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

[zoner16]

As in Rome II, it can and has been modded. There are other ways to interact with the characters other than appointing them "generals." Women intrigue should be part of the game. It is history. I guess it illustrates that CA is really just developing the fantasy mode and the historical mode is an afterthought.

Without CK2 level court politics systems, I'm not sure how "women intrigue" could be made a meaningful part of the game. They tried it somewhat in Rome 2, but it didn't work. The level of personal interaction just doesn't translate well to Total War as it is currently.

I'm not even sure we can blame fantasy here, because it seems to be a general pop history trend to make the exception into the rule in these regards, so we might've ended up with it regardless of if Romance mode was even a thing or not. A lot of the community seems oddly quiet about it recently (given past events). Even the Youtube comment sections have barely made mention of it.

[PikeStance]

The announcement of the “footnote of a footnote” Zheng Jiang as a “legendary warlord,” and CA’s defense of such, should’ve been the first indicator that CA was going to continue their agenda that began in Rome II. I called it back in December.

There is only one way to express one's feelings on it

Without CK2 level court politics systems, I'm not sure how "women intrigue" could be made a meaningful part of the game. They tried it somewhat in Rome 2, but it didn't work. The level of personal interaction just doesn't translate well to Total War as it is currently.

I'm not even sure we can blame fantasy here, because it seems to be a general pop history trend to make the exception into the rule in these regards, so we might've ended up with it regardless of if Romance mode was even a thing or not. A lot of the community seems oddly quiet about it recently (given past events). Even the Youtube comment sections have barely made mention of it.

This is sort of my point. They really developed the Romance Mode only. The Historical mode is an afterthought. There s a reason why they showed the "Romance" first. This is because this is the game. The "Record" mode was designed not to lose the base audience. My guess is that they are hoping the "Romance" would be well- received. My gut tells me they will be disappointed. While some base fans may try the "Romance" version, most will return to what Total war is actually about.

[zoner16]

This is sort of my point. They really developed the Romance Mode only. The Historical mode is an afterthought. There s a reason why they showed the "Romance" first. This is because this is the game. The "Record" mode was designed not to lose the base audience. My guess is that they are hoping the "Romance" would be well- received. My gut tells me they will be disappointed. While some base fans may try the "Romance" version, most will return to what Total war is actually about.

Ah, I see.

I get that impression to a certain extent. My working theory is that they intended the game to be some Romance/Records fusion at the beginning of production, but eventually realized that the wuxia heroes were going to be a breaking point for too meany people, so they split the two modes around that. There's areas where plenty of effort for historical authenticity seems to have been exerted, and then there's areas where it's clear that someone in the studio really just wanted something because it looked cool in a movie. A sort of grab bag of 3K stuff from a bunch of different traditions.

[PikeStance]

I can see either scenario. If you read between the lines of the interview by PartyEite, they were wholly inspired by the Romance. I think they let their excitement get the better of them. Chinese audiences may enjoy fantasy and they are interested in the game, but they are fooling themselves if they think this will translate to any huge increase in sales of other titles. ironically, for doing far less, they have received serious backlash for doing anything remotely ahistorical in the past. Why they thought the fan base would be more open to it is a good question.

[PointOfViewGun]

What do people expect the difference between the Romance and Records versions to be other than just how heroes are represented on the battlefield?

[LestaT]

What do people expect the difference between the Romance and Records versions to be other than just how heroes are represented on the battlefield?

Some events in the campaign modes are different between romance and records. Battles will play longer in records due to fatigue compared to romance which is more targetted for fast paced actions.

[Daruwind]

I can see either scenario. If you read between the lines of the interview by PartyEite, they were wholly inspired by the Romance. I think they let their excitement get the better of them. Chinese audiences may enjoy fantasy and they are interested in the game, but they are fooling themselves if they think this will translate to any huge increase in sales of other titles. ironically, for doing far less, they have received serious backlash for doing anything remotely ahistorical in the past. Why they thought the fan base would be more open to it is a good question.

But there is good reason for some fantasy stuff approach here. Look at latest history TWs. Rome2 was success after all but release debacle hit Attila sales. ToB being based upon Attila and looking like a "smaller" game is also not big hit. Meanwhile completely fictional fantasy Warhammer is success through roofs. Romance mode is natural step between being historical and totally fictional, big stress on characters...Quite clever combination. Of course it could really be a flop but after Attila/ToB CA probably thought that classic historical formula is not working right now so well.

Exactly as you wrote Pike. While they had several backslashes about historical titles. Warhammer is doing quite well without any major negative press. maybe except Norsca for WH2 but then again CA in this one issue showed very good handling of the issue and avoid major cluster.

[Seether]

I think the difference is that WH is obviously a fantasy title based on a fantasy world with fantastic units, combat and environments based on its own fantasy universe. So of course it would be received and judged as such. 3K, on the other hand, has been touted by CA, since the very beginning, to be the next historical title in the Total War series. So it is being judged as an historical title, per CA’s own marketing of the title. The fictional “Romance” and the actual history of the 3K era are two very different things, and simply adjusting bodyguard units and fatigue is not at all sufficient to differentiate between the two.

