New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

[Eien]

Not sure why when any new TW games come out there will always be a group that will scream to the world that "I'M NOT BUYING THIS GAME! CA IS DEAD TO ME!" As if there is a compulsive need to let the world know you are not buying a game.

CA's main motive is to always make money, and not pander to the wants of a minority hardcore historical group. TW was never historically accurate to begin with. The beauty of a free market is if CA is not producing a game you want, go buy something else. No one is pointing a gun at you to buy TW:3K.

[thesmoosh]

how any of you could by this is beyond me, you are just bored, you are not interested in a quality historical strategy game.

-60 usd$

Can you name some? I'm serious.

I don't have a big beef with CA but if there's someone doing better work I'd love to know (please don't say field of glory).

[Huberto]

Can you name some? I'm serious.

I don't have a big beef with CA but if there's someone doing better work I'd love to know (please don't say field of glory).

Or Alea Jacta Est. I agree with Steve Hoos though, if CA is going to ignore and disrespect Chinese history by making 3K a Romance game, they need to allow us to mod the game and remove the fantasy stuff or provide a ‘hardcore’ edition that removes it. Lord Oda Nobunaga points out there are other potential issues with TW:3K, based on CA’s track record in recent game design. We just have to hope the design team care enough about China to push back on those who want a martial arts and magic epic.

[Theramines]

Total War already has magic: agents, who can plunge entire armies into such existential despair that they cannot move for months, even years, at a time.

[thesmoosh]

To be honest I care far more about the engine, combat mechanics and the strategy aspects of the game than whether or not they romanticize history a bit (news flash, most history is already distorted and romanticized). I want tactical battles not giant p blobfests, brutal slugfests not yet another heroic hammer+anvil victory...

I want raiding armies serving as distractions while a main force carries a night attack on a key undefended stronghold. I want economic / commercial warfare of consequence and starvation tactics meant to incite revolt in the populace.

I want an AI that actually learns, instead of falling for the same stupid crap for the 50th time. It's 2018 ffs, this should be standard.

If my general wants to wear a pointy hat and fly around on a broomstick while executing brilliant tactical maneuvers I could care less. As long as units have mass, the engine understands inertia, and unit and army morale resemble anything remotely similar to actual warfare I'll be happy.

Fantasy and realism are not mutually exclusive. The battles in Lord of the Rings movies were plenty realistic for example (ghost army excluded) whereas most of fights in Rome 2 vanilla are downright silly.

[SinisterOmen]

what do you mean they don't connect? could you give a screen shot of it? I have never seen/experienced this problem.

I probably explained myself poorly, English is not my first language. I meant they don't "connect" physically, like they do in previous titles, that's why there're no kill animations apart from special cases like monstrous units grabbing models or hero/lord units.
The models wave their weapons in the air and the enemy models start taking damage, some times there's a pretty noticeable "gap" between 2 models, so it looks a bit odd.

I mean, the combat difference is pretty noticeable if you compare Warhammer with, say, Attila. I'm not super good at explaining it, that's why I was talking about the old "duel" combat system between units and the new Warhammer system.

[craziii]

I probably explained myself poorly, English is not my first language. I meant they don't "connect" physically, like they do in previous titles, that's why there're no kill animations apart from special cases like monstrous units grabbing models or hero/lord units.
The models wave their weapons in the air and the enemy models start taking damage, some times there's a pretty noticeable "gap" between 2 models, so it looks a bit odd.

I mean, the combat difference is pretty noticeable if you compare Warhammer with, say, Attila. I'm not super good at explaining it, that's why I was talking about the old "duel" combat system between units and the new Warhammer system.

if you mean 2 soldiers from 2 units locked into private 1v1, that is what we called matched combat. first showed up in shogun II. everyone hated it. it also killed running down routing units as each one will do match combat. this has been solved in warhammer though. we only get this when generals or 1 unit monsters fight each other.

about some attacks not connecting, I don't think it can ever be solved. especially given the different models and sizes in warhammer. the big ones will always connect, but the smaller ones looked like they are hitting air(small humanoid size models trying to hit those big monster types). I am not sure how ca can solve this.

think of this problem as those items you equip on your character in rpgs but they clip through armor, same type of problem. this is purely my opinion, no evidence to back this up.

