Why The Total War Fanbase Is Furious

[@fearan9406]

Has there ever been a bigger waste of potential, they had thier own genre, and they burned it all down to chase some extraction trend

[@Sypitz]

It was more of the publisher pushing them towards making an extraction shooter iirc

[@RKNGL]

​@@Sypitz I thought it was debunked that Sega pushed for Hyenas? CA wanted to use it to justify its expansion into other genres, kind of like their foray into Alien Isolation.

[@YourBlackLocal]

They made an extraction shooter?

[@dntthe88]

@@YourBlackLocal Hyenas the cancelled game

[@Coachteach]

No game was more mismanaged in its life time than ow2

[@Seedmember]

You know things aren't going well for your franchise, when people are more hyped about mod releases for your older games than they are for your new releases.

[@reappermen]

@penileymajorey7174 Uhm, you realise that GW'S leadership has nothing to do with the course CA is taking with TWW3, and other future stuff? This is squarely on CA and their owner Sega. GW let them happily do good stuff with TWW1 and especialy 2, and did not force them int oany of the problems they created in 3.

[@richardshiflett5181]

Eh. 3k was great... then ca killed it. Troy is fun, but it feels abandoned for Pharoah.

[@riverblack565]

​@@richardshiflett5181the problem here is simple...even Troy has better graphics,and Pharaoh does it too,the main reason I liked TW were the battles and since Shogun 2 those declined,not improved and if someone felt disappointment when Rome 2 was launched,with Troy battles are a disaster and Pharaoh continued...if you don't care that much about battles or if you didn't played the older versions than all could be fine,I can buy that,but if you played them its impossible not to be disappointed because improvements were expected,not getting worst...for me battles in Troy are the worst of TW franchise so I'll never buy Pharaoh,which is a copy/paste Troy with some modifications

[@centuzezaim7471]

just like bethesda

[@aragornii507]

They purposely destroy our games though to create their failed Frankenstein experiments

[@fus132]

Creative Assembly is essentially a monopoly of the "mass-battle RTS" genre. Until someone else comes around and drives them into the ground with better titles this sewage flood of shovelware slop ain't gonna stop, unless they run themselves out of money first, of course. Of all the studious to be hit with layoffs, this one dare I say needed it most.

[@GermanOlle]

There are some alternatives: "Ultimate General: American Revolution" from the old Total War modder Darth (creator of DarthMod for Empire/Napoleon/Shogun2); "Grand Tactician: The Civil War (1861-1865)".

[@BashfulRoy]

*RTT

[@paulmcdonald4608]

If all their games go the way of Pharaoh then they'll drive themselves in to the ground.

[@Ramotttholl]

Genres need to absolutely crash before someone else takes over take SimCity V City Skylines for example they didn't even got the go ahead to make CS untill SimCity publicaly got humiliated with their terrible new game.

[@zombieranger3410]

CA and Paradox are truly mirror images of themselves and just how monopolized they have made things in their respective genre. CA is the only one to paint a game with a different color every year and sell it for full price, and Paradox is the only company to get away with milking HOI4, Stellaris, and other games with yearly full game-priced DLC for many years now.

[@anvos658]

Ever since they started their modern DLC system I've firmly been in the camp of don't pay full price for a total war game or dlc.

[@blindmown]

Just pirate their games where possible. I wouldn't normally advise that, but CA is so egregious that it's almost a moral good to steal from them.

[@AavorSkyrender]

Stealing is pathetic. You aren't entitled to free entertainment. @@blindmown

[@thenoobgamer95]

​@@AavorSkyrender Gonna cry? 🤷‍♂

[@Marshmobilise]

Not bought a full price game since shogun2. Feeling pretty smug rn

[@eewweeppkk]

​@@AavorSkyrenderMorally I agree, but in this case they're putting economic pressure on CA to be more fair to their consumers.

[@Phantus00]

It boils down to corporate greed like everything else in this brave new world. What can we get away with; how can we offer less for more. Easily my favourite franchise but I've never purchased a Saga nor will I spend 150% more on DLC. Sad to see SEGA ultimately put CA in a lose/lose situation. Clueless suits don't make great games at fair prices.

[@sheepfly]

No, this is on CA

[@turk88]

@@sheepfly no this is entirely on the playerbase , they continue to give them money and they are the reason why things are the way they are, you get what you pay for .

[@sheepfly]

@@turk88 I agree they share the blame too, I only have Rome 1, Medieval 2, Shogun 2, Warhammer 1 and 2 and only bought one dlc for Warhammer 2.

[@H41030v3rki110ny0u]

my noble savage brethren, unite! do not stand for this, quit giving them money for garbage

[@Aethelhald]

Corporate greed is definitely a part of it for sure, but it's not the main problem. The main problem is that all CA's growth and popularity over the past 8 years was fake. It was Warhammer fans buying the Warhammer games. Those Warhammer fans aren't coming back for non-Warhammer games, and CA's older fans (like me) don't believe that CA knows how to make good Total War games anymore. If Medieval 3 came out today it'd just be a fucking Warhammer 2 reskin.

[@hocestbellumchannel]

I remember back when the first Warhammer was coming out, and there was widespread worry among history fans that CA would not pay as much attention to their traditional historical titles. There were assurances that the "Warhammer" team differed from the team that worked on historical titles. Well, in hindsight, the worries were not baseless.

[@Skyguy22]

Well, it's not like everything is perfect on the Warhammer side of Total war right now. CA pretty much screwed up TWW3 at release and the DLC pace of the last 1 1/2 years has been slower than at the end of TWW2's life cycle. I think there could be a perfect world where a big new Total War Medival, Rome or Warhammer can come out every few years without unnecessary filler games in between. But right now it doesn't look like we're heading there.

[@RazorsharpLT]

Not to mention the fact that almost everyone and their mother wanted to see a Victoria: total war, with such a lack of Victorian era games, considering how well Vicky 3 did... But i guess that's a bit too much new mechanics for CA to add. Smaller squad sizes later on etc. small unit tactics But honestly the last samurai worked great. @@Skyguy22

[@jarrod797]

​@@Skyguy22 Warhammer isn't on the same level as Pharaoh. Warhammer has proven to be a moneymaker and they'll put their time into it. The screwed up release is a standard and should be expected from any game from now on. Your DLCs will come out and probably be good because Warhammer is a moneybag.

[@Skyguy22]

@@jarrod797 Yeah, Warhammer is definitly no Pharao, but that doesnt mean its going to well there either. Updates are slow and DLCs are far in between. And at least as of the latest DLC, the quality is also degrading. It should be, that Warhammer fans are getting good content, but in reality we are just getting milked.

[@Brazilian134]

Yep, it's mind boggling how greedy they are but can't even see that WH3 is their biggest cash cow and can't even have a proper crew running on it. There is little more unbecoming in a company than being greedy and incompetent. Haven't played Pharaoh yet and probably never will but heard it has a lot of problems that Troy had regarding unit interaction just for one problem.

[@TacticusPrime]

I really don't get it. Is it just the revenue sharing? That's what they hate about WH? But that still doesn't explain killing 3 Kingdoms. It's so weird man.

[@Ultrajamz]

Yeah WH3, Medieval / Shogun / Rome rinse repeat.

[@Luci4her]

give us Empire 2 XO

[@JohnSmith-ft4gc]

"Unit Diversity" isn't just a shallow objective, it's a resource sink & a company like CA that wants to cut costs really should steer away from it. Unit balancing & solid mechanics under the hood is potentially a lot cheaper but it would rely upon keeping compentent devs on instead of just churning them through & using them up. Expanding the game with Faction DLC is probably a lot easier to crunch the $numbers on, but the entire concept is very much the definition of Parasitic Gameplay.

[@masterhand9305]

​@JohnSmith-ft4gc Redditors always clamor for more diversity, but not just always does it boil down to 10 slightly different units of spearmen with the same animations, but the only *(meta)* way to really play a game like Warhammer is doomstacks of very specific units, so they'll never even use most of those units. It's just so tiresome.

