Will Attila be the last historical TW?

[Hazey]

I'll be very surprised if we never see another historical Total War. Looking forward to Warhammer and what they do with a little more artistic freedom with gameplay mechanics because of the fantasy setting. I'm sure they'll go back to historical at some point though.

[Clone1710]

If I would be them, I'd also step away from historical scenarios when I see how critical the "fanbase" here is, even regarding minor details.

[Påsan]

Im not talking about the Real time battles, im talking about the campaign.


And, considering the campaign, all total war games are a joke compared to Paradox (SPECIALLY CK2 and Victoria 2)

, CA had the balls to make 2 games about the medieval era which has absolutely NO FREAKING THING about feudalism. Cant beat that.

There was crude feudal elements in Med 1. But I agree wholeheartedly about Med 2, but med 2, in today's hostile gaming environment would be called a "just an R1 port" anyway since it used the same mechanics as that game.

Also you did not mention anything abut the campaign in your post, so bit of a fallacy there rectifying yourself after the counter argument. Also I dont agree at all that the Paradox strategy level is the benchmark of what can be defined as "historical" . Stuff like Age of Empires and Empire Earth is "arcadey" as hell but still historical games.



As for the Warhammer game, if it indeed is a full-fledged TW title, as a lifetime TW player I'd exited about all the new gameplay mechanics to play with, as indeed a Warhammer game would require A LOT of new features to even work.

[SPARTAN VI]

I'd bet a kidney that Attila is not the last "historically inspired" TW game we see out of CA.

[Prof]

I'd bet a kidney that Attila is not the last "historically inspired" TW game we see out of CA.

I hope so.

[Wulfburk]

Also you did not mention anything abut the campaign in your post, so bit of a fallacy there rectifying yourself after the counter argument. Also I dont agree at all that the Paradox strategy level is the benchmark of what can be defined as "historical" . Stuff like Age of Empires and Empire Earth is "arcadey" as hell but still historical games.

Yeah sorry i meant solely the campaign, forgot to mention it in my first post.


But i was just merely being picky anyway. AoE and M2TW and etc portray a historical setting yeah, even if they are arcade or not... (and on paradox games, you could argue that for example Victoria 2 aint that historical, since you can make a brazilian annexation of the state of New York against a communist newfoundland who has taken whole of the US.... but you get my point)

[6040610]

Personally I think CA will either make an American Civil War game or a China Warring States game, just based on polls and forums. They're the two most asked for settings besides Medieval 3, which has already been ruled out by CA since they're adverse to third installments or something. A Genghis Khan TW would be pretty close to Medieval 3 though, but it would suffer from the Empire and Rome 2 syndrome of being overly ambitious and failing to deliver. This is all far in the future however as Arena and Warhammer are the current projects. I doubt we'll see another historical TW game for another 3-4 years at the very earliest.

[Wulfburk]

A total war game solely about the american civil war would be quite boring, 2 sides with the exact same characteristics, where is the fun in that?

BUT if they made a game which had several campaigns of the wars of the 1860-1870 years, that would be good...

Like, a ACW campaign, a campaign of the austro-prussian and franco prussian wars, and of the Paraguayan war, and etc...

[6040610]

A total war game solely about the american civil war would be quite boring, 2 sides with the exact same characteristics, where is the fun in that?

BUT if they made a game which had several campaigns of the wars of the 1860-1870 years, that would be good...

Like, a ACW campaign, a campaign of the austro-prussian and franco prussian wars, and of the Paraguayan war, and etc...

I would love to play a civil war multiplayer game similar to the LoL style where each player controls one general/army. Would make a for a great game imo, more so than Arena at least from what I've seen.

[deemarksu]

I m sure Med3 will be released in one day. Because this will make a lot of money to CA.

[Påsan]

I would love to play a civil war multiplayer game similar to the LoL style where each player controls one general/army. Would make a for a great game imo, more so than Arena at least from what I've seen.

LoL: TW

[Dangerman]

At this point they should create a "Super" Historical Total War and have the entire world represented with thousands of settlements, faction types and politics and sell multiple eras (I can think at least 6 or 7 at least and for several thousand settlements in Eurasia and North Africa and another thousand or more in Africa and the Americas at least I wouldn't mind paying full price for an era). Nobody is going to be satisfied at this point and with 64-bit and DirectX12 I hope this is the direction CA will take and up the scale in general (I want to see tens of thousands on a battle rather than the usual 5000-6000, even decentralized European High Middle ages saw battles on a larger scale than that).

Also people calling for a US Civil War game? Honestly that'd be boring as hell, just two factions with very similar roosters (and people complained about Shogun 2's roosters, with two factions on the map I can see it getting boring real quick). That's why I am concerned for a Warhammer TW, possibly enough factions on the grand campaign map (there should be at least a few dozen).

[The Roman Republic]

IF you look back at the series the next one will either be an Alexander: Total War or move on to Medieval 3.

[Påsan]

Yea..they are certainly not going back to the antiquity again, and Med 3 is unlikely.

[Heavy Weapons Guy]

WW1 would be cool

[James the Red]

Looking at this from the perspective of a company, they have to pick settings that the average gamer in the western markets would find interest in. The average gamer would want to play a game about Samurai, or medieval Knights, or Rome. Not the rise of the Persian Empire or Three kingdoms, sorry to say. 'Off the beaten path settings' I see more likely happening for DLCs, so I can imagine that an early medieval age (Dark ages) that involve Charlemagne and the rise of Islam and such happening as a DLC for Atilla TW, but not as a game in itself. Likewise a 'Pike and Shot' 1600s TW game would likely not happen, unless its a DLC for an 'Empire 2', if that ever happens.

They might change the TW formula enough to make a WW1 game.

[HigoChumbo]

Likewise a 'Pike and Shot' 1600s TW game would likely not happen, unless its a DLC for an 'Empire 2', if that ever happens.

Give the anglosaxon public incentives (such as giving emphasis to Henri VIII, Elizabeth I, the English Civil War, Jamestown or even the War of the Roses, if they make it as awesome as to start in the mid 15th century. Or allow an early independence of the United States) and you are set for good.

I think that, despite the lack of mainstream knowledge about the period is in fact an important impediment for the success of this game, the main barrier is the ability to properly implement the complex warfare of the time and make it fun to play.

[petertel123]

Personally I think CA will either make an American Civil War game or a China Warring States game, just based on polls and forums. .

a game with only 2 factions or a game based on a period hardly anyone of their costumer base knows or cares about?

[Generaal Van Heutsz]

I think a good period could be a prequel to Empire starting in 1568 (start of the dutch revolt) up until where Empire ends (or starts), lot's of conquest and discovery and many wars in europe in that period.

I will not buy Warhammer of other fantasy TW but I never got around to playing Shogun2 nor Rome2, so if they make fantasy games it'll give me years to start enjoying games I have owned a long time

[Teutonicus98]

[QUOTE = prithupaul; 14364893] Ich habe irgendwo gelesen, dass CA sind nicht geneigt, um einen dritten Teil für eine der Epochen freizugeben. Dennoch gibt es viele historische Einstellungen noch übrig zu erkunden. Drei Königreiche (oder einen der epischen historischen Kriegen im alten China), Bronzezeit usw. Sie können einfach gehen mehr in die Tiefe in einem kleinen Bereich, wie Nordeuropa in der Wikingerzeit etc. [/ QUOTE] Keine er in die Gemeinschaft verlangen,


f we want a Rome III oder Medieval III in a survey last year. So im sure the next Total War is Medieval III <3