Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Shogun 3

ShoGunnerrrShoGunnerrr Registered Users Posts: 1
edited August 2020 in Total War General Chat
Shogun 2 is the best total war game till date (imho). And lucky for me and other diehard fans of the shogun series, the recent free give away of shogun 2 really showed a spike in new users playing shogun 2 and remaining to do so, showing it is still a very succesfull and popular game even 7 years after its release. So I really hope this might actualy inspire the producers and developers to make a third installment (fingers crossed). There have been people saying there are not enough new ideas for shogun 3 after shogun 2 wich is ofcourse bs. There are plenty of new ideas that could be implemented. It can use new graphics and a new smooth engine (so not the warhammer 2 one lol) also it could use the newer total war game mechanics of aquiring armor and weapons from your defeaten foes. So you can give and modify your generals with nice and unique armor pieces, weapons, horses etc. Next to having that personal skill tree. Also it could implement the militairy missions of japan into korea and china during the shogun era. or maybe its own invasion by the mongols stuff like that are just things that would easily come to mind. Also a small skill tree for individual units that have reached a certain level of experience would be a great idea. And honestly i could think of a lot of new ideas, and im sure many of the other shogun and total war fans could aswell. The fact is though, that many of us would even buy a third installment double the price even if it just had some updates graphics and general improvements. I am a fan of all the total war games, and the same could be said for a medieval 3, and a rome 3 etc. But Shogun 3 is on top of my wish list. Its where it all started, it deserves the first third installment.
Post edited by BillyRuffian on
«1

Comments

  • tadakatsutadakatsu Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 785
    i agree with wanting a shogun 3 but for me only if they go the route of 3k and have both romance and history mode. cause well having tadakatsu be a one man killing machine is the only way they could do him justice which was also historical too unlike lu bu in 3k who was heavily exaggerated
  • epic_159817030363AS6d3l9epic_159817030363AS6d3l9 Registered Users Posts: 103
    For me its Rome 1 then Medieval 2. That is my personal choice. And its 100% subjective.

    Best potential is Medieval 3 and that is objective.

    Time period, different composition of armies, crusades, religion, diplomacy, map... its just the best. But, if they want to step up, either they need to pump few more TW titles and learn from the mistakes, or to make new engine for this game, which I doubt they will do.

    Diplomacy must be improved and campaign AI, thats first. We will have CK3 in a few days, they should try to get some thing from them. Imagine just to combine CK and TW game for Medieval (which is impossible with this engine ofc), that would be masterpiece.

    Medieval Europe is just the most diversity timeperiod ever and it has the most potential for TW game and will always be. After that its Roman/Greek period.
  • tadakatsutadakatsu Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 785
    edited August 2020

    For me its Rome 1 then Medieval 2. That is my personal choice. And its 100% subjective.

    Best potential is Medieval 3 and that is objective.

    Time period, different composition of armies, crusades, religion, diplomacy, map... its just the best. But, if they want to step up, either they need to pump few more TW titles and learn from the mistakes, or to make new engine for this game, which I doubt they will do.

    Diplomacy must be improved and campaign AI, thats first. We will have CK3 in a few days, they should try to get some thing from them. Imagine just to combine CK and TW game for Medieval (which is impossible with this engine ofc), that would be masterpiece.

    Medieval Europe is just the most diversity timeperiod ever and it has the most potential for TW game and will always be. After that its Roman/Greek period.

    "best potential is medieval 3 and thats objective" sorry but no thats still subjective. medieval total war is not even the most popular title. shogun however i would say has the highest chance at getting a 3rd game of them all based on how successful it was. europe has been done far too many times its time for asia to get more love and justice with its history. also there is still history of japan around the same era yet to tell too but they have already told pretty much everything there is to tell with medieval europe. a 3rd game would be selling a game full price but simply updating graphics or adding features from other titles.
  • BoicoteBoicote Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 799
    The medieval period has not yet a TW game based on the warscape engine, so it's a potential candidate for a remake.
    I would also like to see a TW game about the Renaissance and the Age of Discoveries, and another one about the Thirty Years War (maybe a Saga game?)
  • tadakatsutadakatsu Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 785
    Boicote said:

    The medieval period has not yet a TW game based on the warscape engine, so it's a potential candidate for a remake.
    I would also like to see a TW game about the Renaissance and the Age of Discoveries, and another one about the Thirty Years War (maybe a Saga game?)

    i think the "medieval period" could do with more games but medieval europe doesnt need any more solely for the reason of being on a newer engine. also in terms of scope i think 30 years war would fit the saga scope but ive no idea what they could experiment with anymore cause i know they like experimenting with things in saga titles
  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 10,645
    edited August 2020
    Boicote said:

    The medieval period has not yet a TW game based on the warscape engine, so it's a potential candidate for a remake.