[@revanlord05]

Here is the thing. Creatively Assembly doesn't care about improving, or innovating its games, just push a product with the least amount of effort and a high revenue chance. Ever since Rome 2, every game afterward is a Total Conversion of that game, even Total War Warhammer, their biggest cash cow, is built on the framework of Rome 2. They hadn't changed much other than adding magic and single entities and modifying slightly the core gameplay to support it but other than that, it was Rome 2 gameplay. They removed stuff, No more naval, there was no more improvement or innovation on the battle side of the game beyond the mentioned magic and monsters and changed the focus of empire building to character building, then realized that they can charge DLC after DLC for power creep, OP heroes, lords, factions for it and people ate it up, praising it. They thought of using the same formula for the historical side but didn't work as well, it was a bad, awkward affair. I knew People who wanted a Bronzen Age Total War, and we got it, _in pieces;_ Troy and Pharaoh and you can bet that after Pharaoh, we WON'T get Mesopotamia. Do you guys want Medieval 3 and Empire 2? Don't worry, they'll come _in pieces as well._

[@antonisauren8998]

They did Warhamer in pieces too, didn't they? Bronze as merge of Troy and Pharaoh might not be the worst idea. :P

[@revanlord05]

​@@antonisauren8998 Yes, Warhammer was made into a trilogy instead of a single, continuous game with proper expansions. The whole thing is designed to sell you *_THE SAME GAME, FULL PRICE_* with a Expansion Addon in as the only playable side then sell you DLCs for Characters and Power creep Units and to have the entire experience, is required to own the three games, and *_all_* the DLCs or else, you'd be lagging behind and locked out of a lot of content that *_is already in your computer_* Bronze Age Should've been All Europe, Egypt and Mesopotamia combined from the very start, pieces. This strategy is the worst and people praised CA for it.

[@SSDexter99]

Warhammer doesn't have naval because it requires a second IP negotiation with GW. CA got the license to do Warhammer Fantasy but not Man O' War.

[@oscarstaszky1960]

@@SSDexter99 and with James Workshop being just as despicable as CA itself, we definitely won't be seeing Warhammer Naval version anytime soon even with Warhammer: The Old World already coming up next year...

[@Projolo]

Shogun 2 was their peak, Rome 2 changed the engine that changed the way battles were simulated and made it more unrealistic. Before Rome 2 each soldier had separate hp and they were calculated individually. After Rome 2 the unit has a hp pool and soldiers die after a threshold.

[@djllewellyn6277]

Making a game about the Bronze Age Collapse and not including Mycenae, Mesopotamia, etc at launch is so stupid. They will almost certainly add that to the game as DLC but that's nothing more than greed. People have been asking for Medieval 3 and Empire 2 for over a decade but CA just doesn't care to listen.

[@Baldeagle-tw2nv]

It's not that don't listen, it's just they KNOW they'll get absolutely destroyed if they do either one of those. This is because there is ONE person still at CA who doesn't want those two to be tainted and left alone.

[@MrDeflador]

they wont, dead on arrival, will not get much support, just look what they did to 3 kingdoms.

[@GermanOlle]

@@MrDeflador They will only do the promised 3 faction DLCs (And even then we don't know what they mean by that. Could be completely new cultures, existing ones like Sea Peoples or Libu, or just more Egyptians) and the one campaign DLC; some patches and maybe some free stuff. But if a damn successful Total War title like Three Kingdoms is simply discontinued after mediocre support, I don't want to know how quickly Pharaoh will unfortunately be left behind.

[@spikem5950]

Doing a Bronze Age Collapse without the full-blown Mediterranean map we've had in Medieval 2, Rome 2, etc. was stupid, not just Mycenae and Mesopotamia. You could've had proto-Etruscans, Halstatt Celts, the Germanic tribes of the time, Iberians, etc. and it would've made for an interesting campaign to turn those into the dominant empire of the period too. That's the whole point of historical Total Wars, not to only play who was historically the dominant faction of the time but play the underdogs and change history. A TW where one region of the map is technologically advanced but tightly packed, starved for expansion room and collapsing economically and another region are just beginning civilizations with plenty of iron to not feel the collapse and space to settle without as much competition would've made for an interesting dynamic.

[@PrincessStabbityPLS]

And the worst part? Not even a Total War game set during the Bronze Age will let us invade Tinland and become a tin dealer.

[@Baldeagle-tw2nv]

CA is quickly becoming Bethesda. They both launch empty, broken, and shallow products and have the modding community arrrive and fix/complete their games. They then abandon porjects as quickly as possible when they don't make all the money. This IS the new trend of gaming and will continue as this behavior is rewarded by mindless consumers.

[@Spllyn]

Well Said.

[@HackerArmy03]

It had become something worse, it follows GW workshop's greedy levels ever since they set foot on WH. They became bethesda in Rome 2 total war, then GW workshop in Warhammer 1 (WH3 is when they fully bloomed, especially when they made a shogun 2 DLC into a standalone game and increased the damn price without any change)

[@orclover2353]

Skyrim, Med 2, Shogun 2 all have major flaws and would get roasted in 2023. Gamexpectations have skyrocketed since the 2006-2014 era. The warhammer series has done the job of advancing the technology and scope far beyond the older games and even Rome 2 was mountains more impressive than the actual Rome product, it just came out with ridiculous expectations and was hyped beyond all reason. They fricken released a remastered Rome version and got dumped on because Rome was actually not that great, was easy to exploit, and the "features" were actually somewhat superficial compared to what we expect. Nobody is playing Vanilla shogun 2, medieval 2 and having more fun than Warhammer, Atilla, Rome 2. Nobody is playing vanilla skyrim and having more fun than Starfield and fallout 4. Our memory of those games is positive because they were new and cutting edge for their time. But after playing a total war game for a 1000 hours we demand a better and different experience. It would be impossible for a new vanilla release to compare to my Northern Dunedain campaigns in M2tw DAC. BUt it doesn't mean that M2tw as a vanilla game is anywhere near flawless. It has benefited from decades of modding and improvements.

[@HackerArmy03]

@@orclover2353 The thing about the older games is, no matter how bad their releases or vanilla state were, is that they are actually fresh and CA was not afraid of implementing new ideas and features in. Just like how different Shogun 2 is from Shogun 1 or of Medieval 2 to 1 and Rome as well. They were INNOVATIVE no matter how barebones they are. Same thing with Skyrim from oblivion, but the problem with Starfield is that fans wanted more, not just a copy pasted poorly built vanilla skyrim launch experience with graphic improvement mods. The problem now is that they've essentially begun copy pasting their products, just changing the bare minimum in features and letting the art team do the rest. And not to mention how they price their products, 60 - 70 usd for a small sized game that is a reskin of Troy? Wtf? And yes, in the end, the price of the product is the issue. With CA's greed and lack of innovativeness coming in second.

[@orclover2353]

@@HackerArmy03 I blame the popularity of WH2/3 for the destruction of the immersive total war experience. The popularity of total war as a max/min, ui overload, table top experience has given the impression that people want humbers, popups with slight mathematical changes, and UI that explains everything. Games like medieval told the player almost nothing. There were important traits and features that one could only know about if you looked through the files. Is this good or bad? Probably both. Probably a high percentage of players don't know how important physics and positioning is in older total wars, and CA made the decision to cut these immersive elements out to save resources and instead represent them with visible numbers, this math bleed then extended to the entire experience. It must be what people want because WH2 and WH3 are the most popular games ever. Pharaoh might be a great experience for a max/min person who likes figuring out endless systems that are represented with text and random events instead of experiencing the world through a valid and realistic physics systems that are immersive but create a simpler experience.

[@burnttoast26]

They gave the finger to their customers, so the customers are giving it right back. From what I've heard, CA's brass are very petty

[@fabienherry6690]

Devs are to ! Like just a reminder Sofia with 60 people put out all that and the rest of CA with 790 people what did they brought to the table ? Warhammer 3 that is basically an expension of warhammer 2 that is an extension of warhammer 1? broken DLC ?

[@LitlBlackDragonNinja]

@@fabienherry6690 Bulgarians are just built different. :P

[@kronusx3484]

@@fabienherry6690 WH3 is Warhammer 2 version B. It had some improvements but also a lot of bad things.

[@Khalkara]

@@kronusx3484 What does W3 do worse than W2? As far as I'm aware they improved upon everything from balancing to sieges.

[@kronusx3484]

@@Khalkara The AI, buggier than before, many fixes in 2 are not in 3, more bugs than game 2 that are new (don't get me started on the artillery bug where it decides to go in melee) and so on. In theory WH3 SHOULD be a better WH2, but it's what it fails to deliver.

