When will the new total war game come out?

[Abriael]

The thing is what I see is you making baseless assumptions according,I don't see why CA would about this lie

Lie? Who ever said it was a lie? Good marketing has nothing to do with lies. It's about making reality sound better. They ARE returning to their roots. They just aren't doing that for the reason you think. You're entirely free to think otherwise, of course.

since it's a perfectly reasonable explanation, they did a remake of Medieval why not make one of their first game?

They did a remake of their first game, because their first game was set in a popular setting that paid off well sales-wise. They did a remake of medieval exactly because of the same reason.
Or maybe you think someone at Sega/CA marketing office takes any commercial decision (besides where to eat dinner) out of nostalgia for the glorious old times?

I don't even think this setting is really that popular quite the opposite , most of the reactions I've seen outside of TWC where of people preferring a new medieval or rome instead of a mostly "obscure" civil war of an asian country, because most of the people aren't even familiar with it.

LOL. Oh my goodness, my belly...

Samurai? Ninja? Katana? I'm not sure what kind of environments you usually prowl, but you sure have a quite elastic idea of the meaning of "obscure".

[Aykis16]

I can see it now...

After they release the inevitable Shogun 2: Expansion, they'll come out with an announcement saying that the next game will be a sequel to one of the most beloved games in the franchise.

All of us will drool as threads form about how Rome 2 is coming out and how awesome it will be, with speculation on the changes.

Then the announcement day comes and...
EMPIRE 2!

[Alexander_Paines]

I can see it now...

After they release the inevitable Shogun 2: Expansion, they'll come out with an announcement saying that the next game will be a sequel to one of the most beloved games in the franchise.

I was expecting you to Spartan Total Warrior. Now THAT would be a kick in the nuts.

[xjlxking]

If anything, Rome 2 comes out next and hopefully, next year!!

[Aykis16]

I was expecting you to Spartan Total Warrior. Now THAT would be a kick in the nuts.

Hahaha I should've said that.

[empr guy]

I don't think they need to drop eye candy (if I said that, that was not what I meant), but I was thinking that you don't know how much it costs to develop a whole new graphics engine (it's not cheap). The one they have right now is fine, it's possible to add on stuff to an engine by the way. They are more likely to heavily modify the current engine if they really want to revamp things, which is what I expect they will do.

well its not going to be cheap to make a game either, but the potential to make profits outweighs the risks. The one they had for Rome/medieval 2 was also fine, but they decided to make a new one. With empire the numerous flaws and shortcomings of the game some probably thought it was a bad idea, now i doubt anyone (perhaps other then those who really wanted mods) would object to the engine.

Also CA really likes to focus on graphics, if they make a fully new game without reusing screens and models then i expect the game would come out in 2013 anyway, at which point this engine will probably not be up to the standard for graphics.

Formations still exist, and all it really takes is for them to apply the right statistic bonuses when you do formations and it would work exactly the way you want it to.

They could simply expand on the formations mechanic and you could have your rotating front lines and phalanx fairly easily.

yes, but it seems so much easier to have units as interactable blocks instead of being isolated and uncapable of interacting with each other instead of giving bonuses and stat changes to make it feel like men in a unit can interact with each other.

The biggest issue I see there is that phalanx never worked properly and flanking them has never produced any major effect. CA needs to find a way to make that work properly (perhaps making phalanx much harder to turn around once it's formed up), but it does not call for a new engine.

im not sure one lone problem would ever call for a new engine, but so many things combined with the time probably do. Flanking phalanx actually has a good effect, since in Rome the sword attack was pretty weak in anything other then elite units, and turning was a bit easy but if fighting anything to its front turning mid combat would give huge moral penaltys.

And the point about involving more than one person in combat is valid, but it's probably not something that can be done very easily. The real thing you need to worry about is the artificial simulation of battles. An example of that is that if a phalanx is flanked, it should get destroyed. Two people stabbing one guy is simply an extra bit of eye candy. You might as well ask for soldiers to have hit boxes and take wounds realistically or something like that.

they say the harder problems are the ones worth solving
Although i would not consider people getting stabed in the back pure eye candy, the effect of being surrounded and getting attacked from all sides is much more noticible and natural then surrounded men having one on one duels with a dozen onlookers then simply giving the surrounded guy really weak stats so he looses his duel.