    I don't want M3 on current engine though. I wish it to be made on new game-engine.

    Look at Rome 2, it was made with current engine. But when CA already makes new titles on 64bit engine, I wished Rome 2 is being made with that engine.

    If new game engine runs flawlessly, it's worth the wait. Medieval is a very good era for total war just like Rome 2 and I don't want it to be rushed.

    Let's wait for new engine.

    Just my opinion.
  • tadakatsutadakatsu Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 785
    jamreal18 said:

    Boicote said:

    The medieval period has not yet a TW game based on the warscape engine, so it's a potential candidate for a remake.

    I don't want M3 on current engine though. I wish it to be made on new game-engine.

    Look at Rome 2, it was made with current engine. But when CA already makes new titles on 64bit engine, I wished Rome 2 is being made with that engine.

    If new game engine runs flawlessly, it's worth the wait. Medieval is a very good era for total war just like Rome 2 and I don't want it to be rushed.

    Let's wait for new engine.

    Just my opinion.
    we already got a new engine debut with 3k
  • epic_159817030363AS6d3l9epic_159817030363AS6d3l9 Registered Users Posts: 103
    tadakatsu said:

    For me its Rome 1 then Medieval 2. That is my personal choice. And its 100% subjective.

    Best potential is Medieval 3 and that is objective.

    Time period, different composition of armies, crusades, religion, diplomacy, map... its just the best. But, if they want to step up, either they need to pump few more TW titles and learn from the mistakes, or to make new engine for this game, which I doubt they will do.

    Diplomacy must be improved and campaign AI, thats first. We will have CK3 in a few days, they should try to get some thing from them. Imagine just to combine CK and TW game for Medieval (which is impossible with this engine ofc), that would be masterpiece.

    Medieval Europe is just the most diversity timeperiod ever and it has the most potential for TW game and will always be. After that its Roman/Greek period.

    "best potential is medieval 3 and thats objective" sorry but no thats still subjective. medieval total war is not even the most popular title. shogun however i would say has the highest chance at getting a 3rd game of them all based on how successful it was. europe has been done far too many times its time for asia to get more love and justice with its history. also there is still history of japan around the same era yet to tell too but they have already told pretty much everything there is to tell with medieval europe. a 3rd game would be selling a game full price but simply updating graphics or adding features from other titles.
    medieval total war is not even the most popular title.

    No, most popular is the Troy by the sales lol.

    I have 0 interest to play asian tw games so don't care. I skip when it comes to that and wait for another title. And Medieval is a great potential and they will do it for sure, its just a matter of time. With this engine, probably not yet.
  • epic_159817030363AS6d3l9epic_159817030363AS6d3l9 Registered Users Posts: 103
    jamreal18 said:

    Boicote said:

    The medieval period has not yet a TW game based on the warscape engine, so it's a potential candidate for a remake.

    I don't want M3 on current engine though. I wish it to be made on new game-engine.

    Look at Rome 2, it was made with current engine. But when CA already makes new titles on 64bit engine, I wished Rome 2 is being made with that engine.

    If new game engine runs flawlessly, it's worth the wait. Medieval is a very good era for total war just like Rome 2 and I don't want it to be rushed.

    Let's wait for new engine.

    Just my opinion.
    Same.

    Medieval on this engine would be bad. Wasted opportunity.
  • epic_159817030363AS6d3l9epic_159817030363AS6d3l9 Registered Users Posts: 103
    tadakatsu said:

    jamreal18 said:

    Boicote said:

    The medieval period has not yet a TW game based on the warscape engine, so it's a potential candidate for a remake.

    I don't want M3 on current engine though. I wish it to be made on new game-engine.

