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

Are you interested in the other Total War titles/Current State of the community?

13»

Comments

  • Commissar_GCommissar_G Senior Member Posts: 10,031Registered Users

    People just don't trust CA anymore.


    Heard that near constantly since Empire.

    It hasn't become any more truthful since then.
    Yes it has, it peaks and troughs based on the quality of the content they release at the time.
    Hell no. R2, the title where hordes of forumites swore that this was the end of CA not only continued to become CA's best selling historical title, it even retained enough of a playerbase to get patches and DLC five years later.

    What people proclaim on the web and what buyers actually do is often very incongruent.
    Hell no what? Hell no the community doesn't react to the quality of the titles? Lol.

    R2 sold well in spite of it being a disaster because it had a million pre-orders and CA outright lied in the marketing. The result was every historical title since R2 has flopped. Or are we also going to claim that Attila and ToB are roaring successes? Those games suffered as a direct result of how bad R2 was.

    Warhammer turned that around for CA, but CA in their infinite wisdom decided it was best to not focus on the golden goose.
    "As a sandbox game everyone, without exception, should be able to play the game exactly as they see fit and that means providing the maximum scope possible." - ~UNiOnJaCk~
  • FinishingLastFinishingLast Posts: 4,133Registered Users
    Have to admit here, I bought Rome 2 at release. Played one campaign and never went back.
    Later
  • SiWISiWI Senior Member Posts: 10,204Registered Users
    edited September 2018

    People just don't trust CA anymore.

    -We have DLC on the FLC chart as if that's somehow acceptable.

    you mean the bone giant?
    while surprising I not remember people being actually angry at this (which surprised me).

    -Hidden content in DLC held back for later as if not knowing what you're buying is somehow acceptable.

    While that was silly, to announce the monster beforehand wouldn't have hurt CA, how many people have really taking that much offence on this? It doesn't seem to come up often.
    -Pretending that having to pay for patches with DLC is somehow acceptable.

    Wait what?
    Because CA, to avoid problems like Norsca btw, prefers to bring patches with payed contend the patches are now payed contend?
    -The player-base made to pay full price to beta test Mortal Empires for them is somehow acceptable because they call it FLC even though it comes at the low low cost of two full priced AAA games.

    But both games are completely and for hundreds of hours, playable. And ME empires stacks upon of that.
    -"""Separate teams""" Lord packs that now take 5 months instead of 5 weeks with less unique assets than previously which just so happen to coincide with historical titles being made parallel. The fact your marketing team even keeps saying this is just getting more and more irksome.

    If you want to people that CA has its roughly 500 workers focus on one title at the time, its your right but thats not fact base nor rational.

    While not 100% sure where your 5 months come from, CA has explained that having 2 campaigns maps to integrated new contend means that that progress takes longer.
    Ratling_Guns.gif?t=1554385892
  • MaedrethnirMaedrethnir Senior Member Posts: 5,113Registered Users
    I was interested in 3K. But now I'm not only not interested in it I wish it to fail with all my heart.
    Drowned in stars, bloated we shine.
    ... .... .... --··-- -. --- - . .- .-. ... ·-·-·- --- -. .-.. -.-- -.. .-. . .- -- ... -. --- .-- ·-·-·-

  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Posts: 16,008Registered Users

    I was interested in 3K. But now I'm not only not interested in it I wish it to fail with all my heart.

    Because CA's definitely likely to invest more in Fantasy if a marquee fantasy title fails.
    Game 3 must have variety in its core races. Ogres, Chaos Dwarfs, Kislev, and Demons of Chaos in its full iconic, glorious, undivided glory.
  • ReeksReeks Posts: 1,882Registered Users
    Arsenic said:

    Can only speak for myself here, obviously.

    Much like the fans of Age of Sigmar, I wish fans of historical content well, and have no wish for their franchises to fail, even if they don't interest me.

    Regarding Warhammer 2..there is a general feeling that in order to pump out historical releases, CA has not given the game the support that could reasonably have been expected.

    People were led to believe that lack of support was due to an issue with Norsca, when that turned out to not be the case and this was the planned release schedule, things got ugly. Especially when the DLC that was finally released was rather mediocre and arguably unfinished, with one unit kept back for a month, and it was revealed another long awaited DLC was being kept back until next year, for no discernible reason.

    You could argue that you can go without the DLC, but CA refuses to bugfix except with it, and bugs remaining for five months is just unacceptable.

    Think the Warhammer fans have good reason to be annoyed, although I don't hold with wanting historical titles to fail.

    It´s like you zoned in on my brainwaves here dude, it´s almost spooky.....

    The thing is some people at CA have done terribad since the release of WH2 and i expect it to be the decision makers, while others over there in Horsham have created what could have been a master piece with decent levels of polish and support.

    Instead of being upfront with changes to their release schedules compared to game one they bring forth the information about the change in pace after the fact leaving a lot of the community feel spurned and righteously so in my opinion, because of course we expected the same amount of content dripping toward our needy veins as we got in game one.

