval. 2nd gen would be the original rome and med 2. 3rd gen would be empire onward and 4th gen would be warhammer onward

[@thadsul]

If medieval 3 or empire 2 are released any time soon, people will see clearly that the problem with pharaoh is not the setting, it's the shit gameplay, full of cosmetic mechanics

[@Sisyphe987]

I love the time period, i hate the gameplay of the battles, the unit scaling, the animation, chariot bonking against shield and tweaking while fighting, spear handles and shields going throughts people, people going through people, animation with not enough diversity, arrow being magicaly deflect while units have their shield above their head, the general design and colors, the unit image design during battles being just a 2D image of their game avatar, the sound design being goofy just crush my immersion i see the soldiers as gaming avatar while they were people living in a different time period in previous total war than 2016, if the next "historical" is in the same vibe, i'm done with total war.

[@drunklessdylan1234]

Medieval 3 will unite us all and its a win win, CA will get rich and we will get the game we deserve if they hopefully put love and effort into it.

[@InnesRobertson]

The problem is a common issue with many game companies. Game franchises made great improvements in graphics and UI, features and game engines evolved and when you bought a new title it was freash and innovative. Two good examples are total war and Bethesda titles, both franchise's peaked 10 years ago. We see so many reskins, same game engines, features removed more than added. That is why Attila and Skyrim are more popular than Pharaoh and Starfeild. Anno, Age of Empires, paradox and Civ are the same, just reskined. Only indi developers and modders are innovative. I love strategy and RPGs but I haven't bought a game for years. The last games I enjoyed were Atitilla and the Witcher 3 both came out in 2015 10 years ago. Sadly indi games like Manor Lords take years to flesh out. Hopefully I will be able to play it in 2026

[@AleksaShule]

I don't mind the time period of Pharaoh. I would love to play a bronze age total war game....but if you made it in Med2 as a mod, lol.

[@Ratking_420]

Pharoah rules. Troy rules. Been playing TW games since Rome and TW is pretty much the only game I play. The Bronze Age games are peak and the combat is faaaaar more dynamic than any other historical title.

[@Drybread]

Notice how he didn't give a comment praising the game a like lol.

[@danielgranger-ts6en]

Why is CA still not listening!? Its been so many years now with people asking for them to look at the old games and look at mods like divid et impera. But they still keep spending money making simplified garbage. Do you think half the production team would lose their jobs now if they said actually we can just copy and remaster the third age mod and sell more.

[@francescomutignani]

TW Pharaoh will never have success as it represents the betrayal of a community. I do not (only) refer to the endless call for Medieval 3 or Empire 2, but to the marketing policy CA has adopted since many years which has reached its peak with this game. If the community had not revolted there would be no Dynasties and this game would remain a miserable copy of Troy. Concerning the historical setting, we already had a bronze age one with Troy, which I do not consider historical, but that was the scenario. Was that worthy? Maybe, I do not know. But it seems gamers always preferred other classic titles. All in all, there were many good option to satisfy everyone, but CA decided to make easy money on its fanbase. That's why I'll never consider to buy Pharaoh.

[@Gibson7Clans]

Most of these players who play other total war games currently, is simply playing mods most of the time. I my self only got and play medieval 2 for just 1 mod, which I really love. And I Basicly never touched the main game. It’s the same for most of those still playing medieval 2 total war.

[@KurlandHickory]

Pharoah is fine. Not bad, but what we really want is Medieval 3. Give it to the people.

[@stevewalsh3001]

I don’t need CA to get its act together as nice as it would be. So many other developers are upping their game. Ultimate General/Admiral, Great War Western Front, and Gates of Hell all 13:38 scratch that old TW itch for me. Haven’t tried Manor Lords or Steel Division yet, but those look good too. Some studio will be able to provide a more direct challenge to the formula soon. I give it a couple years.

[@ItsOkray]

What song is in the background

[@Durdles26]

I really love the setting but I flipping hate the modern mechanics and the people saying “oh they have more unit diversity” meaning it’s good now really annoys me. They need deeper mechanics and it could make any setting great but they took the easy dlc route, add more units, charge for em, and people laud you for it. I desperately love the Bronze Age and it could have been awesome but not with bland modern ca lack of mechanics. Frankly we need tactics and morale not super hero units

[@swardinc]

i don't care what game people play i will question them because i want to know why they like it maybe i missed something etc

[@MedjayofFaiyum]

Why can’t we enjoy total war games as they are without being forced into tribal camps?