    Look at Rome 2, it was made with current engine. But when CA already makes new titles on 64bit engine, I wished Rome 2 is being made with that engine.

    If new game engine runs flawlessly, it's worth the wait. Medieval is a very good era for total war just like Rome 2 and I don't want it to be rushed.

    Let's wait for new engine.

    Just my opinion.
    we already got a new engine debut with 3k
    Not true.

    Game engine is the same as that introduced for TW Empire. There have been a number of updates, imcluding getting it to run with with 64 bit processing.
  • BillyRuffianBillyRuffian Moderator UKRegistered Users, Moderators, Knights Posts: 39,113
    Not a Troy discussion. Moved to General Chat with all the other future games threads.

    "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts - for support rather than illumination." (Andrew Lang)

    |Takeda| Yokota Takatoshi

    Forum Terms and Conditions: - https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/172193/forum-terms-and-conditions#latest

    "We wunt be druv". iot6pc7dn8qs.png
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 13,096
    I'd be happy with another Shogun. However, die to expectations I do believe the map would need to be extended to Korea and China.
    Interested in Sea Elves? Did you just call me a simpleton?

  • tadakatsutadakatsu Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 785
    edited August 2020

    tadakatsu said:

    jamreal18 said:

    Boicote said:

    The medieval period has not yet a TW game based on the warscape engine, so it's a potential candidate for a remake.

    I don't want M3 on current engine though. I wish it to be made on new game-engine.

    Look at Rome 2, it was made with current engine. But when CA already makes new titles on 64bit engine, I wished Rome 2 is being made with that engine.

    If new game engine runs flawlessly, it's worth the wait. Medieval is a very good era for total war just like Rome 2 and I don't want it to be rushed.

    Let's wait for new engine.

    Just my opinion.
    we already got a new engine debut with 3k
    Not true.

    Game engine is the same as that introduced for TW Empire. There have been a number of updates, imcluding getting it to run with with 64 bit processing.
    im 99% certain CA said a while back that 3k was the introduction of a new engine. also to be fair CA a while ago said they wont do the same game 3 times and honestly it makes no sense to make the same game that many times 2 times is enough otherwise they get called greedy just making money of graphical improvements at that point
  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 10,645
    tadakatsu said:

    tadakatsu said:

    jamreal18 said:

    Boicote said:

    The medieval period has not yet a TW game based on the warscape engine, so it's a potential candidate for a remake.

    I don't want M3 on current engine though. I wish it to be made on new game-engine.

    Look at Rome 2, it was made with current engine. But when CA already makes new titles on 64bit engine, I wished Rome 2 is being made with that engine.

    If new game engine runs flawlessly, it's worth the wait. Medieval is a very good era for total war just like Rome 2 and I don't want it to be rushed.

    Let's wait for new engine.

    Just my opinion.
    we already got a new engine debut with 3k
    Not true.

    Game engine is the same as that introduced for TW Empire. There have been a number of updates, imcluding getting it to run with with 64 bit processing.
    im 99% certain CA said a while back that 3k was the introduction of a new engine. also to be fair CA a while ago said they wont do the same game 3 times and honestly it makes no sense to make the same game that many times 2 times is enough otherwise they get called greedy just making money of graphical improvements at that point
    But most people demand Medieval 3
  • CommisarCommisar Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,699
    I'd expect M3 before S3. Been longer since and be a bigger change for the series than redoing Shogun. If it has to be held off to be the "first" third installment then I'd expect it to be a very long time before we see it, a lot of other periods that haven't yet had their first.

    Yeah it's the same base engine, they are more modular these days so they can swap out parts for newer code and so on and gives them longer life and allows development of new mechanics and systems.
  • tadakatsutadakatsu Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 785
    jamreal18 said:

    tadakatsu said:

    tadakatsu said:

    jamreal18 said:

    Boicote said:

    The medieval period has not yet a TW game based on the warscape engine, so it's a potential candidate for a remake.

    I don't want M3 on current engine though. I wish it to be made on new game-engine.

    Look at Rome 2, it was made with current engine. But when CA already makes new titles on 64bit engine, I wished Rome 2 is being made with that engine.