[PikeStance]

Seether nailed it. I would add that Warhammer appeal to an entirely different base of fans.

From point of view. It was vitally important that CA nails the historical title after the success of Warhammer and the issues with Rome II and the criticism stemming from Attila and ToB.

[Daruwind]

With that I completele agree. It is important for CA to make new great historical title. However as i see it they opted for half fantasy half history title because they are not sure next fully historical (3K in this case) title would be such hit as purely historical title. That´s the issue. Look at gaming industry as whole at the moment. Games that are suppose to be hits are flops (Anthem, Battlefield 5) while completely strange titles like Apex are success.

[PointOfViewGun]

I think the difference is that WH is obviously a fantasy title based on a fantasy world with fantastic units, combat and environments based on its own fantasy universe. So of course it would be received and judged as such. 3K, on the other hand, has been touted by CA, since the very beginning, to be the next historical title in the Total War series. So it is being judged as an historical title, per CA’s own marketing of the title. The fictional “Romance” and the actual history of the 3K era are two very different things, and simply adjusting bodyguard units and fatigue is not at all sufficient to differentiate between the two.

So, give a few examples of those differences.

[JackDionne]

There is only one way to express one's feelings on it





This is sort of my point. They really developed the Romance Mode only. The Historical mode is an afterthought. There s a reason why they showed the "Romance" first. This is because this is the game. The "Record" mode was designed not to lose the base audience. My guess is that they are hoping the "Romance" would be well- received. My gut tells me they will be disappointed. While some base fans may try the "Romance" version, most will return to what Total war is actually about.

I thought that too. The game was originally intended to be Romance mode only and when CA saw post from like minded individuals like myself (who stated not buying if it'snot historical) who have been waiting not only for 3K for years and the Warhammer cycle to end to get a historical title.


I would love to know the real reason why the second delay to May 23 happened. I am guessing it has something to do with one game with the combination of Romance and Classic but CA is calling it Records mode now.

[Daruwind]

It depends on details in the end.

As I recall, CA stated that active abilities are only in Romance mode. In Classic there are just passive abilities. Some events and legendary items are easily limited to Romance mode as well while you can use all non-legendary items for example for Classic mode. General´s bodyguards vs single hero.

I would state the question otherwise. What mechanics and features would you envision for Classic mode, which cannot be used for Romance? And in the end, why? Why limit some mechanics purely to one mode and leaving others without it? Imagine if for example population was thing just in one mode. Why? People seems to look at Classic mode as Romance mode minus some stuff while for me it is mutually exclusive changes. Like for example active abilities for heroes, characters. Historical people usually detest those as something not historical so what is problem in limiting those just for Romance mode? Removing them for classic mode is for such person actually positive sign, isn´t it?

[PointOfViewGun]

It depends on details in the end.

As I recall, CA stated that active abilities are only in Romance mode. In Classic there are just passive abilities. Some events and legendary items are easily limited to Romance mode as well while you can use all non-legendary items for example for Classic mode. General´s bodyguards vs single hero.

I would state the question otherwise. What mechanics and features would you envision for Classic mode, which cannot be used for Romance? And in the end, why? Why limit some mechanics purely to one mode and leaving others without it? Imagine if for example population was thing just in one mode. Why? People seems to look at Classic mode as Romance mode minus some stuff while for me it is mutually exclusive changes. Like for example active abilities for heroes, characters. Historical people usually detest those as something not historical so what is problem in limiting those just for Romance mode? Removing them for classic mode is for such person actually positive sign, isn´t it?

That's pretty much my question. Thanks for building up on it.

[Seether]

So, give a few examples of those differences.

Myself and others have done so numerous times throughout this thread, such as events, historical actions (Ma Teng did not support the Han), ties and relationship (Huang Zhong with Liu Biao, Taishi Ci with Kong Rong), people (Zhou Cang is in the game and he did not exist in history), “magic”, dueling, and numerous other things. I would link to specific posts, but can’t because I’m on my mobile. I’m sure you can search yourself, if you’re so inclined.

[Mhaedros]

Tried googling, can't find anything about Zhou Cang being in both modes (but I may just have missed it?). The reason I'm writing this, is that they've mentioned purely fictional characters, like Diaochan, will only be in Romance mode. Quote from the Dong Zhou article.

In Romance Mode, Dong Zhuo’s dilemma chain focuses around Diaochan, the beautiful serving girl who turned Dong Zhu and Lü Bu against each other with their jealousy (which eventually led to Dong Zhuo’s death).

As Dong Zhuo, you can influence these events by giving up on Diaochan in order to gain Lü Bu’s approval – or confirming his affection by marrying her, thus leading to a more difficult outcome.


In Classic Mode, this dilemma chain is based around personal differences between Dong Zhuo and Lü Bu, as well as the political scheming of Wang Yun.