[Eien]

Or Alea Jacta Est. I agree with Steve Hoos though, if CA is going to ignore and disrespect Chinese history by making 3K a Romance game, they need to allow us to mod the game and remove the fantasy stuff or provide a ‘hardcore’ edition that removes it. Lord Oda Nobunaga points out there are other potential issues with TW:3K, based on CA’s track record in recent game design. We just have to hope the design team care enough about China to push back on those who want a martial arts and magic epic.

How is making TW:3K based on RoTK is even remotely disrespectful to Chinese history? RoTK is so ingrained in our culture that it's pretty much part of history, embellished to hell it may be.

[Intranetusa]

How is making TW:3K based on RoTK is even remotely disrespectful to Chinese history? RoTK is no ingrain in our culture that it's pretty much part of history, embellished to hell it may be.

ROTK is a lot of folklore mixed in with history. This 3K TW claims to be a main historical game as a part of the historical series. If it claims to be historical, then it should keep the folklore to a minimum.

Claiming folklore is history may not be disrespectful, but it certainly is misleading and inaccurate.

[katsusand]

To be honest I care far more about the engine, combat mechanics and the strategy aspects of the game than whether or not they romanticize history a bit (news flash, most history is already distorted and romanticized). I want tactical battles not giant p blobfests, brutal slugfests not yet another heroic hammer+anvil victory...

I want raiding armies serving as distractions while a main force carries a night attack on a key undefended stronghold. I want economic / commercial warfare of consequence and starvation tactics meant to incite revolt in the populace.

I want an AI that actually learns, instead of falling for the same stupid crap for the 50th time. It's 2018 ffs, this should be standard.

If my general wants to wear a pointy hat and fly around on a broomstick while executing brilliant tactical maneuvers I could care less. As long as units have mass, the engine understands inertia, and unit and army morale resemble anything remotely similar to actual warfare I'll be happy.

Fantasy and realism are not mutually exclusive. The battles in Lord of the Rings movies were plenty realistic for example (ghost army excluded) whereas most of fights in Rome 2 vanilla are downright silly.

This is a good post, and I agree.
The most important thing right now is how they improved the battle engine and overall tactical play, if it's just Attila with more focus on cooldown abilities them I'm jumping off the hype train.

If the actual gameplay is realistic, that's all that matters. People who want historical accuracy can mod out the fictional elements.

[Theramines]

To be honest I care far more about the engine, combat mechanics and the strategy aspects of the game than whether or not they romanticize history a bit (news flash, most history is already distorted and romanticized). I want tactical battles not giant p blobfests, brutal slugfests not yet another heroic hammer+anvil victory...

I want raiding armies serving as distractions while a main force carries a night attack on a key undefended stronghold. I want economic / commercial warfare of consequence and starvation tactics meant to incite revolt in the populac

The most important thing right now is how they improved the battle engine and overall tactical play, if it's just Attila with more focus on cooldown abilities them I'm jumping off the hype train.

If the actual gameplay is realistic, that's all that matters. People who want historical accuracy can mod out the fictional elements.

That's the gist of the problem, isn't it? Current games are limited in that there is very little variation in gameplay. Every campaign and battle more or less pans out like the previous. There is such little variety. For example it's pointless waging a war of attrition against the AI because the economic systems of Rome2 and Attila are designed to prop up the AI so that it provides some semblance of a challenge ('other income'). I still play Attila, but that's because I'm building and testing my own mods for fun. There's no way I'd touch vanilla again because I'd been there done that after 2 or 3 campaigns.

I don't hold out much hope, if any, for depth in 3ks, judging by the trailer and its Warhammer vibe, but I have a small hope, a tiny bit of optimism, that ThroB will actually provide deeper gameplay, whether a war of attrition, or grand offensive, or some combinations of whatever. The map appears promising for more complex and subtle strategy. Also, the absence of heavy cavalry might mean that, finally, hammer and anvil won't be the only way to win battles.

However, to be fair, although the campaign AI of TW seems to have regressed a little recently, the BAI seems to improve steadily game by game. So, here's hoping that trend continues.