    If new game engine runs flawlessly, it's worth the wait. Medieval is a very good era for total war just like Rome 2 and I don't want it to be rushed.

    Let's wait for new engine.

    Just my opinion.
    we already got a new engine debut with 3k
    Not true.

    Game engine is the same as that introduced for TW Empire. There have been a number of updates, imcluding getting it to run with with 64 bit processing.
    im 99% certain CA said a while back that 3k was the introduction of a new engine. also to be fair CA a while ago said they wont do the same game 3 times and honestly it makes no sense to make the same game that many times 2 times is enough otherwise they get called greedy just making money of graphical improvements at that point
    But most people demand Medieval 3
    most hm no not really the vocal minority has been demanding it. but also to be fair CA said ages ago they wont make the same game 3 times which is precisely what a medieval 3 would be. whereas even a shogun 3 still has much more history they can tell and some key characters they left out in shogun 1 and 2 such as hideyoshi and tadakatsu
  • CommisarCommisar Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,699
    tadakatsu said:

    most hm no not really the vocal minority has been demanding it. but also to be fair CA said ages ago they wont make the same game 3 times which is precisely what a medieval 3 would be. whereas even a shogun 3 still has much more history they can tell and some key characters they left out in shogun 1 and 2 such as hideyoshi and tadakatsu

    That is still currently the best evidence for what the community wants to see for the next game. It's not a reliable source but best we have. I can't recall ever seeing or hearing of CA do a community poll on their next setting, so not sure how they do go about choosing it.

    They haven't, they said they were unlikely to do any third iteration of any setting as they had many other periods to choose from but that was many years ago. There's tons more history in Medieval Europe that they haven't covered than Shogun.
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 13,096
    Commisar said:

    tadakatsu said:

    most hm no not really the vocal minority has been demanding it. but also to be fair CA said ages ago they wont make the same game 3 times which is precisely what a medieval 3 would be. whereas even a shogun 3 still has much more history they can tell and some key characters they left out in shogun 1 and 2 such as hideyoshi and tadakatsu

    That is still currently the best evidence for what the community wants to see for the next game. It's not a reliable source but best we have. I can't recall ever seeing or hearing of CA do a community poll on their next setting, so not sure how they do go about choosing it.

    They haven't, they said they were unlikely to do any third iteration of any setting as they had many other periods to choose from but that was many years ago. There's tons more history in Medieval Europe that they haven't covered than Shogun.
    I believe CA make a decision closer to the time.. it's based on what's happening in the world, what they feel motivated to do and what they can do.

    I do remember them saying they don't have plans to do a 3rd repeat so with this in mind.. I'm hoping for Victoria or the Bronze Age.
    Interested in Sea Elves? Did you just call me a simpleton?

  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 10,645
    edited August 2020
    Bronze Age playable factions:

    *Egypt
    *Mycenae
    *Assyria
    *Hittites
    *Mittani
    *Babylon
    *Sumerian
    *Akkadian
    *Sea People

    Medieval 3 Playable Factions:

    *England
    *France
    *Scotland
    *Holy Roman Empire
    *Portugal
    *Byzantine
    *Hungary
    *Poland
    *Egypt
    *Etc...


    Way better than Shogun 3. Totally diverse factions.
    Post edited by jamreal18 on
  • tadakatsutadakatsu Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 785
    jamreal18 said:

    Bronze Age playable factions:

    *Egypt
    *Mycenae
    *Assyria
    *Hittites
    *Mittani
    *Babylon
    *Sumerian
    *Akkadian
    *Sea People

    Way better than Shogun 3. Totally diverse factions.

    diversity doesnt mean good fyi. there is a reason why shogun 2 was extremely successful and well it wasnt cause of diversity it was simply put for being a great game. they could have however had japan invade china in an expansion since leyasu tokugawa was shogun when japan invaded china or had the mongol invasion etc there is alot more they could have done with that era that they chose not to do.
  • CommisarCommisar Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,699


    I believe CA make a decision closer to the time.. it's based on what's happening in the world, what they feel motivated to do and what they can do.

    I do remember them saying they don't have plans to do a 3rd repeat so with this in mind.. I'm hoping for Victoria or the Bronze Age.

