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

Last total war game

RyanLuiRyanLui Registered Users Posts: 200
edited August 2020 in Total War General Chat
Gonna take a break from buying anymore total war games. Troy was a let down mostly because of the battles which wont be fix(easy seige battle and combat). What ever new games comes out likely warhammer 3 isnt very interesting.
Post edited by BillyRuffian on

Comments

  • united84united84 Registered Users Posts: 917
    I quite agree.

    But I think this is expected because grand strategy and RTS games are lacking competition.

    We have to see if Age of Empires 4 actually offers better gameplay in terms of graphics, AI and mechanics.

    Atm, I am actually interested in Black Myth WuKong and might just buy a PS5 for that game. If TWW3 is nothing but chaos warriors themed...it will be an easy pass for me.
  • TheWittyWatermelomTheWittyWatermelom Member Registered Users Posts: 136
    Troy isn't fun for me. Nor was Three Kingdoms. That's 2 historical titles in a row that I haven't liked. In TK all you see on the campaign map are these giant name tags. Cant even see the cities unless zoomed in all the way. I've tried so many times but just cant enjoy it. The armies on the CM feel weird as well the way they move, etc.

    Same goes for Troy. While the cities are better and at least you can see them properly but the whole feel is one of a mobile-ish game. Not a serious TW campaign map. Then you have the one man general unit. What happened to the generals body guard unit? It was fine for Warhammer and fantasy titles. Its not fine for a historical title.

    TW has been one of my most fav games of all time. Its a shame the directions they've decided to take after Warhammer. They just keep adding fantasy stuff in historical titles. Keep the fantasy stuff in fantasy game.

    First they removed road upgrades years ago in Rome 2. That was probably the first thing I wasn't happy with. Its pretty much just been a gradual downhill slide after that. It's taken 7 years but I think I'm finally done with this series. Been a fan since Rome 1. No more unless the next historical title is legit 10/10 and the campaign map is taken seriously again.
  • tadakatsutadakatsu Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 785

    Troy isn't fun for me. Nor was Three Kingdoms. That's 2 historical titles in a row that I haven't liked. In TK all you see on the campaign map are these giant name tags. Cant even see the cities unless zoomed in all the way. I've tried so many times but just cant enjoy it. The armies on the CM feel weird as well the way they move, etc.

    Same goes for Troy. While the cities are better and at least you can see them properly but the whole feel is one of a mobile-ish game. Not a serious TW campaign map. Then you have the one man general unit. What happened to the generals body guard unit? It was fine for Warhammer and fantasy titles. Its not fine for a historical title.

    TW has been one of my most fav games of all time. Its a shame the directions they've decided to take after Warhammer. They just keep adding fantasy stuff in historical titles. Keep the fantasy stuff in fantasy game.

    First they removed road upgrades years ago in Rome 2. That was probably the first thing I wasn't happy with. Its pretty much just been a gradual downhill slide after that. It's taken 7 years but I think I'm finally done with this series. Been a fan since Rome 1. No more unless the next historical title is legit 10/10 and the campaign map is taken seriously again.

    troy isnt a historical title fyi. its based off the illiad and in 3k it had 2 modes as there were 2 versions of the story. so it has romance mode with 1 man gen and records mode with a bodyguard. also i think people complain about small things that get removed too much and totally forget about the major improvements they make in other areas. also if you cant see the city names without zooming in all the way maybe eyes need to be checked?? i can see them just fine. also if you think troy feels like a mobileish game then i dont think you played any mobile game at all.
  • Whiskeyjack_5691Whiskeyjack_5691 Registered Users Posts: 4,159
    edited September 2020
    Personally, Warhammer 3 is a hard-pass for me. After a thousand hours between Warhammer 1 & 2 I think I've had my fill and seen the best the trilogy has to offer. Game 3 with its Edgelord Dwarves, Obese Ogres, and Bargain-Bin Cossacks are like the gratuitous toppings on an already-overstuffed, heart failure-inducing dessert.
  • tadakatsutadakatsu Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 785