    The lack of polish might be my biggest gripe concerning CA, we have had to deal with several game breaking bugs, many immersion breaking bugs and a myriad of graphical bugs and all of it for months on end, many of them are still a issue as we write and that is simply not good enough close to a year after release, they should in my opinion strive to deliver a much more complete and polished product that do not feel like it´s only halfway out of pre-release beta, i am still of the opinion that it would attract more potential costumers if they did so.

    Don´t get me started on the shifty business tendencies they started showing with "Deluxe LP now containing Mystery content" that almost made me puke, there´s a little part of my cold and shriveled heart that "hope" it were a question about them not having the unit done on time and not a prelude of future shenanigans.

    And yes the Bone Giant on the FLC array just made me slow-clap as well nothing more to say about it really.

    I love the game, i love the Total War Warhammer games as i thought i could never love another game series again, they are in many ways some of the best i´ve ever played, but the lack of polish and subsequent lack of bug fixing pulls the game down from "Master piece" to just being "A great" game instead, it´s sad really.
  • dge1dge1 Moderator Arkansas, USAPosts: 18,555Registered Users, Moderators, Knights
    Sorry folks. Have to move this to Chat.
    "The two most common things in the universe are Hydrogen and Stupidity." - Harlan Ellison
    "The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." - Hubert H. Humphrey
    "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
  • KelefaneKelefane Posts: 1,214Registered Users
    edited September 2018
    Honestly, I think 3K flops. TOB flopped and i see no reason why 3K wont flop either. The reason I say this is because CA is quickly getting on a lot of folks **** list because of their patching/DLC policy and how long bugs remain in these games.
    Post edited by BillyRuffian on
  • BrakierBrakier Posts: 1,522Registered Users
    edited September 2018
    warhammer 2 sales is about the same as warhammer 1 sales now. if you check steamspy

  • FinishingLastFinishingLast Posts: 4,133Registered Users
    Brakier said:

    warhammer 2 sales is about the same as warhammer 1 sales now. if you check steamspy

    That's kind of like saying Warhammer 2 outsold Warhammer 1 per the bones I threw against the wall.

    Steamspy has never been very accurate. The public just doesn't have much better metrics since no one releases numbers anymore.
    Later
  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Posts: 8,579Registered Users
    I prefer history.

    Historical games make you familiar and interested in what happened in the past.

    Fantasy games are only for past time.
  • psychoakpsychoak Posts: 2,275Registered Users

    Just trying to understand whats going on! Not blaming anybody here. Not trying to offend anyone here.

    For example I didn't know that Warhammer not only sold well but actively saved their franchise! I thought Shogun was buggy but good not that history titles actively hurt their sales. This is bad news!
    I also didn't know that they made DLC for Rome 2 and Attila. Especially Attila has terrible reviews.
    This whole thing starts making more sense now.

    Also explains why a lot of the screenshots I see are often from Medieval 2 aka very old Total War games.

    I went through all the Steam Charts regarding the games player base and ToB is abysmal!
    Rome 2 has quite a large player base, only 2000 less than Warhammer.
    Attila has around as much as the first Warhammer, so does Shogun.

    DLC for Rome 2, even if its really old makes sense cause it still holds a big player base.
    Attila makes less sense but eh.

    It also seems like the Fantasy Fans are in the majority! In this part of the forum obviously but also player base wise.

    It didn't save the franchise.

    This is just verbal diarrhea with no basis in fact, spouted by people being silly. Even Attila probably made money, and Atilla was a massive failure compared to Rome 2 before it, which, like most of it's predecessors, sold a million plus copies in a matter of months. Warhammer was very successful, but the series in general is.
  • Cronik2kCronik2k Posts: 89Registered Users
    I have absolutely no interest in CA's historical titles since Warhammer came along, the only one I would buy would be medieval 3 with a good crusade expansion.

    I really just wish they would concentrate on making the mortal empires campaign the big epic feature they hyped up and continue with dlc and patches at a reasonable rate.
  • WilderbeastWilderbeast Posts: 1Registered Users
    edited September 2018
    I have played and bought all TW games but Atilla, since the release version of Rome 2 felt incomplete with an AI that wasn´t working. I also played Warhammer tabletop so I got realy happy when TWW was announced and the two TWW games has been a great experience and is to me the best games in the series,

    I did buy ToB which seemed to me like historically authentic and the map was great but to go back to just have men with swords fighting each other with a game engine and animations that is much worse was very disappointing. I loved that most cities had a unique map but since the battles was so boring compared to TWW I could not play it.

    I hope CA puts as much effort in the coming dlc´s as the Tombking dlc which was very good. I just hope they would put more resources to this game so they could release them faster. The eastern part of the map with the big empty forest makes me long for new content so much I can't make my self to play the game anymore.

    I am eagerly waiting for new stuff in preferred order:
    1. Chaos dwarf DLC
    2. Empire big update with new trade and political mechanics, more unique stuff for each part of the empire and a second starting pos (Or preferably like 4 more starting points as elector counts since I love to play the empire.)
    3. Kislev DLC
    4. Dogs of war DLC
    5. Wood elf update (They feel lacking mechanical wise compared to the new races)
    6. Oger kingdoms DLC
    7. Arabya DLC
    8. Third game with chaos invasion and end of the world stuff! but I prefer to have everything else as dlc before that.
  • MaedrethnirMaedrethnir Senior Member Posts: 5,113Registered Users

    I was interested in 3K. But now I'm not only not interested in it I wish it to fail with all my heart.