    I'm not sure it does, so far all the recent releases haven't had any direct tie ins to the goings on in the real world and the time it takes to develop a game is multiple years.
    tadakatsu said:

    diversity doesnt mean good fyi. there is a reason why shogun 2 was extremely successful and well it wasnt cause of diversity it was simply put for being a great game. they could have however had japan invade china in an expansion since leyasu tokugawa was shogun when japan invaded china or had the mongol invasion etc there is alot more they could have done with that era that they chose not to do.

    Diversity is often a complaint in the game series, a lot of vocal people want things to look different. Even if they have the same role, similar stats and play the same - it's all about the look for many. It also opens up the option of doing more things as having more locations means there's more historical events to choose from.

    They've done the Mongol invasion. Shogun 1 had it.
  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 10,645
    edited August 2020
    Commisar said:


    They've done the Mongol invasion. Shogun 1 had it.

    Mongols shall have their own game.

    Factions:

    *Borjigin clan
    *Merkit clan
    *Kara-Khitai Khanate
    *Xia Empire
    *Song Empire
    *Jin Empire
    *Goryeo Kingdom
    *Khwarazmian Empire*
    *Kamakura Shogunate
    *Delhi Sultanate
    *Kievan Rus
    *Volga Bulgaria*
    *Abbasid Caliphate
    *Byzantine Empire
    *Sultanate of Rum
    *Kingdom of Georgia
    *Kingdom of Hungary
    *Kingdom of Poland

    Regards to Matt Jeans
    Post edited by jamreal18 on
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 13,096
    Commisar said:


    I believe CA make a decision closer to the time.. it's based on what's happening in the world, what they feel motivated to do and what they can do.

    I do remember them saying they don't have plans to do a 3rd repeat so with this in mind.. I'm hoping for Victoria or the Bronze Age.

    I'm not sure it does, so far all the recent releases haven't had any direct tie ins to the goings on in the real world and the time it takes to develop a game is multiple years.
    tadakatsu said:

    diversity doesnt mean good fyi. there is a reason why shogun 2 was extremely successful and well it wasnt cause of diversity it was simply put for being a great game. they could have however had japan invade china in an expansion since leyasu tokugawa was shogun when japan invaded china or had the mongol invasion etc there is alot more they could have done with that era that they chose not to do.

    Diversity is often a complaint in the game series, a lot of vocal people want things to look different. Even if they have the same role, similar stats and play the same - it's all about the look for many. It also opens up the option of doing more things as having more locations means there's more historical events to choose from.

    They've done the Mongol invasion. Shogun 1 had it.
    TBF I'm going off what they said in their interview on how they select new games. Some sort of tie in is just another reason to do a game. If there's a major tie in opportunity they react to it; if something becomes available they take it; if the team come up with great ideas - they give with it.
    Interested in Sea Elves? Did you just call me a simpleton?

  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 13,096
    tadakatsu said:

    jamreal18 said:

    Bronze Age playable factions:

    *Egypt
    *Mycenae
    *Assyria
    *Hittites
    *Mittani
    *Babylon
    *Sumerian
    *Akkadian
    *Sea People

    Way better than Shogun 3. Totally diverse factions.

    diversity doesnt mean good fyi. there is a reason why shogun 2 was extremely successful and well it wasnt cause of diversity it was simply put for being a great game. they could have however had japan invade china in an expansion since leyasu tokugawa was shogun when japan invaded china or had the mongol invasion etc there is alot more they could have done with that era that they chose not to do.
    There is a reason why Empire and Shogun 2's sales weren't that far apart and also why concurrent players on Shogun 2 is pretty much dead, compare that R2 who beat both games absolutely and is still played today.

    Diversity of units is now an obvious issue, especially thanks to the introduction of fantasy.
    Interested in Sea Elves? Did you just call me a simpleton?

  • tadakatsutadakatsu Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 785

    tadakatsu said:

    jamreal18 said:

    Bronze Age playable factions:

    *Egypt
    *Mycenae
    *Assyria
    *Hittites
    *Mittani
    *Babylon
    *Sumerian
    *Akkadian
    *Sea People

    Way better than Shogun 3. Totally diverse factions.

    diversity doesnt mean good fyi. there is a reason why shogun 2 was extremely successful and well it wasnt cause of diversity it was simply put for being a great game. they could have however had japan invade china in an expansion since leyasu tokugawa was shogun when japan invaded china or had the mongol invasion etc there is alot more they could have done with that era that they chose not to do.
    There is a reason why Empire and Shogun 2's sales weren't that far apart and also why concurrent players on Shogun 2 is pretty much dead, compare that R2 who beat both games absolutely and is still played today.