[@TsunamiWombat]

Oh boy this is my fanbase and my game time to see how much he gets. Note 1: the message about the price being due to inflation didn't come from a community manager. It came from an open letter from CA's Executive of Product. It included language that said that the future of total war relied upon the sale of such DLC at such prices to continue support and development of the game. The community took this as a THREAT, because not too long ago CA up and pulled the plug quite abruptly on a game that had otherwise performed reasonably well, Total War 3 Kingdoms. However 3 Kingdoms DLC attach rate was low for various reasons (this is a whole discussion in and of itself) so CA somewhat blind sided the community with a "we're shutting down" message attached to a video and post somewhat hilariously titled 'The Future of Total War 3 Kingdoms". They have since gone back and edited the title of this. CA does that a lot, goes back to edit things to gaslight you. Ex. They now claim that Shogun 2: Fall of the Samurai, an expandalone DLC for Shogun 2 (both of which were very well received) was a Saga title. Except that marketing term and idea hadn't been developed yet. They literally retroactively went back and changed the title of FOTS to label it a saga game to try and shake the poor reception from Britannia. Note 2: Apocryphally (I cannot find the video), people are saying a CA developer themselves said Pharaoh was originally an expansion or DLC for Troy, but 'grew too big in scope' and became it's own game. People have run with this. I'm sure you can imagine how well that's gone over. Note 3: to put the recent Total War: Warhammer 3 hullabaloo into context, the DLC cost for Shadows of Change was $25 USD. This is the same price as the Forge of the Chaos Dwarves faction pack, which added an entire new race with new mechanics and new skeletons and riggings and units and changed the map etc etc. Shadows of Change by comparison added 3 sub factions (faction leaders for existing races) and 2-3 units for each of those factions, many of which were reskins or are shared across multiple factions. The most recent comparable package, in my opinion, would be Champions of Chaos which launched almost exactly 1 year before Shadows of Change. It completely overhauled an existing race, added 4 new sub factions with different mechanics, a bunch of new units (many of which admittedly were reskins), and was an overall robust package. It cost $15.99, one year ago. CA's accounting for inflation then is an additional $10 in one year. Note 4: Supposedly, according to former employee's both speaking openly and in 'leaks', Hyena's saw them invest in two new buildings and was largely responsible for the studio swelling to 900 people. They absolutely BLED money and labor into this with nothing to show for it and it's the opinion of many is siphoned off every other studio Note 5: Sofia is a great studio. I've seen nobody blaming them for Pharaoh. Sofia is tremendous and everyone only has compliments for them. Note 6: Warhammer 3 still has plenty of gas left in it in terms of content they could charge for. And people WANT to be charged for it. People WANT to spend money on the game. And that's what makes it infuriating. Note 7: CA in general has always been terrible at communication and community interaction and since this all kicked off has done and said... nothing. Right now everyone is waiting to see how deep the cuts from Sega are going to get because Sega announced they are cutting employees after Hyenas.

[@Tzilandi]

The fact that CA threw out pablum like "if you don't buy the DLC at $25, we can't continue supporting the game" while they were funneling the money from sales of Total War Warhammer III into Hyenas instead is just the spun sugar decoration on top of the dogshit croquembouche.

[@sheepfly]

Hopefully CA gets shut down.

[@alf513]

@@sheepflyonly let the ceo get sacked. I don’t want the developers and studio to fail as a whole

[@Sanvone]

Add in that they are beneficiary of British goverment subsidies and the increase in price also seems like community had to sponsor CA expansion for part of "bad reception".

[@Synystr7]

It is like they are purposely making bad historical titles, act like they aren't and then go "we gave you what you wanted, and you didn't like it. We're gonna go make more warhammer games."

[@Vikingskog]

They are'nt, they are making cheap historical titles and the games end up bad because of that. Its a poorly thought out strategy to try earn money with the least amount of effort. All of the recent bad/"cheap" historical titles have been made by their bulgarian studio and been literally reskins of other previous games they have made. They have different teams working on the historical titles and the warhammer games. Most likely they are working on a big historical title(medieval, empire, shogun) right now and have been for a while.

[@bighat4742]

At this point, I wish they would just leave the game alone. Every time they are coming to it they are just saying "We have an overpriced DLC that barely adds anything besides a couple of Lords and we also broke other things, now give us money or we are dropping support for our only game that is bringing in money".

[@omarcomming722]

Warhammer are the only ones that aren't boring with some visual and mechanical diversity diversity. It broadens the audience from historical nerds to regular nerds which is a much bigger playerbase.

[@cobaltfog]

I know a lot of people that play TW:WH and none have bought the latest DLC that I know of. Not worth $25 for a few lords and units.

[@Mithguar]

There won't be Warhammer 4 so maybe when they are done with WH3, the team will jump on Medieval 3 and make it to scale of Warhammer.

[@РустемСиразов-м9м]

It's not the fault of CA Sofia. This studio is good. They make great DLCs and they saved a lot of TW games. And Pharaoh was changed from Troy DLC to "full price game" because someone on top of CA pyramid (pun intended) decided that they want more money for the same product. The same was with the last TWW3 DLC.

[@waltonsmith7210]

It wouldve been so much better combined with Troy.

[@Khalkara]

You can't say that, whilst they completely fumble siege mechanics repeatedly across games and sieges are like 50% of the gameplay. The studio can do good, like the art and animation department has done 9/10 work. But overall balancing and mechanics wise they're awful. It took them like 5 years to realize the obvious that supply lines are a bad mechanic, and that verticality adds fun to siege battles.

[@cosmokramer7926]

Part of me wonders if they'd have made more of a positive impact financially and just community goodwill-wise if they'd just used the money for Pharaoh to move the WH3 QA and DLC development to CA Sofia, have the 20 person DLC team and 1 bug fixer in CA UK do some knowledge transfer/matrix to CA Sofia and use the whole Pharaoh team to just hammer out bug fixes and develop like 2 or 3 DLCs concurrently and then stagger release of 2-3 fully polished DLCs designed to work flawlessly with each other and a newly debugged WH3 platform.

[@matthewy2j]

From the wise words of LegendofTotalWar, don't blame the Devs, blame the suits.

[@jimmyorgenkaccrow4961]

​@@matthewy2jidgas. They are all responsible for this mess.

[@Loalrikowki]

Glossed over the fact that CA cut Three Kingdoms' throat because it didn't meet sales expectations and the post responding to the Warhammer dlc price hike debacle was a direct threat to end support early if people don't buy a mediocre offering at a 50% markup.

[@Pancakespls]

As if CA would cut the source of a literally billion dollar source of revenue for themselves, WH3 😂

[@Naeron66]

I love it when a company tells it the way it is in today's market and people think they are being "threatened".

[@kronusx3484]

@@Naeron66 You mean a company that expended thanks to their fans?

[@YaBoiSmokey]

I think you mean a 150% markup

[@strangestecho5088]

@@Naeron66 WH2 DLC was extremely profitable. It's how CA was able to afford to expand so much in the first place. The problem is that they funneled all the profits to Hyenas and other dead-on-arrival projects at the expense of WH support, and then demanded that the WH fanbase directly subsidize the losses with a massive price hike on DLC. It's not our fucking problem. It's not like there's any shortage of games to play, so if CA is unwilling to produce a good product for a price that its customers will tolerate, then they can go bankrupt.

[@jeremynoll7026]

Going through different Total War pages, the most common thing I see the fans want is Medieval 3 or Empire 2. We still haven't gotten either.

[@lt.danicecream]

The problem with that is it will suck with the current engine. Either game would be a watered down disappointment. They need a new engine and bring back all the bells and whistles that they had in the games prior to Rome 2.

[@DiviAugusti]

@@lt.danicecreamThat was my concern. They’ll make some cartoonish arcade type bastardization of Medieval and then all hope is lost.

[@AavorSkyrender]

What bells and whistles? What did they have in Med II that they didn't expand and improve upon in future releases? Because I have played since Shogun 1 and every single title has been a step up from the previous titles.@@lt.danicecream

[@Pancakespls]

Most fans want more TTWH, as med2 and empire have a tiny population compared to WH3.

[@PwerRanger01]

@@Pancakespls probably cause they are a lot older...

[@seancurtis1199]

Total War Medieval 2 blew my mind as a kid, it solidified the genre as a keen interest of mine and the constant disappointments over the better part of the last 2 decades has been cumbersome to say the least. How do you, as a company, create pure money printing gold and just continue to fail time after time to deliver on simple improvements and innovation when the fans are handing you the solutions through their feedback and criticisms. Its like these people hate money

[@fabienherry6690]

Medieval 2 wasn't even that good ! The gamedesign was awefull especially in DLC like the new world one where aztec building chain was all over the place. But it HAD gameplay it HAD system that mod could use to make it better.

[@iPoTeNcYy]

​@fabienherry6690 each dlc expansion for medieval 2 was basically a saga title.