    Personally, Warhammer 3 is a hard-pass for me. After a thousand hours between Warhammer 1 & 2 I think I've had my fill and seen the best the trilogy has to offer. Game 3 with its Edgelord Dwarves, Obese Ogres, and Bargain-Bin Cossacks are like the gratuitous toppings on an already-overstuffed, heart failure-inducing dessert.

    i personally disagree for a couple reasons. first is cause it will combine all 3 maps and second like seen with warhammer 2 it will most likely have updates for the older factions.
  • Whiskeyjack_5691Whiskeyjack_5691 Registered Users Posts: 4,159
    tadakatsu said:

    Personally, Warhammer 3 is a hard-pass for me. After a thousand hours between Warhammer 1 & 2 I think I've had my fill and seen the best the trilogy has to offer. Game 3 with its Edgelord Dwarves, Obese Ogres, and Bargain-Bin Cossacks are like the gratuitous toppings on an already-overstuffed, heart failure-inducing dessert.

    i personally disagree for a couple reasons. first is cause it will combine all 3 maps and second like seen with warhammer 2 it will most likely have updates for the older factions.
    Well, you are perfectly free to disagree with my personal preference. 🤷‍♂️
  • TheWittyWatermelomTheWittyWatermelom Member Registered Users Posts: 136
    tadakatsu said:

    Troy isn't fun for me. Nor was Three Kingdoms. That's 2 historical titles in a row that I haven't liked. In TK all you see on the campaign map are these giant name tags. Cant even see the cities unless zoomed in all the way. I've tried so many times but just cant enjoy it. The armies on the CM feel weird as well the way they move, etc.

    Same goes for Troy. While the cities are better and at least you can see them properly but the whole feel is one of a mobile-ish game. Not a serious TW campaign map. Then you have the one man general unit. What happened to the generals body guard unit? It was fine for Warhammer and fantasy titles. Its not fine for a historical title.

    TW has been one of my most fav games of all time. Its a shame the directions they've decided to take after Warhammer. They just keep adding fantasy stuff in historical titles. Keep the fantasy stuff in fantasy game.

    First they removed road upgrades years ago in Rome 2. That was probably the first thing I wasn't happy with. Its pretty much just been a gradual downhill slide after that. It's taken 7 years but I think I'm finally done with this series. Been a fan since Rome 1. No more unless the next historical title is legit 10/10 and the campaign map is taken seriously again.

    troy isnt a historical title fyi. its based off the illiad and in 3k it had 2 modes as there were 2 versions of the story. so it has romance mode with 1 man gen and records mode with a bodyguard. also i think people complain about small things that get removed too much and totally forget about the major improvements they make in other areas. also if you cant see the city names without zooming in all the way maybe eyes need to be checked?? i can see them just fine. also if you think troy feels like a mobileish game then i dont think you played any mobile game at all.
    Firstly, I know what these two games are based on. That's the issue here. Mixing fantasy with history. It ruins the whole experience for me.

    Secondly, I said I cant see the cities themselves. All you see are their giant name tags. Of course I can see their names. Compare that to other total wars and you see what I mean. I believe you need to have your eyes checked so you can read my post properly.

  • tadakatsutadakatsu Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 785

    tadakatsu said:

    Troy isn't fun for me. Nor was Three Kingdoms. That's 2 historical titles in a row that I haven't liked. In TK all you see on the campaign map are these giant name tags. Cant even see the cities unless zoomed in all the way. I've tried so many times but just cant enjoy it. The armies on the CM feel weird as well the way they move, etc.

    Same goes for Troy. While the cities are better and at least you can see them properly but the whole feel is one of a mobile-ish game. Not a serious TW campaign map. Then you have the one man general unit. What happened to the generals body guard unit? It was fine for Warhammer and fantasy titles. Its not fine for a historical title.

    TW has been one of my most fav games of all time. Its a shame the directions they've decided to take after Warhammer. They just keep adding fantasy stuff in historical titles. Keep the fantasy stuff in fantasy game.