Personally I love the motion capture and as for the Germans and Gauls itd be great, but I've been thinking maybe it is possible if they can get a group of guys 10 or so for the motion capture and have them do killing animations as a unit ie have multiple spears stabbing in one guy, also if the barbarian unit for example crashes headlong into the legion they can break the men up and the legionaires suffer a huge penalty as if they were flanked! Because the best hope for the barbarians in a headlong crash with the legions was to hit them hard enough that they could fight them individually, thats how they won! most of the victories the Germans had on the Romans were because they broke the legionaires up and defeated them in single combat.

yea, its actually surprisingly acurate for the heroism based warefare of those cultures, although making huge group motion capture animations sounds rather complex. I think that refining the style where men just go about doing whatever until they get attacked so that every hit produces an effect it would work just as well.

by that i mean in rome men would swing their swords, and sometimes the enemy would stumble or something, and sometimes it would kill him. If every hit produced a reaction like a stumble or an animation to show a glancing blow then it would both look very good and be functional.

[adecoy95]

fantasy: total war would be pretty fun too imo, your general could be a hero, it would make fantastic use of the new RPG system. i would love to train up a wizard general and toss fireballs or summon elementals onto the battlefield. you could have all sorts of fun with a system like that. it would be.... WARMASTER: TOTAL WAR, you would have giant eagles, elven chariots, the unit stack merging hoards of the rat people things. unit/battlefield tide turning magic, dwarven anti magics. it would be awesome.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warmaster

but i doubt it would happen, but i can hope cant i?

[Abriael]

fantasy: total war would be pretty fun too imo, your general could be a hero, it would make fantastic use of the new RPG system. i would love to train up a wizard general and toss fireballs or summon elementals onto the battlefield. you could have all sorts of fun with a system like that. it would be.... WARMASTER: TOTAL WAR, you would have giant eagles, elven chariots, the unit stack merging hoards of the rat people things. unit/battlefield tide turning magic, dwarven anti magics. it would be awesome.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warmaster

but i doubt it would happen, but i can hope cant i?

That game already exists. It's called Warhammer: Mark of Chaos.

[adecoy95]

That game already exists. It's called Warhammer: Mark of Chaos.

bah, its just not the same

[Chyeaaaa111]

Read up on your history, buddy. Chariots didn't appear until the Early Dynastic Period in Mesopotamia (3rd millenium BCE), and full fledged cavalry didn't appear until the Iron Age.

What I would like to see would be an ancient Mesopotamia Total War. Perhaps starting with the fall of the Ur III empire (where you see a return to individual city states), ending before the late Bronze Age collapse; say, 2000-1200 BCE. Around the 17th century, things get very very interesting when the Hittites, Kassites, Egyptians, Assyrians and the kingdom of Mitanni form large states and compete with each other. Technology was constantly upgrading, in terms of new chariot technology, composite bows, scale bronze armour, etc. I think that would be a ing sweet game. You could even have Mycenaean Greece in there, as well as the Trojans - and so, the map would stretch from Greece to India. Since it would be starting in 2000 BCE, you'd begin with only a single city state, fighting only with your neighbours, and eventually work your way up to a full fledged kingdom or empire after the initial 300-400 years. You'd have multiple invasions, such as that of the Indo-Aryans into Northern Mesopotamia and India, and the Arameans later on. Tribal affiliations (i.e. having an Amorite king from one tribe or another) would be very important in the political scheme of things. This time period would be absolutely ideal for a Total War game.

All of that sounds soooo sexy

[Blom89]

I would prefer they spent at least 2 years working on the next TW game instead of bum rushing to get a game out every year. There gonna have to build a whole new engine as well.

[Abriael]

bah, its just not the same

Would you mind explaining why? The strategy/tactics structure is pretty much the same. The only difference is that it doesn't have the CA brand on it, which isn't exactly a surefire mark of quality.

[belgolas]

There will be am expansion next year just like they always have done. 2013 I hope to hear Rome 2. If it is Med3 I will ripe my eyes out as that would be the last thing I want to hear. I am so sick of the medieval time period. I mean we already have 2 medieval Total War games. Lets stay away from Medieval till 2017.

My hopes would be for Rome 2, Ancient Greece, Ancient Mesopotamia, Ancient China/Asia. Once they have done all those I think it would be o.k. to go back to Medieval 3 and Shogun 3.