[@worlddd7777]

@@fabienherry6690 Medieval 2 technically wasnt great, but in terms of immersion, it was pure perfection

[@fabienherry6690]

@@worlddd7777 Because it tried to create a world and not distract you with a bunch of bar that fill up and drain down xD

[@anonyme4881]

Personnally as kid I was in love with Rome 1 The battle flow is just really insane on rome 1, its way more energetic than other ttw game. The ia didnt aged well thi

[@imaxinsertnounherex]

There are too many issues with the real time battle system and AI in general that make the Warhammer Engine not really that fun to play. These problems carry on to Troy and Pharaoh. The slow loss of features that we have experienced over the course of the franchise is another giant problem.

[@taylorturant8567]

And the word from Legend of TW is WH3 is the basis for the game they're working on right now, as Bellular says probably Med 3. They effed up again!

[@H41030v3rki110ny0u]

for one, how they seem to handle warhammer & physics -collisions, for example- is not meant for historical application.. and it's just wonky in general tbh

[@PadyEos]

This is exactly the point I keep coming back to. CA Sofia has released polished games that are tarnished by the source material they were forced to use by CA management(time settings, general idea, warscape engine). As far as actually developing the game they probably did so on a similar level of polish as Shogun, Medieval 2 and Rome. Certainly miles better than Empire and Rome 2(which again Sofia made better with DLC and patches). I would really love to see what they could do with a better engine, setting and development timeframe.

[@fabienherry6690]

In medieval 2 the issue was resolved by the fact that YEAH AI is dumb but even doing dumb action can still put you in trouble if the result of battle matter more than "do i win ?" . AI is basically using wave tactic but that only work when you can't just regenerate your troop and being led to just autoresolve or cheese everything

[@fabienherry6690]

@@PadyEosI don't know the few thing i saw where mana bar , MORE mana bar , MOAR mana bar. It's not my definition of interesting and engaging system that provide emerging gameplay. Bring back the freaking recruitement cards

[@reqhart]

"everybody loses" This industry in a nutshell honestly.

[@matteste]

Another similar story is how with the newest Sonic game, SEGA tried to cheat around Steams approval process by uploading a different build for review whereas the release version came with both Denuvo DRM and Epic Online Services tacked on, meaning people were never informed of this until after they got the actual game.

[@spongebobfan78]

The one who said that retracted the statement. It was a speculation on their part and it spread like wildfire.

[@GuruFromEHRPG]

If you raise the price Meet the price with the content It's as simple at that Chaos dwarfs and warriors met it for me when shadows of change didn't at all And 3kingdoms was generally great Seriously I loved it. Then they went back and murdered it for no reason because they could not fix the bugs at all Hell the dlc choice for it just baffled me. Why they chose to do the first dlc as 8 princes is just insane But legendoftotalwar makes a good point with say pharaoh and Troy The warhammer engine fucking sucks for total war games without magic You can feel that with how battles in Troy went. It doesn't matter if the campaign itself is good If the battles suck then there is no point to play it.

[@gucciguy3408]

Yea was having fun with Three Kingdoms as my first TW experience then....They somehow managed to butcher the feeling in the game...

[@moonshiry]

What happened to three kingdoms?

[@zarahandrahilde9554]

Respectfully disagree there, flanking and maneuvering on the battlefield never felt more effective and smooth than it did in Troy for my part. It's the same in Pharaoh from what i've played so far. When you successfully maneuvre spear runners around and hammer&anvil the enemy in the back and they start to melt away - feels gud.

[@FriendlyFrienby]

After the promise of 3 kingdoms and how fast they cut support for it, they lost a lot of my trust. Any new historical game has to have a lot of scope and fix a lot of previous title's problems before I will buy another one. The way they have constantly cut features, such as family trees and naval combat, while expecting us to pay more is ridiculous. Older titles should not have greater scope, features and replayability than newer ones. If they can't go bigger, then they need to innovate and provide something unique and rich enough to compete. But whoever is at the top is not giving the devs the time and resources to do either bigger or to innovate.

[@emperoroak7331]

Yeah, only thing I’ll expect from newer TW games is Family tree and Naval battles , but they’re too bored to make that things back again

[@hafirenggayuda]

Oot a bit, I initially thought the 3 kingdom discontinuation is because copyright or backlash. After learning what really happened, I realize CA actually done similar things with their other titles. By the time Pharaoh announced, me and lots other people already skeptical there

[@AavorSkyrender]

Sofia was never going to be the team working on Empire 2 or Med 3....never....they have no impact on those games development at all. This is a side project for a smaller side studio of CA, not a main title and they did a damn good job on it just as they did with Troy and even Thrones in many aspects * for everything I disliked about Thrones they also did something right*

[@tommyfortress7515]

Im still sad they cancelled Three kingdoms so im only hoping for more news about three kingdoms 2 they said they are working on.

[@Pancakespls]

​@@AavorSkyrender I've said this many times myself, but these guys do not care or listen. The community killed TW.

[@fredwin]

We're still talking about Total War because it's just another modern day, almost too big to fail IP. Outside of a couple trend-breaking titles, this entire franchise has been on a tired, sad, downward slope for over a decade. People just keep buying garbage though. If you bought Pharoah after reading anything or watching any trailer, you're part of the problem, and you deserved to lose your hard-earned money.

[@chico9805]

Fortunately, most people had enough sense not to buy this shit. Lowest sale and play numbers in the franchise's history.

[@ThoraeJenkins]

And if you brought it before that, you're a sheep. This includes people who preordered.

[@spiderknight9893]

@@ThoraeJenkinsanyone who buys a product that doesn’t exist yet deserves to get hosed. The whole dlc for sale day one and in the future is just stupid. Buy the product when it’s available.

[@bibby659]

It's too big to fail (almost)...? Have you ever heard about how the bigger they are, the harder they fall? And trust me, when they likely fall in the future, it will be disastrous for everyone involved and had been involved. The difference between years ago and now is "falling" is only a huge opportunity for other companies to pick up the pieces for a bargain... only to then do nothing with it as Microsoft has done with their hundreds of thousands of IP's.

[@Pancakespls]

I'm buying Pharaoh. I love the Saga titles, especially ToB, so there 😒

[@MultiStendhal]

Bellular, thank you for covering this topic. This issue may have come to a head only in the past couple of months, but we've been fighting with CA to change since Rome II. Their modus operandi is to hunker down until things blow over, then act as if nothing has happened. However, we need to force them to say something.

[@AavorSkyrender]

I mean, alot of the things the community throws at them simply aren't true. The games weren't better back in the day, they were just really good games for their time. I find Med II unplayable, even modded, compared to the amazing progress in stability, AI and performance aswell as all of the QoL features we get in the TW games from Thrones and up.

[@edtazrael]

Stop paying them. It's this easy.

[@Meusli]

​@@AavorSkyrender I still play MTW2 with stainless steel mod or LOTR mod. I even play the remastered Rome 1, hands down better than anything released since Shogun.

[@duckheadbob]

​@AavorSkyrender yah a ton of these criticisms sound like they are coming from people that played tw3 for 5 hours upon release and haven't touched it since. The game is not the heaping dumpster fire so many are making it out to be.

[@MultiStendhal]

@@duckheadbob People didn't criticize Warhammer 3 solely because it's a bad game but because of this greedy shift of not only hiking up the prices but also diminishing the content in each DLC. Everyone was rightfully pissed and then comes the nitpicking: Well the changes to sieges wasn't that great after all and so on and so forth. however you have to remember that not everyone agreed to this fantasy shift, a chunk of the player base was left behind and now CA is trying to pick them back up with gameplay mechanics that are not suited for historical games. just the fact that you have immortal god faction leaders in a historical total war breaks my immersion

[@caelin18]

100% convinced pharaoh was a saga. They took away the saga title since it has a stigma of being small and boring. It backfired because they were being greedy for the higher price. Corporate corporate.

[@warhammerguy]

As a huge total war fan and longtime fan of the channel I am really glad to see Belluar cover this 😁👍

[@jg264]

They hit gold with Medical Total War II and i never understood why they couldn't just add too it, touch it up, and call it Medical Total War III. Boom instant hit. They have gone downhill ever since then. Played a little bit of Warhammer just because it was a new world/setting, the units were cool but as far as gameplay mechanics it was still kinda meh. They could a just added better ai, better economy/civ management to TWII and it woulda been great

[@jg264]

In my mind, if u take Medival TWIIs combat system and marry it to Crusader Kings empire management you would have something special. If I'm greedy throw in Stellaris economy. But boom! Peanut butter, meet Chocolate.

[@chico9805]

It's straight laziness and incompetence. They refuse to invest that effort.