    Diversity of units is now an obvious issue, especially thanks to the introduction of fantasy.
    um shogun 2 sales where much higher than empire..... also shogun 2 concurrent players are higher than every total war game except warhammer and rome 2 so its far from dead. its a miracle rome 2 isnt dead cause of how awful the launch was. but as i said before diversity never means the game will automaticaly be good
  • CommisarCommisar Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,699
    jamreal18 said:

    Mongols shall have their own game.

    Different thing to what was being discussed. Shogun 1 had an expansion covering the Mongol invasion of Japan which was requested for Shogun 3.
    tadakatsu said:

    um shogun 2 sales where much higher than empire..... also shogun 2 concurrent players are higher than every total war game except warhammer and rome 2 so its far from dead. its a miracle rome 2 isnt dead cause of how awful the launch was. but as i said before diversity never means the game will automaticaly be good

    Stats put each main release gaining more players than the last.

    And yet Rome 2 is more popular than Shogun 2. Diversity is a good reason for it.

    While diversity doesn't mean it will be good, it does mean a more positive reaction. The issues that game can have is the same issues a game with low diversity can have, just now without the benefit of the diversity. The more diverse the game can be the better for the community and keeping players.
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 13,096
    tadakatsu said:

    tadakatsu said:

    jamreal18 said:

    Bronze Age playable factions:

    *Egypt
    *Mycenae
    *Assyria
    *Hittites
    *Mittani
    *Babylon
    *Sumerian
    *Akkadian
    *Sea People

    Way better than Shogun 3. Totally diverse factions.

    diversity doesnt mean good fyi. there is a reason why shogun 2 was extremely successful and well it wasnt cause of diversity it was simply put for being a great game. they could have however had japan invade china in an expansion since leyasu tokugawa was shogun when japan invaded china or had the mongol invasion etc there is alot more they could have done with that era that they chose not to do.
    There is a reason why Empire and Shogun 2's sales weren't that far apart and also why concurrent players on Shogun 2 is pretty much dead, compare that R2 who beat both games absolutely and is still played today.

    Diversity of units is now an obvious issue, especially thanks to the introduction of fantasy.
    um shogun 2 sales where much higher than empire..... also shogun 2 concurrent players are higher than every total war game except warhammer and rome 2 so its far from dead. its a miracle rome 2 isnt dead cause of how awful the launch was. but as i said before diversity never means the game will automaticaly be good
    They weren’t actually. 2011 sales were 600,000 for S2 while it was 800,000 for Empire over a few extra months.

    Diversity doesn’t mean it’s automatically good, but all things equal, it’s an issue. R2 had a poor launch but got over it, however, people enjoy playing thanks to the diversity of the game.

    It’s basic logic, if more factions play differently then a player has more options and has more reasons to play.

    Interested in Sea Elves? Did you just call me a simpleton?

  • tadakatsutadakatsu Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 785

    tadakatsu said:

    tadakatsu said:

    jamreal18 said:

    Bronze Age playable factions:

    *Egypt
    *Mycenae
    *Assyria
    *Hittites
    *Mittani
    *Babylon
    *Sumerian
    *Akkadian
    *Sea People

    Way better than Shogun 3. Totally diverse factions.

    diversity doesnt mean good fyi. there is a reason why shogun 2 was extremely successful and well it wasnt cause of diversity it was simply put for being a great game. they could have however had japan invade china in an expansion since leyasu tokugawa was shogun when japan invaded china or had the mongol invasion etc there is alot more they could have done with that era that they chose not to do.
    There is a reason why Empire and Shogun 2's sales weren't that far apart and also why concurrent players on Shogun 2 is pretty much dead, compare that R2 who beat both games absolutely and is still played today.