    Because CA's definitely likely to invest more in Fantasy if a marquee fantasy title fails.
    That's neither here nor there. Satisfaction is everything, far more worth than any franchise in the world.
    Drowned in stars, bloated we shine.
    ... .... .... --··-- -. --- - . .- .-. ... ·-·-·- --- -. .-.. -.-- -.. .-. . .- -- ... -. --- .-- ·-·-·-

  • KyzarkonKyzarkon Posts: 42Registered Users
    edited September 2018
    I'm no elitist couch commander but I'm still intellectually curious.

    Love history and fantasy, couldn't be happier.
  • KronusXKronusX Posts: 1,358Registered Users
    jamreal18 said:

    I prefer history.

    Historical games make you familiar and interested in what happened in the past.

    Fantasy games are only for past time.

    I mean to be fair if you are interested in what happened in the past you are better off picking up a book.
  • MrJadeMrJade Senior Member Lansing, MIPosts: 7,162Registered Users

    MrJade said:

    MrJade said:

    Arsenic said:


    Yeah wow. There's even more salt on reddit than there is here at the moment. I suppose their backlash is just later than ours.

    I'm even seeing Grace's comments being down-voted to oblivion.

    Everyone has their last straw I suppose.

    Oddly mine was something quite small, the release of the Bone Giant as part of the FLC schedule.

    I'd praised CA on this board multiple times for their FLC on that chart being free to everyone, and said it could not possibly be the Bone Giant that was the "sandstorm" unit, as CA doesn't do that, and we should give them credit where it was due.

    Thanks for making me look a naive prat, chaps..
    Even I was hoping to be wrong and that my cynicism was misplaced.

    Speaking of the FLC chart, has it been updated since Bone Giant?
    Why are you still here then? If you think that CA will only ever disappoint you, what's the point of sticking around instead of playing something else?
    Astoundingly, I am in fact playing other things.

    Thanks for caring so much ED.
    I guess those other things aren't as amusing as TW then because you spend a lot of time here hoping to get disappointed.

    I think CA hasn't handled WH2 well, but I keep coming back because I know they can do better.
    A lot. Man, I spend like 10 minutes every other day or less. Generally I get on forums when I can't be playing a game and have a few minutes off at work.

    Again, thanks for looking out for my well being.
    Thrones of Britannia: 69/100
    Warhammer II: 73/100
    Warhammer: 79/100
    Attila: 70/100 [Age of Charlemagne: 72/100]
    Rome II: 49/100
    Shogun II: 93/100 [Fall of the Samurai: 95/100]
    Napoleon: 58/100
    Empire: 53/100
    Medieval II: 90/100 [Kingdoms: 90/100]
    Rome I: 88/100
    Medieval I: 92/100
    Shogun I: 84/100
  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Posts: 8,579Registered Users
    KronusX said:

    jamreal18 said:

    I prefer history.

    Historical games make you familiar and interested in what happened in the past.

    Fantasy games are only for past time.

    I mean to be fair if you are interested in what happened in the past you are better off picking up a book.
    Therefore, to be fair if you are interested in Warhammer you are better off picking up lore books or buying miniatures.
  • KronusXKronusX Posts: 1,358Registered Users
    jamreal18 said:

    KronusX said:

    jamreal18 said:

    I prefer history.

    Historical games make you familiar and interested in what happened in the past.

    Fantasy games are only for past time.

    I mean to be fair if you are interested in what happened in the past you are better off picking up a book.
    Therefore, to be fair if you are interested in Warhammer you are better off picking up lore books or buying miniatures.
    Not necessary. You are assuming I am after the lore. For me the Lore is nice but it is not something that I would value over gameplay. Miniatures also would not be my thing since I am horrible at painting, it is extremely expensive and it is not something I have any particular interest in.

    I played Total War games since Rome Total war, alexander and picked up also Medieval 2 and Shogun 2. Those 3 games I believe defined Creative assembly since I was not interested in the rest. I avoided Rome 2 at launch which was a good thing and picked it at a discount, but I found it insanely boring compared to the original Rome.

    The reason why I play Total War Warhammer is because it combines real time strategy with fantasy which I was always a fan of (used to read the Greek myths and legends when I was younger).

    If someone asked me if I would go back to play another historical game after playing Total Warhammer, the answer is yes, I would go back to play Shogun 2 since I still believe it is a much better game than Rome 2 in every way. I am sorry but you cannot beat samurai fighting each other that can climb walls or the lovely assassination clips (especially when the agent blunders it).
  • Xenos7Xenos7 Posts: 4,930Registered Users
    jamreal18 said:

    I prefer history.

    Historical games make you familiar and interested in what happened in the past.

    Fantasy games are only for past time.

    If you go into an academical discussion about history armed with knowledge gained from Total War you will be laughed at. Historical governance, military tactics and equipment looked nothing like they are in these games.
Sign In or Register to comment.