    First they removed road upgrades years ago in Rome 2. That was probably the first thing I wasn't happy with. Its pretty much just been a gradual downhill slide after that. It's taken 7 years but I think I'm finally done with this series. Been a fan since Rome 1. No more unless the next historical title is legit 10/10 and the campaign map is taken seriously again.

    troy isnt a historical title fyi. its based off the illiad and in 3k it had 2 modes as there were 2 versions of the story. so it has romance mode with 1 man gen and records mode with a bodyguard. also i think people complain about small things that get removed too much and totally forget about the major improvements they make in other areas. also if you cant see the city names without zooming in all the way maybe eyes need to be checked?? i can see them just fine. also if you think troy feels like a mobileish game then i dont think you played any mobile game at all.
    Firstly, I know what these two games are based on. That's the issue here. Mixing fantasy with history. It ruins the whole experience for me.

    Secondly, I said I cant see the cities themselves. All you see are their giant name tags. Of course I can see their names. Compare that to other total wars and you see what I mean. I believe you need to have your eyes checked so you can read my post properly.

    the way the cities appear on the campaign map isnt new. some older titles had that too. also again i can see the cities just fine on the map the only thing is on the campaign map they all look the same most likely to save money and make the cities look different in the battle.
  • TheWittyWatermelomTheWittyWatermelom Member Registered Users Posts: 136
    tadakatsu said:

    tadakatsu said:

    Troy isn't fun for me. Nor was Three Kingdoms. That's 2 historical titles in a row that I haven't liked. In TK all you see on the campaign map are these giant name tags. Cant even see the cities unless zoomed in all the way. I've tried so many times but just cant enjoy it. The armies on the CM feel weird as well the way they move, etc.

    Same goes for Troy. While the cities are better and at least you can see them properly but the whole feel is one of a mobile-ish game. Not a serious TW campaign map. Then you have the one man general unit. What happened to the generals body guard unit? It was fine for Warhammer and fantasy titles. Its not fine for a historical title.

    TW has been one of my most fav games of all time. Its a shame the directions they've decided to take after Warhammer. They just keep adding fantasy stuff in historical titles. Keep the fantasy stuff in fantasy game.

    First they removed road upgrades years ago in Rome 2. That was probably the first thing I wasn't happy with. Its pretty much just been a gradual downhill slide after that. It's taken 7 years but I think I'm finally done with this series. Been a fan since Rome 1. No more unless the next historical title is legit 10/10 and the campaign map is taken seriously again.

    troy isnt a historical title fyi. its based off the illiad and in 3k it had 2 modes as there were 2 versions of the story. so it has romance mode with 1 man gen and records mode with a bodyguard. also i think people complain about small things that get removed too much and totally forget about the major improvements they make in other areas. also if you cant see the city names without zooming in all the way maybe eyes need to be checked?? i can see them just fine. also if you think troy feels like a mobileish game then i dont think you played any mobile game at all.
    Firstly, I know what these two games are based on. That's the issue here. Mixing fantasy with history. It ruins the whole experience for me.

    Secondly, I said I cant see the cities themselves. All you see are their giant name tags. Of course I can see their names. Compare that to other total wars and you see what I mean. I believe you need to have your eyes checked so you can read my post properly.

    the way the cities appear on the campaign map isnt new. some older titles had that too. also again i can see the cities just fine on the map the only thing is on the campaign map they all look the same most likely to save money and make the cities look different in the battle.

    LOL. Yes it is new. The cities don't exist if you zoom out. No other total War game looks like it. Where the city name is so overpowering and big that the city is hidden behind it unless you zoom in. Its just a stupid game of labels. May as well call it Total War: Name Tags. Because that's all you're attacking and defending. A bunch of labels and tags.

    Of course there are other new additions and features in the game which are commendable I'm sure. I'm not even suggesting that its a bad game in general. Its just bad and unplayable for me personally. That's all.
Sign In or Register to comment.