[Huberto]

How is making TW:3K based on RoTK is even remotely disrespectful to Chinese history? RoTK is so ingrained in our culture that it's pretty much part of history, embellished to hell it may be.

CA says that it maintains historical authenticity in its historical titles. This may need to change now because, as you note, RoTK is heavily embellished historically-themed fiction (i.e. much of it didn't happen). History is the practice and profession of finding out and explaining what actually happened. If legend, heavy embellishment or myth is put forward as history it is disrespectful to the practice and profession of history. Passing off RoTK as authentic history would also be disrespectful to China IMO, because no historically authentic game set in the West would be able to get away with fictional embellishments like RoTK. For example, if CA did a game based on the Iliad or King Arthur, it wouldn't call it a historical title.

[ikyu828]

CA says that it maintains historical authenticity in its historical titles. This may need to change now because, as you note, RoTK is heavily embellished historically-themed fiction (i.e. much of it didn't happen). History is the practice and profession of finding out and explaining what actually happened. If legend, heavy embellishment or myth is put forward as history it is disrespectful to the practice and profession of history. Passing off RoTK as authentic history would also be disrespectful to China IMO, because no historically authentic game set in the West would be able to get away with fictional embellishments like RoTK. For example, if CA did a game based on the Iliad or King Arthur, it wouldn't call it a historical title.

the rotk game series from koei is already in it's 13th version
http://store.steampowered.com/app/36...DOMS_XIII__13/
and that is based on the fictional story of the history

and then there is also the dynasty warrior series
http://store.steampowered.com/app/27...dition___with/

i''ve never heard there is a big negative reaction from the chinese community regarding those 2 games
if ca did this game well i'm pretty sure the chinese community won't care if the game will be based on the fiction version

[adrastea]

This is a good post, and I agree.
The most important thing right now is how they improved the battle engine and overall tactical play, if it's just Attila with more focus on cooldown abilities them I'm jumping off the hype train.

If the actual gameplay is realistic, that's all that matters. People who want historical accuracy can mod out the fictional elements.

I wonder how much longer CA is going to use the Warscape engine. A quick google-fu shows that the original "TW Engine 1" used for STW and MTW was used from 2000-2003. The "TW Engine 2" used for RTW and M2TW was in use from 2004-2007. Empire Total War, the first game to use the Warscape engine, came out in 2009. That's almost 10 years of using the same game engine.

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

As Settra was pointing out earlier, most Chinese only know the heavily embellished version anyway. There was also Kessen II which dealt with the Three Kingdoms. Though that game is so unbelievably fictional that it would make Luo Guangzhong fans vomit.

In terms of Chinese media there is already the old 1994 series Three Kingdoms, the 2008 film Three Kingdoms: Resurrection of the Dragon, the 2008 film Red Cliff, the 2010 series Three Kingdoms, the 2011 film The Lost Bladesman, the 2012 film The Assassins, the 2013 series Cao Cao, the 2017 series The Advisors Alliance.
There is also the Chinese Manhua The Ravages of Time (2001) which is hugely popular. Also the Japanese manga Sangokushi (1971) and Souten Kouro (1994).

That is not to mention the popular video games such as Romance of the Three Kingdoms (13 games) and Dynasty Warriors (9 games).

If Three Kingdoms wasn't so lucrative in Asia then they would not have this much material. Total War Three Kingdoms is definitely an attempt to market in Asia while also appeasing CA's core fan base.

[Huberto]

i''ve never heard there is a big negative reaction from the chinese community regarding those 2 games
if ca did this game well i'm pretty sure the chinese community won't care if the game will be based on the fiction version

I doubt Koei or Dynasty Warriors marketed themselves as "historically authentic," yes? In any event, you be may right that the Chinese commercial audience won't care if CA (UK, Japan) reflects back to them a fake history of China, claiming it was authentic. Historians would care that's for sure.

Again, IF 3K is an adaptation of RoTK, CA needs to make that clear and own the fact that they are no longer necessarily making historically authentic titles when they call something "historical." Perhaps they would lose sales by being honest, but to do otherwise amounts to false advertising.

If the actual gameplay is realistic, that's all that matters. People who want historical accuracy can mod out the fictional elements.