[@Speederzzz]

​@@EmilKoldthey probably will, but they'll also fuck up the UI like they did with rome remastered. People hate the new UI so much many are still playing the old version

[@draganescuconstantin2380]

I think the Paradox comparison is the most pertinent. The clear franchise model means you have reboots within the titles which offer the opportunity for innovation, and are the perfect moment for new players to get into the game. You can also clearly end development for a title when its successor comes out. People are willing to pay because they are continuously getting new content, and you have a giant heads-up in what people expect (not that you should only do what people expect but it is valuable info). In Total War everything is quite same-y but chaotic. I got into the franchise with Warhammer 2 and in a relatively short time they release 3. Why would I buy 3 aside from the fact that 2 is no longer getting content? And is this a good reason to buy a game? Instead of doing 3 Warhammer games in 6 years they could have very easily released one with continued DLC development and moved on to another franchise title like "Medieval 3".

[@IsaacSchubert]

TWW3 has simultaneous player turns, making it multiplayer games vastly more tolerable: that said the campaigns in TWW2 are still worth playing

[@jzi1601]

The huge difference is that Paradox very much listens to the community and delivers on it.

[@Choom89]

There are some great improvements in WH3 but I agree that the trilogy didn't need to unfold so fast. I would like to see more time between titles rather than back to back releases.

[@guimaciel7457]

Medieval 2 feels very different from rome because one is based around heavy cavalry and the other is based around infantry, they feel very different to play Troy and pharaoh are both infantry focused and share a similar time period Nobody complains about shogun 2 and fall of the samurai sharing the same engine and region because they play differently, you don't get to use artillery effectively in shogun 2, it's a different experience

[@TheOffkilter]

Yeah but his point thats its basically a updated reskin of Rome is still valid, people were saying that back when it came out and there wasnt even much of a complaint of that since Rome when it came out completely revolutionized TW and brought it to new heights. Ive been playing TW since Med1 and yeah reskins of previous things arent inherently bad if the core product is good. WH1 was a fantastical reskin of Attila even. Sadly thats not been the case with recent historicals and they really need to go back and innovate and fix their core engine and design to fix its flaws and shortcomings but that takes time and Sega doesn't allow CA that kind of time because they are the only studio making them any real money right now.

[@guimaciel7457]

@@TheOffkilter idk what you mean, we seem to be in agreement lol

[@TheOffkilter]

@@guimaciel7457 so I reread the comment and think I misinterpreted it originally when I was just skimming through it sorry

[@guimaciel7457]

Basically he compares med2 to pharaoh in the video as they're both reskins, so I'm making the point that reskins are not bad, but you've got to change the gameplay as well, I did not mind paying full price for fall of the samurai because it gave me a completely different experience from shogun 2 for example, but I feel like troy and pharaoh gameplay are too similar and that it was a bad move for them to attempt this, pharaoh feels like a dlc campaign

[@GothPaoki]

Legend of total war has been talking about ca greed ever since the blood pack dlc and where it would lead.Not a single other creator backed him. Everyone was content sitting back and enjoying free benefits and access CA gave them and acting like legend was crazy. And now we got dlcs being sold as full games and everyone puts surprised Pikachu faces..

[@chico9805]

Yup, everyone wants to act like things are peachy, until they're not.

[@H41030v3rki110ny0u]

access journalism is a powerful bargaining tool

[@timothym9398]

Legend didn't do himself any favors for a while with his brief foray in to edgelord behavior. From a business perspective I wouldn't have wanted any formal partnership with someone who was throwing out slurs and swastikas (even as a joke) as a business partnership. KZbin is an odd business place where content creators have to be genuine, but also understand that they are forming actual business relationships, with all of the normal social and financial risks and responsibilities of any other business relationship. Not saying Legend is a terrible person, I don't think that at all, but I wouldn't hire someone making those decisions until they sorted that behavior shit out for any brick and mortar storefront either.

[@nonononononononononono]

​@@timothym9398Legend did what now?

[@timothym9398]

@@nonononononononononono If I'm remembering correctly it was a thing a fair number of years ago now, kind of in the same time where he was ending all of his videos with "see you later fuckers!" I'd put it well in the category of things long since past as far as today is concerned. That being said I feel it's important to remember that people's actual jobs outside of youtube rely on being careful who they sign on with or not, and lots of youtubers don't seem to have a similar professional ethic on the business side of things.

[@CapitalTeeth]

Pharaoh was dead on arrival since it was announced. The old fans don't want it because it's just a shit TW game. The Warhammer normies left after WH3 to shill for overpriced plastic figures instead of overpriced games. The new fans didn't ask for a $60 DLC of Troy.

[@Vikingskog]

A lot of people are still playing WH3, although the previous DLC which was very overpriced has made many angry its still a very good game. Problem with Pharaoh is that its just a reskin of Troy and its a game nobody asked for. These smaller scope total war games (thrones of brittania, troy, pharaoh) are made by their bulgarian studio and are obviously just a attempt by them to produce games that require less effort to develop. They should really just either close down that studio or have them help working on bigger titles (medieval 3) instead.

[@kam2150]

Divide et Impera dev here, thank you for giving us nice, unexpected shout out in the video!

[@chrisbergman5526]

One of the biggest issues I have is like you've pointed out, we are being asked to pay more for less. Even when they do provide DLC there are usually bugs that are not fixed until months after and instead the modding community has to fix them.

[@Sweenus987]

Would love a Total War game centered around the 1700s to early 1900s

[@ctg4818]

Napoleon Total War exists, its lack luster but it exists

[@cage94123567890]

I think you need to look at CA again if you still have any hope for getting a game in a time period you enjoy that's worth your money.

[@longhornsfreddy8001]

I wish a competitor company would start up against total war

[@Darkflo23]

It was obvious from the moment they announced that Hyenna was cancelled that CA would start engaging in abusive pricing to recoup the loss, between the last TWW3 DLC beeing grossly overpriced, and now this Saga game beeing sold as main serie entry price.

[@HellDuke-]

I remember the first Total War game. I think that is what got me interested in Japan. Might be rose tinted glasses but it feels like some things were so cool that went missing. For example having to send an emisary to the faction leader to do diplomacy. The daimyo room was very cool but nothing similar was ever done again. I still remember the original Shogun: Total War fondly, but I recognize that the remake is indeed better

[@Projolo]

Shogun 2 is peak total war

[@fastermaster5555]

CA in England made Rome 1, then Medieval 2 was made by CA's 2nd studio in Australia (now shut down), I think CA Australia also did the Kingdoms Expansion too, but Med 2 was made as a refinement on Rome 1 while CA in the UK did other games

[@Mcfred37]

I've been a total war fan since my grandpa got me into the series with Rome when I was little, I'll always look forward to the next title, I just hope the last few months have been a wake up call for CA that their fans won't blindly shell out money for less content at an increased price. Just about every mechanic has taken a step back in recent years, the main releases come with less factions and less units, settlement building is a shell of what it was during rome and medieval two. Even as recently as attila settlements were much better than now, infantry combat and cavalry mechanics are in the gutter, and naval battles that were introduced and were hella fun in empire have disappeared. At the risk of this turning into an encyclopedia(another thing that has been cut from recent titles) I'll wrap this up by hoping that CA looks at there past success, fixes there game engine, and take there time to give their fans a reason to support their future titles.

[@nickcraige2660]

One of their worst moves that few talk about is no multiplayer chat anymore and removing it from other games such as Napoleon. Some players prefer multiplayer and they all but killed the multiplayer base

[@Maesterful]

Why is there no MP chat now?

[@nickcraige2660]

@@Maesterful They took it away a few months ago. Not sure about other ones that previously had chats, but Napoleon was removed on purpose. I don't understand why they think multiplayer chat is a bad thing. Sure discord and personal friendships exist, but we shouldn't have to use third-party things to talk to teammates and strangers. Makes it tough to set rules and meet new players

[@Maesterful]

@@DillsyYourDaddy67 Never, lol. That's mad

[@Shadare]

I'd be making empire 2, which will be easier to do, and doesnt rely heavily on the melee system, giving you a whole game to rework melee as you go without it breaking the entire game if its not great for certain patches. Then when it's in a good spot you'll be porting it into medieval 3.

[@friendlyspacedragon7250]

Let's not forget how the Shadows of Change DLC was described as "premium DLC" in the 4.0 update blogpost. Literally the first DLC to have that description and still the same amount of content as the previous DLCs that were sold for 40% of the price. I can only imagine that was the attempt to make it look better for value when the community backlash became apparent. Might as well stick a large Supreme logo on all the large centerpiece monsters and see if any suckers fall for it.