[Abriael]

Read up on your history, buddy. Chariots didn't appear until the Early Dynastic Period in Mesopotamia (3rd millenium BCE), and full fledged cavalry didn't appear until the Iron Age.

What I would like to see would be an ancient Mesopotamia Total War. Perhaps starting with the fall of the Ur III empire (where you see a return to individual city states), ending before the late Bronze Age collapse; say, 2000-1200 BCE. Around the 17th century, things get very very interesting when the Hittites, Kassites, Egyptians, Assyrians and the kingdom of Mitanni form large states and compete with each other. Technology was constantly upgrading, in terms of new chariot technology, composite bows, scale bronze armour, etc. I think that would be a ing sweet game. You could even have Mycenaean Greece in there, as well as the Trojans - and so, the map would stretch from Greece to India. Since it would be starting in 2000 BCE, you'd begin with only a single city state, fighting only with your neighbours, and eventually work your way up to a full fledged kingdom or empire after the initial 300-400 years. You'd have multiple invasions, such as that of the Indo-Aryans into Northern Mesopotamia and India, and the Arameans later on. Tribal affiliations (i.e. having an Amorite king from one tribe or another) would be very important in the political scheme of things. This time period would be absolutely ideal for a Total War game.

I'm sure you, me and the other 500 that would buy it, would be delighted

[belgolas]

I'm sure you, me and the other 500 that would buy it, would be delighted

Lot of people would buy it. Everyone loves ancient Egypt. Building giant pyramids and massive conquest. There are several other games that are in this era that sold well.

I hope the next game in 2013 will be on a new engine. This engine sucks in so many areas especially in sieges. I mean I think the only reason why they chose Shogun 2 is because the sieges were so basic as far as siege weapons go that the engine would work. Rome 2 and Medieval 3 simply can not work on the current engine. We need ladders, siege towers, sappers, battering rams, etc. So far this engine doesn't look like it would support any of those.

Also they need a new engine just for the naval battles as well. If they did Rome 2 they would need to change it so the focus is ramming the enemy's boat to sink it. The current one does not work for ramming. Plus the boarding needs a major overhaul as the only way men get to other boats is doing a super jump. That needs fixing.

Next is phalanx's do not appear to work that well on this engine.

Lastly they need a new engine that will better support mods. Mods sell more copies and also patch the game. I know of some games that have used patch mods for the official game. Plus they extend the life of your game which increases sales and keeps the game selling.

[Abriael]

Lot of people would buy it. Everyone loves ancient Egypt. Building giant pyramids and massive conquest. There are several other games that are in this era that sold well.

Care to name one of those games that sold over a million copies, by the way?

[dieterweber35]

Would you mind explaining why? The strategy/tactics structure is pretty much the same. The only difference is that it doesn't have the CA brand on it, which isn't exactly a surefire mark of quality.

Mark of Chaos was a terrible game. Just terrible.

Also, anything named Total War will sell millions, no matter what age it's set in.

[The Emperor of Down Under]

Total war New Zealand. Would be epic!!!! Map the same size of Japan. Factions Britian, New Zealand, Australia, Maori tribes, Aboriginal tribes, and pacific islands as trade nodes. French, dutch could be emergent factions. Massive fleets total destruction of New Zealand.

New Zealand faction would obviously have a bonus in sheep farming. Hahahah my god this game would be epic.

[SDconqueror]

I'm pretty sure they can use the same engine for a 3 kingdoms: total war (Chinese dynasty).. So I wouldn't be surprised if that came out as a stand alone expansion of Shogun 2 as Napoleon did for ETW the following year. Or a completely new game of it's own considering the 3 kingdoms period is around 200 something AD. After that, I can very much see a new engine developped for a Rome 2.

But I gotta admit.. An Ancient Greece: Total War just as detailed and focused as Shogun 2 ===> Approved!

[Abriael]

Mark of Chaos was a terrible game. Just terrible.

While it wasn't that incredible of a game, the same can be said about any vanilla TW. And there were quite a few elements from which CA could have something to learn.

Also, anything named Total War will sell millions, no matter what age it's set in.

I think you're overstimating by quite a bit the popularity of the franchise. Some developers have done the same mistake before. They weren't happy at the end.