If CA goes with the martial arts focused gameplay like they featured in the 3K announcement trailer, I don't know how one would mod that out, or the "hero" skill trees, if they are like Warhammer, or other fictional RPG elements, if they are baked into the game. We'll have to see.

[Intranetusa]

"I don't hold out much hope, if any, for depth in 3ks, judging by the trailer and its Warhammer vibe, but I have a small hope, a tiny bit of optimism, that ThroB will actually provide deeper gameplay, whether a war of attrition, or grand offensive, or some combinations of whatever. The map appears promising for more complex and subtle strategy. Also, the absence of heavy cavalry might mean that, finally, hammer and anvil won't be the only way to win battles. "


I play the Danish faction in Age of Charlemagne (they have no cavalry) and my tactics are pretty much hammer and anvil or shield walls. Chasing down routing enemies after a battle ends is an absolute pain in the a-- without cavalry.

[thesmoosh]

He's taking about Thrones of Brittania not 3k.

[Intranetusa]

He's taking about Thrones of Brittania not 3k.

You are correct, I misread that.

[caratacus]

As Settra was pointing out earlier, most Chinese only know the heavily embellished version anyway. There was also Kessen II which dealt with the Three Kingdoms. Though that game is so unbelievably fictional that it would make Luo Guangzhong fans vomit.

In terms of Chinese media there is already the old 1994 series Three Kingdoms, the 2008 film Three Kingdoms: Resurrection of the Dragon, the 2008 film Red Cliff, the 2010 series Three Kingdoms, the 2011 film The Lost Bladesman, the 2012 film The Assassins, the 2013 series Cao Cao, the 2017 series The Advisors Alliance.
There is also the Chinese Manhua The Ravages of Time (2001) which is hugely popular. Also the Japanese manga Sangokushi (1971) and Souten Kouro (1994).

That is not to mention the popular video games such as Romance of the Three Kingdoms (13 games) and Dynasty Warriors (9 games).

If Three Kingdoms wasn't so lucrative in Asia then they would not have this much material. Total War Three Kingdoms is definitely an attempt to market in Asia while also appeasing CA's core fan base.

I am thinking historical realism won't be a priority with CA for Three Kingdoms, the Chinese market for PC games is full of an array of fantasy titles which may likely indicate more of a lack of interest in realism rather than an opportunity for a realistic strategy sim. Total War is after all an exception in computer games for having a significant grounding in history, Despite its flaws Attila TW was far more historically accurate than its predecessor Rome Total War Barbarian Invasion. However, given the new commercial focus on a Chinese market with its huge rewards by the games industry, I'm thinking that that aspect of realism won't continue to have the same appeal among its fan base as it has before. Warhammer has proved to be especially big in China and CA will no doubt be looking to follow up with a game in the same vein or with similar features.

Expect the new Total war to be significantly different from the other games prior to Warhammer, and in the future a range of expansions focused on China as well as a new game which may even focus on developing alien civilizations rather than those in periods of history!

Chinese games market is the world's biggest at $25.6bn
Expected to grow to $29bn by the end of 2017, currently represents 25% of the global market
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/article...t-at-USD25-6bn
New figures from the video games market in China shows the nation to be leaps and bounds ahead of the rest of the world.
The market was valued at $25.6bn in 2016, according to a report from IHS Markit, representing a quarter of all money generated by video games around the globe.
IHS forecasts that this value will grow to $29bn this year, led by the already dominant mobile and PC games sectors. China is also the world's largest games market for both these platforms.

Steam games in China: Making the most of a lucrative opportunity
April 20, 2017 | By Chris Priestman
https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/...pportunity.php
There are now over 15 million Steam users based in China (according to SteamSpy). That makes it the country with the third largest number of Steam account holders, behind only Russia and the USA. Numbers like that should be enough to convince any game developer to make efforts to appeal to the Chinese audience. Yet many don’t.

Thanks to PUBG, China may now have more Steam users than any other country
http://www.pcgamer.com/thanks-to-pub...other-country/
By Tyler Wilde December 11, 2017
Chinese-readers account for 64.35 percent of Steam Hardware Survey respondents, compared to just 8.6 percent last year.