[@andrews.5212]

Calling pharaoh an "historical title" would be like calling rome2 at launch a "good game with barely any issue"

[@Naeron66]

How is it not a historic title? Go on, elucidate.

[@ZiniCel]

From what I understand of the whole Hyenas thing is that, originally, the pitch for the game was way different (this is from second hand if not third hand stories, so take it with a grain of salt), but as live service games were the big thing at the time, the project was greenlit but aimed at being Segas big live service game. Most of the development then went into how to stretch out the game long term and never really getting a result that worked, ultimately killing the project. Bad decisions, no clear goal and a complete shift in what was proposed. As for Total War, I know everyone wants to get Medieval 3 or Warhammer 40k or whatever, but I honestly just want them to take a year where they go back and work fix some of all the issues they've left in their previous titles, and build up the engine and mechanics in such a way that they're better prepared for the future.

[@beepboopbeepp]

Hopefully this shit proves once and for all for CA that just pumping out game after game does not mean good money, i’m tired of these trashy short titles pharao, britannia etc we want fully fledged games not region locked ones in super small areas.

[@jihyotwice3159]

What pisses me the most is whether it's a full fledge game or an expansion / DLC is that it's development is eerily similar to Madden. What has actually improved? You get small improvements, battle enhancements and smarter AI. Different campaign maps, generals, story and what else? Oh, it's Rome history. Then Troy. Then Europe. Then Napoleon. Then Three Kingdoms. Add a few more generals with more storyline and you get more DLC within the main game. Change the UI, campaign location, dynamic trading (my favorite), and battle animations (fire arrows, chariots, camel cavalry, siege engines), etc. You can roll out a new $60 usd game every 3 years. Then add more DLC every month which you can give out as free or in packs.

[@ItsDaKoolaidDude]

You would think looking at the negative reactions towards a lot of games recently would be the indicator of *_"stop trying to follow their examples, you d i n t e d c a n o f o l d m i l k"_*

[@Matt123Chez]

The only way to save Pharaoh is to make a Bronze Age expansion and combine the map to include Troy, which it should have always been.

[@thegroovee]

There is as much variation in the Bronze Age as in later periods. The problem is that Pharaoh is mostly in Egypt. They should have done a broader Bronze Age campaign with the Mycenaeans, the Assyrians, Babylonians, The Sherdans, the Urnfield culture tribes and even the Nordic Bronze Age culture tribes. Then the game would have plenty of variation.

[@KnightBanditDayz]

I think a big problem with companies is that they get too big and overhead comes along with that, it's too much to handle. Huge bonuses, overpaid people, too much staff, some staff dont really do much but make a lot of money. Its from the big wigs being to greedy, stupid, and lazy.

[@mandu6665]

Take this with a grain of salt but supposedly according to an ex-employee, the past few years of CA company culture have been people who leak emails/content announcements/fuck up in some way are the ones to get promoted while the actually talented and passionate people get pushed out. Warhammer 3 plus Immortal Empires (three games combined into one giant map) is an incredibly complicated game and for the most part, the community has been very understanding when things go bad. But, the community is also a little pissed CA has allegedly put one single developer on bug fixes and a small team of roughly 30 people to make content and update the game. Warhammer 3 has the potential of three or four more years of great content and the community has been frothing at the mouth to buy more DLC, when the price is reasonable. CA killed a lot of that goodwill with the latest DLC which more than doubled in price alongside a thinly veiled threat from some corporate suit of low sales means the game won't be supported as long.

[@khurramwadiwalla4922]

I was so excited to play a game set in Bronze age fertaile crescent. I feel that CA from era of TW:Shogun is no more. Now we got CA that lives in past glory like Gondor did.

[@ivan200804]

Man, since 1999, they had town building, 20 unit stacks battling each other. It was awesome and new in 1999 and early 2000, but now they need more grandeur, fresh approach. I'll buy it in a few years for $5 when it goes on sale just because. I personally like Bannerlord battles. Right now it's a supreme battle and empire simulator.

[@Selvalis]

I know you have to condense a lot for these, but i feel its important to point out that three kingdoms was supposed to have more DLC and expansions on par with Rome 2, and they seemingly cancelled it out of the blue after devs had confirmed more was coming. that fed the fears with a statement they put out for the latest warhammer 3 dlc where people took it as a threat to do the same to warhammer if dlc didnt sell well.

[@Naeron66]

If you spend money creating DLC for a game and it doesn't sell well enough then you stop making more DLC. No company wants to lose money. Business 101.

[@qh777]

I've asked for something like pharaoh since Rome II came out. I am disappointed by the geographical size of the campaign map with the game. My wish for the game was at release a campaign map about the geographic range as Rome II and Atilla with Egyptians, Canaanites, Hittites, Assyrians, Mittani, Babylonia, Mycenaeans, Minoans, Libu tribes, etc. The sea peoples would be an event like the Mongols in Medieval II and some dlc ideas would be making them playable as like a horde faction, then a future dlc with Elamites added and maybe Indus valley. My hope is in the future they try a proper bronze age title like I described.

[@Xport9]

So, essentially, Creative Assembly became lazy. That or SEGA just didn't do a quality check.

[@ctg4818]

Both

[@jvoodoochild2755]

“Let’s put on our business suits” This is the issue I have with a lot of content creators; trying to be back seat game executives We have no idea what CA’s 10y plan is. We have no idea how the current engine fits into those plans. We have no idea if Troy was really a separately sold Pharaoh lite, nor if Sophia is tasked with making a Bronze Age trilogy. The only thing I think the community should do is look at their credit card and ask themself “Is the cost of this item worth the value that I think I will gain from its purchase? “ And as far as advice to the community, instead of outrage at a company making decisions that they think will be profitable, we use that energy to improve our lives for ourselves and those around us Thank you for the content, I hope that I’m not just a mark here

[@xathlak]

Been playing Total warhammer since launch of the first game and you can really tell how little they've put into the game since the release of 3. Huge bugs that the community fixes in moments with a mod which takes the developer a year to release a patch for. Some of these bugs literally broke some of the DLC factions which people paid money for. As for prices, it's really obvious that we're footing the bill for the failure that was Hyenas. Why is that on us?

[@Soul7k]

The problem with that new warhammer 3 dlc is they are charging 25 dollars for what was previously 10 with less units. You could argue that you are getting 3 lords instead of 2, but just about everytime a dlc dropped a free lord dropped beside it. The difference is now we don't get the free lord and they charge 2.5x the price

[@babute21]

I'm glad niche total war community is getting some recognition from the wider gaming world

[@Tocroach22]

It’s been really frustrating trying to explain this to my friends from the perspective of a longtime fan. I played the original medieval TW very briefly as a kid and really got into the series with M2. Rome, M2, Empire, Shogun 2, Rome 2, and Attila were all phenomenal. I even really enjoyed Warhammer 1. But it was difficult to get friends who entered the series with WH that the gameplay was radically different from the historical titles, not just because it was a fantasy game but because the experience was so radically different. All the videos and commentary coming out about how far the franchise has fallen is honestly very validating. I felt like I was in “old man yells at cloud” territory

[@zoogie980]

The worst part about this is that the fan base has been asking for specific historical titles such as Medieval 3 and Empire 2 for YEARS. They instead create Pharaoh out of nowhere and since its a complete failure CA will say something like "hey we tried to make a historical title and the playerbase just didnt want it." Its so frustrating as a Total War fan. I dont want CA to fail but they are so out of touch with their fanbase and their products just get worse and worse over the years.

[@Stanehable]

I did not know that Bellular is so passionate about Total War. Thats amazing. Also i really hope they make Medieval 3 as large as Warhammer series..Hopefully with an building art like in old game alongside amazing music like Rome 1 and Med 2

[@TheGreatBookofGrudges]

I have a large stake in Total War as a CA partner. Med 3, Empire 2 and so on will NOT save the franchise. They are requested games and I want them to but unless CA pull a finger out and actually fix issues because it launches it'll be a shitshow on it's own right. CA are launching stuff (not just Warhammer dlcs and patches) which do not work. Games are launching with terrible issues that again should not happen. As much as I want Med 3 both as a creator and as I fan I do not want it if the launches in the same state that EVERY Total War game has been launching since Rome 2.

[@newlife12789]

Honestly a total war Lord Of The Rings could have so much potential!