    Diversity of units is now an obvious issue, especially thanks to the introduction of fantasy.
    um shogun 2 sales where much higher than empire..... also shogun 2 concurrent players are higher than every total war game except warhammer and rome 2 so its far from dead. its a miracle rome 2 isnt dead cause of how awful the launch was. but as i said before diversity never means the game will automaticaly be good
    They weren’t actually. 2011 sales were 600,000 for S2 while it was 800,000 for Empire over a few extra months.

    Diversity doesn’t mean it’s automatically good, but all things equal, it’s an issue. R2 had a poor launch but got over it, however, people enjoy playing thanks to the diversity of the game.

    It’s basic logic, if more factions play differently then a player has more options and has more reasons to play.

    fyi rome 2 doesnt have nearly as much diversity as it should. many of the playable factions used nearly copy/paste units with only a couple unique units. so even if rome 2 had multiple factions per culture each faction only had 2-3 unique units in many cases. besides in rome 2 case all sword infantry played the same and all spear infantry played the same etc. so again i say diversity doesnt mean good. even with 3k "lack of diversity" its the top selling total war game of all time
  • CommisarCommisar Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,699
    tadakatsu said:

    fyi rome 2 doesnt have nearly as much diversity as it should. many of the playable factions used nearly copy/paste units with only a couple unique units. so even if rome 2 had multiple factions per culture each faction only had 2-3 unique units in many cases. besides in rome 2 case all sword infantry played the same and all spear infantry played the same etc. so again i say diversity doesnt mean good. even with 3k "lack of diversity" its the top selling total war game of all time

    lol yeah a lot of us have pointed that out in past discussions where Rome 2 is held up for diversity. As I said it just needs to look diverse. They can play the same but that's fine for many, they want it to look different it seems.

    It is the top selling but not the most played. I checked earlier (Steam stats sees to be having a slight issue and 3K isn't listed atm) when WH2 had more than double the active players as 3K and R2 had a third less. Numbers were like 25k for WH2, 12K for 3 kingdoms and 8K for R2.
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 13,096
    tadakatsu said:

    tadakatsu said:

    tadakatsu said:

    jamreal18 said:

    Bronze Age playable factions:

    *Egypt
    *Mycenae
    *Assyria
    *Hittites
    *Mittani
    *Babylon
    *Sumerian
    *Akkadian
    *Sea People

    Way better than Shogun 3. Totally diverse factions.

    diversity doesnt mean good fyi. there is a reason why shogun 2 was extremely successful and well it wasnt cause of diversity it was simply put for being a great game. they could have however had japan invade china in an expansion since leyasu tokugawa was shogun when japan invaded china or had the mongol invasion etc there is alot more they could have done with that era that they chose not to do.
    There is a reason why Empire and Shogun 2's sales weren't that far apart and also why concurrent players on Shogun 2 is pretty much dead, compare that R2 who beat both games absolutely and is still played today.

    Diversity of units is now an obvious issue, especially thanks to the introduction of fantasy.
    um shogun 2 sales where much higher than empire..... also shogun 2 concurrent players are higher than every total war game except warhammer and rome 2 so its far from dead. its a miracle rome 2 isnt dead cause of how awful the launch was. but as i said before diversity never means the game will automaticaly be good
    They weren’t actually. 2011 sales were 600,000 for S2 while it was 800,000 for Empire over a few extra months.

    Diversity doesn’t mean it’s automatically good, but all things equal, it’s an issue. R2 had a poor launch but got over it, however, people enjoy playing thanks to the diversity of the game.

    It’s basic logic, if more factions play differently then a player has more options and has more reasons to play.

    fyi rome 2 doesnt have nearly as much diversity as it should. many of the playable factions used nearly copy/paste units with only a couple unique units. so even if rome 2 had multiple factions per culture each faction only had 2-3 unique units in many cases. besides in rome 2 case all sword infantry played the same and all spear infantry played the same etc. so again i say diversity doesnt mean good. even with 3k "lack of diversity" its the top selling total war game of all time
    However, it doesn’t exist in abstract and if you compare it to Empire, Shogun, 3K etc. It’s better and that’s what counts.

    There are factions that play totally differently to other factions.. not the case for the above games which have mild differences.
    Interested in Sea Elves? Did you just call me a simpleton?

Sign In or Register to comment.