[@erik_greymane]

A big problem with the Total War: Warhammer series is also that if you want all the races and such, you need to purchase the older games and DLC, and then they release a new warhammer, you need to buy all the dlc there, but the new version has issues the first one didnt have so you then have to wait for them to fix it up to a acceptable state, and when it finally gets good, its starts over with a new version, and then you have to wait again for that to be updated, etc etc.... so yeah, not a good way of doing it.

[@erik_greymane]

Yup 🙃

[@ElvenBubblegum]

​@@DillsyYourDaddy67they but you can buy them for like 5 dollars on some sited or even get them for free if you have prime, so no biggie. New dlcs price tho

[@Aerinndis]

When Total War Warhammer 3 came out, I hoped that they would eventually add my favorite faction, the Lahmian Sisterhood. I so wanted to pit Neferata and Khalida against one another, but I've pretty much given up hope on seeing that one now.

[@elizabethkoenig3157]

Yeah, I've been waiting for that too. Was also looking forward to Nagash, but with shadows of change... I don't think it's going to happen.

[@Aerinndis]

@@elizabethkoenig3157 Its such a shame. Taking on Nagash as Neferata would've been awesome. She has plenty of reasons to want him deader than dead. So does Khalida and the other Tomb Kings.

[@CC-vp1on]

Med II is probably so high because of mods. Third Age, Stainless Steel, etc. are fairly sizable mods with robust communities. If lots of people are genuinely sitting around playing vanilla Med 2, then I would be extremely surprised.

[@SolexFox]

I was hoping Pharoah would at the very least include the Mycanean Greek region as well Assyria as major civilizations, then some of the few minor civs around them. Maybe even further east a little bit to get the Kassite Empire and Elam. Then perhaps the game would feel more like the world of the Bronze Age collapse, instead of half of a game. Barring the other issues people have been mentioning, of course.

[@pud4272]

I started playing these games with Medieval II in 2005 and it remains the peak of my experience with this series. The last title I bought was Thrones of Britannia, I never enjoyed the Warhammer cartoon universe but thats because Im not generally interested in any of that lore, and playing the game felt like a far cry from the experience I had started with and loved, it just felt like a world away already from what I wanted and had been pulled in the direction of Paradox and other city builder games instead. After this much time of a consistent downtrend in attention to detail; I wouldnt even be as excited for a Medieval III release and that kinda sucks as I feel robbed of that as a long time player. I would need a new engine, a real close and honest commitment to fixing the battle AI and I want to see improvements away from railroading the campaign economy/chess game experience down to such a weirdly disembodied and shallow experience

[@ethanwetzel7]

Fans of TW are pissed because we basically funded Hyenas and knew it would fail. All the while we saw little to no improvements to the things that really hold Total War back. AI, Sieges, walls, etc....

[@LukasJampen]

My issue with the saga games and pharao is that they feel like test for specific mechanics. Thrones for example had the food mechanic, troy had disasters etc. Pharao feels very similar with the weather system. And fans of the historical side have felt somewhat neglected 3k was ok but had a lot of mechanics like the generals being combat monsters that were more romanticised than being really historical. Pharao seemed like a return to form and then it is this small in scope with clear chunks of the map missing for future dlc.

[@Naeron66]

I will note that you can play 3K with the generals just being normal generals. Pharoah has disasters, it has multiple resources, it has generals with bodyguards, it has the outpost system. It is a lot more complex gameplay than the WH series which was basically all about gold.

[@LukasJampen]

@@Naeron66 I know that you can turn it on to have normal generals but it is still trying to be romanticized and historical. You may have a point with warhammer 1 but in 2 and 3 every race has unique mechanics and later dlc lords/factions have even more unique mechanics to differentiate them. Clan skryre plays differently than moulder. Not to mention the sheer variety in terms of units, magic or starting locations. And mortal and immortal empires is absolutely massiv. The warhammer games started pretty bare bones but both 2 and 3 built on that foundation. They still have issues but even stand alone they offer more than pharao (at least it feels that way to me).

[@rennyNOTkenny]

Their games have been going backwards for the last few versions. Biggest example is the removal of 1v1 unit dueling animations. Stuff like that to me is sign of corner cutting saving dev time/costs. The DLC spam is a turn away too

[@trolltollz1317]

Rome 2 was so addicting, the pvp was incredible. But crippled by things they could have made so much better

[@zondor8123]

People want either medieval or empire, and out of nowhere it's Egypt.. Like bruh..

[@tropictiger2387]

Total War is such a sad franchise. The series used to have the bones of something great, but never lived up to its promise. The combat simulation just kept getting worse and worse, eventually they turned to gimmicks and spectacle to carry the games. I wish some new studio would step up and put CA out of their misery. If they can make an engine that does a competent simulation of historic combat, they will have a dedicated niche market cornered that will buy there games in perpetuity.

[@mightylink65]

Sounds like another case of "make number go up" but give nothing in return... they're not giving us any increased value for all these price hikes. It always feels like a one-way relationship whenever they do this and sooner or later their fans are going to want a divorce.

[@scottbrinkman9776]

God, I love watching every awesome company that I loved as a kid crumble and die in this age 😅

[@Rob43955]

It’s brutal isn’t it. C&c, Dawn of war these were “too big to fail” too.

[@Ask3lad]

Shogun 2 is one of the games I keep coming back for some Total War action. Honestly very balanced and the Fall of the Shogun DLC is the best CA has offered.

[@ctg4818]

Cannons are crazy OP in Shogun lol

[@marcinzok8972]

@@ctg4818 Artillery is the queen of battlefield according to Napoleon Bonaparte so... .

[@santerisalminen3911]

One issue is that instead of innovating in campaing they have been removing and simplifying systems instead of expanding after rome 1 and medieval 2

[@nicmast982]

My favorite part of Rome total war was being able to view my cities in Birdseye view and time I wanted... would have absolutely loved that in warhammer... such a shame.

[@alexs_toy_barn]

When they make medieval 3, they'll probably just call it 'medieval' and have the next couple games be 2 and 3 and mortal-empires-ify it by combining the games and maps after each new game launch But really what they need is a new engine or at least massive upgrades to melee and cavalry combat and ai

[@Leggey]

I agree and the first one will only cover like half of what Medieval 2 covered with the same shitty war scape engine

[@MRFlackAttack1]

What the community say about CA Sophia is that they are the team that is doing the lions share of innovation for Total War, it’s the direction and priorities set by CA that are the problem.

[@88oscuro]

Yes. Super obvious a talented studio that is getting @$$& by its publisher.

[@Rampaned]

As a huge fan of the channel and a content creator in the TW space I really appreciate you covering this story Bellular. Frustrations have just been building up over the years within this community and I know for myself personally the Pharaoh release and Shadows of Change drama is what finally broke my spirit about any and all trust I had for the corporate entity that is CA. Taking inspiration from your own game studio and the amazing modding community around TW I have even tried to start rallying support for the community to develop our own spiritual successor to Medieval 2. Because if CA is going to continue showcasing just how out of touch they are with the community then I and the current 9 other team members I have been able to gather so far will try to.

[@SelectKiko]

It's a shame that publishers aren't catastrophically burned by these failures like they were when you had to invest in thousands of burned disks and cartrages. They really have no incentive to produce a game that doesn't suck.

[@chemicalmix]

After the total abandonment of Three Kingdoms and the paltry offering of Warhammer 3, I'm not surprised they are facing backlash. CA had the world at its feet and messed it up.

[@NathanCassidy721]

IMO I think what doomed Total War was when Warhammer 2 introduced Immortal Empires. While I do like the idea, it forced players to buy a full-priced game and it’s DLC rather than a cheaper Expansion pack. And because Warhammer fans are like battered housewives, they let them get away with it. And considering there are rumors that they are canceling TW: Babylon due to Pharaoh failing so badly, I think the plan was to do the same thing with Troy, Pharaoh, etc. Force people to buy three games with a free update.

[@gabrielmagnani9118]

I wanted to play WH3 and Pharaoh but its too expensive in Brasil. its the equivalent of 300USD (by purchasig power). I also think they should cover other historical eras, like Victorian/indústrial going from 1800s to 1900s or even a contemporary TW from 1900s to today. They certainly need to listen more to the comunity bc they are just making products nobody are asking for.

[@cmdrgarbage1895]

No it fucking isn't, I just googled it because that seemed hilariously high and it's 300 Brazilian Real, which is about 58 dollars.

[@SuperAstaros]

@@cmdrgarbage1895 The minimum monthly wage in Brazil (8 hours a day, 5 days a week) is 1320 Reais. The minimum wage in the US is about 1200 Dollars monthly (7,25 hour, 8 hours day, 5 days a week). So, using simple math: WH3 costs 22% of the minimum wage in Brazil. Most people here live with a minimum wage or very close to it. WH3 costs 4.8% of the minimum wage in the US (using the 58 dollars as you said). 300USD would be 25% of the minimum wage in the US. As you can see, it's almost 5 times more expensive to buy WH3 in Brazil and the price of the game in Brazil is roughly about 300USD for an american. This is because the purchasing power is way lower, as the OP said.

[@gabrielmagnani9118]

@@cmdrgarbage1895 But the average brazillian salary is it’s equal to around USD 457,38 purchase power means what you can buy, not overall price. It means due to our salary it has the same impact of a 300 usd product on your salary average.

[@DrOktobermensch]

In retrospect, its kinda sad that no historical Total War title ever got to the level of polish and quality that a release version of Medieval 2 got (mods are a whole separate thing). The melee combat, the economy and population stats, even the tiny details like units upgrading in looks as you upgrade their armor and weapons, this kind of flavour really makes a game and even now I am as likely to play that over any modern title. Its also a the problem of the current engine that doesn't really do what you would want it and they have to work with it to make it work for melee combat.

[@Projolo]

Medieval 2 simulated each individual soldier meanwhile from Rome 2 it is simulated as a whole unit with an hp pool and it loses soldier models passing hp thresholds. In medieval 2 you could stunlock soldiers by hitting them repeatedly so a high tier unit could be killed by lower tiers units.

[@drayle71]

The really sad thing for me is a late bronze age collapse game if you scaled it right could be really interesting and feel big at the same time. Have its map be the whole eastern side of the Mediterranean and Anatolia so you would also have the Minoans and Mycenaean from Greece and the Hittite and others that go from Anatolia into the middle east.

[@VLarraechea]

As a very long time fan of Total War (been around since Rome: Total War and Alexander, played all of them), I must say it is a very sad state of affairs where Creative Assembly have landed themselves with the Saga titles, especially Pharaoh just now. Should crack down on Warhammer and Medieval 3, that’s what works the most.

[@teddywoods6463]

Quick note for the Warhammer trilogy, Mortal and Immortal Empires is not free, if you want to enjoy it to the fullest, you need to have bought all three games. However, we were told this well in advance of game 1 launching. Pharoh looks like it was set up to be stapled onto the map of Troy and CA is probably going to try and sell that to us down the road for more money.

[@Woodception]

Immortal Empires is now free if you only got the 3rd installment of the series. You can just play game 3 races, but you have access to the big map.

[@ieatiron]

CA does less and less for every iteration. Decade old bugs remain, prices skyrocket while the amount of content are basically nothing at this point. Their engine is awful. The AI is one of the worst in the industry. This deserves nothing higher than apathy.

[@PitterPatter20]

I'm really happy to see that the community is sticking by Sofia and not throwing them under the bus for this situation. It's clear that they're a great team and it's nice to see them getting praise for their efforts despite the criticisms of their final product. I really hope they don't get axed by an out-of-touch CA C-suite who misreads the situation.

[@garethmartin6522]

The problem with Three Kingdoms was that it didn't scratch the historical itch. This was primarily due to the emphasis on hero units; which does seem to be a big theme in east Asian gaming, so I didn't find it too surprising. But it inherently made things like battlefield tactics much less important, thus defeating the purpose of playing a game with a historical approach. I was and remain totally uninterested in Warhammer; the fact they put out 3 Warhammers in rapid succession while the historical games languished does feel like they have turned their backs on their old fans. That the lure of lots of cash rolling in from the GW fanbase has actually encouraged them to make less sophisticated games, in which hero units and spectacle take precedence over tactical play. There are a whole bunch of unaddressed issues that have plagued the series for a long time, notably the very weak AI. It was simply unsatisfying to win so many battles because the opposing general charged into the midst of your army and got himself killed in the first minute. Siege battles became more common, leading to repetitive experiences. And rather than fix any of these issues, CA seemed interested only in chasing after new players, whether in China or from the Warhammer IP. This perception was already long in the tooth by the time Troy belly-flopped. It had many of the same problems that had already been irking the fans, but OK, it was only a Saga title. Indeed Pharaoh does seem to have taken steps toward resolving some of the concerns, such as rowing back from the hero units. But it just wasn't the game the fans had been waiting and hoping for. Ancient Egypt just doesn't have the same audience appeal, while the fans are frustrated that their repeatedly expressed desire for a new (and fixed) Medieval or Empire has been ignored for so long. So what we are left with is a game that isn't challenging, which has had features trimmed and streamlined, set in a period that few if any actually wanted, coming after a series of insensitive snubs, and charged at increasing prices. It feels exploitative, even insulting. Everyone is scratching their heads as to why CA seem determined to not give the fans what they have volubly said they want. Pharaoh would have had to have been very good for the historical fans to have overcome they suspicion and cynicism they had developed. It would have needed to have had scope, durability and good craftsmanship for the historical players to feel like their desires were being met and that CA was actually trying to serve them.That what they got felt like only half a game, derived from a previous entry that had been met with yawns, does not feel like CA are putting their back into it. The sad truth is the last of these games I truly enjoyed and engaged with was M1 and its expansion, Viking Invasion. I dropped out of the community a long time ago as CA were consistently heading in a direction I disliked. Lots of people are assuming that CA must surely be working on a Medieval 3 right now, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if instead they were doing Warhammer 4, because they expect it to sell regardless.

[@Naeron66]

So switch that aspect of the heroes off.

[@garethmartin6522]

@@Naeron66A thoroughly inadequate response.

[@Naeron66]

@@garethmartin6522 They gave you the ability to make the heroes just unit leaders which removed most of the emphasis. Just like in Troy, they gave you the option to play with the heroes just as a general with a bodyguard and completely remove the mythic units. It is inadequate, and frankly childish, to say that you didn't like an aspect of a game that CA gave you the option to remove.

[@garethmartin6522]

@@Naeron66 They got a bodyguard, but the unit was still way overpowered. The change was cosmetic, not meaningful. The game was still balanced around heroes with an entourage, rather than military tactics.

[@notani3533]

The biggest problem with CA is that they're still using the same old engine they've made for Empire Total War. The engine didn't work well with a mass collision which made 2 in combat not fighting naturally when in contact. For a clear example with the engine, just compare when a unit passes through another unit, especially when the phalanxes engage in combat, or just check the unit pathfinding in a settlement. Another problem that as an old fan would be the diplomacy system, every new installation feels like having less diplomacy since some of the options are no longer there. If you want to see the obvious problem CA has, just check the Three Kingdoms since it's the 'main title' before Warhammer 3 and Pharoh that's not really fantasy or historical since they use the 'Romance' idea. The has many DLCs but most of them are just new starting date where you starts in the same condition no matter the factions you choose; start as a small faction that's at war with another small faction while being surrounded by neutral factions. Come to think about it, that's the same scenario for every Total War: Warhammer 3 factions campaign.

[@VIrtanenish]

"Lots of people still love and play medieval2, thus CA should make medieval3" is a weird logical leap. If CA in it's current state were to make med3, it'd be just another disappointing heap of shit on warscape engine. Something major with CA and/or Sega needs to change if they want to save the franchise.

[@Maethendias]

i think the problem creative assembly... assembled themselves is the fact that they have extremly saturated the market demand for total war games... people just dont care about total war anymore, even die hard core fans already play total war warhammer... imo the saga strategy probably harmed them alot... not just that people got way too many total wars to care anymore, but also that teams which really should have worked on other projects got split to create more market saturation... saturation for an already kinda niche market too like you said, they are selling plattforms, and you can only like, enjoy so many of them at the same time, thats the very nature of sandbox games afterall, they make players STICK to that one game

[@Legather]

Not getting their Alien Isolation team to make System Shock 3 is an incredible missed opportunity.

[@Nayrock]

Yeah Warhammer 3 is by far their best IP and should cherish it and expound upon it. The total war warhammer is pretty much the only game that has expanded upon the beloved warhammer old world IP

[@FluxNoise]

The problem with Warhammer is not really the lack of new content or even DLC pricing. It's the bugs and lack of technical support to keep the game functional at all.

[@Threxwolf]

I find it funny watching to total war Warhammer bros getting mad at prices. Dude welcoming to the club. Have you played the table top 🤣

[@kurrwa]

Table top is physical that you owns warhammer 3 it’s only digital goods you don’t even own the game it’s rented to you😂

[@TsunamiWombat]

most of them have which is why they're angry because they're literally watching Games Workshop strangle the IP all over again via The End Times. Only this time its CA and a digital game they can't even use for other things.