[PointOfViewGun]

Myself and others have done so numerous times throughout this thread, such as events, historical actions (Ma Teng did not support the Han), ties and relationship (Huang Zhong with Liu Biao, Taishi Ci with Kong Rong), people (Zhou Cang is in the game and he did not exist in history), “magic”, dueling, and numerous other things. I would link to specific posts, but can’t because I’m on my mobile. I’m sure you can search yourself, if you’re so inclined.

A lot of what you list there is already a reality. However, half of what you talk about is content-wise. What I'm asking about is feature and gameplay based. After the Records gameplay reveal some people voiced disappointment. So, I'm asking what they expected to see.

[Daruwind]

A lot of what you list there is already a reality. However, half of what you talk about is content-wise. What I'm asking about is feature and gameplay based. After the Records gameplay reveal some people voiced disappointment. So, I'm asking what they expected to see.

I was talking with a few history guys, they keep talking about WH1/2 and Mortal Empires mode. I tried to explain to them that it is basiclly new campaign. That it is like Grand and Augustus campaigns for Rome 2. Problem is, WH1 is complete game. However because Wh2 introduced some new stuff, older factions are being slowly updated to these new standards. For them, it is like comparing WH1 and WH2. Like two modes of one game because for many people, WHs are just one game... However they hardly see that we are talking about two games... So for outsiders, playing for example Vampires in WH1 is completely different to playing them in Mortal Empires or trying Vampire Coast in Vortex/Mortal Campaign... Adding new rites, they could be easily translated like events and such stuff. And main WH2 Vortex campaign is offering whole Vortex mechanics which is not available in Mortal Empires. So maybe something along those lines....But then those changes are visible due to the fact that we are talking about two games in row...

[Seether]

Tried googling, can't find anything about Zhou Cang being in both modes (but I may just have missed it?). The reason I'm writing this, is that they've mentioned purely fictional characters, like Diaochan, will only be in Romance mode. Quote from the Dong Zhou article.

I thought I spotted him in one of the Records mode gameplay videos? *shrug* Maybe not? And perhaps I misread, but I thought Diao Chan was specifically mentioned as not being in Records mode, not all fictional characters?

A lot of what you list there is already a reality. However, half of what you talk about is content-wise. What I'm asking about is feature and gameplay based. After the Records gameplay reveal some people voiced disappointment. So, I'm asking what they expected to see.

Not a lot, no, but some of it is to a greater of lesser degree. In my post that you quoted, I stated "The fictional “Romance” and the actual history of the 3K era are two very different things, and simply adjusting bodyguard units and fatigue is not at all sufficient to differentiate between the two." What I was specifically referring to was the "Romance of the Three Kingdoms" novel by Luo Guanzhong and the actual history of the Three Kingdoms period, found in the works of Chen Shou, Pei Songzhi, Sima Qian, and others. The former is based on the latter and, while estimates vary, the novel is between 30-50% fictional. There are plenty of online sources to differentiate for you what is fictional in the novel, as it is quite an extensive list.

I'm assuming you didn't search this thread or others in this forum for the examples you seek? Also, I'm not getting into the whole content/feature/gameplay semantics discussion again.

[PointOfViewGun]

Not a lot, no, but some of it is to a greater of lesser degree. In my post that you quoted, I stated "The fictional “Romance” and the actual history of the 3K era are two very different things, and simply adjusting bodyguard units and fatigue is not at all sufficient to differentiate between the two." What I was specifically referring to was the "Romance of the Three Kingdoms" novel by Luo Guanzhong and the actual history of the Three Kingdoms period, found in the works of Chen Shou, Pei Songzhi, Sima Qian, and others. The former is based on the latter and, while estimates vary, the novel is between 30-50% fictional. There are plenty of online sources to differentiate for you what is fictional in the novel, as it is quite an extensive list.

I'm assuming you didn't search this thread or others in this forum for the examples you seek? Also, I'm not getting into the whole content/feature/gameplay semantics discussion again.

Sigh... It's not semantics at all. The Records reveal gameplay that we saw was a minor settlement siege battle that showed battle mechanics. There wasn't much content involved. What you're basically pointing out here is exclusively content. We have already heard from the CA that certain events and characters will play out differently in the Records mode. That said, if someone, after watching a battle gameplay, says that they're disappointed with the lack of different between the Romance and the Records modes then its only natural to ask what kind of features they were expecting to see differently. To call that semantics play doesn't really make sense.

I was talking with a few history guys, they keep talking about WH1/2 and Mortal Empires mode. I tried to explain to them that it is basiclly new campaign. That it is like Grand and Augustus campaigns for Rome 2. Problem is, WH1 is complete game. However because Wh2 introduced some new stuff, older factions are being slowly updated to these new standards. For them, it is like comparing WH1 and WH2. Like two modes of one game because for many people, WHs are just one game... However they hardly see that we are talking about two games... So for outsiders, playing for example Vampires in WH1 is completely different to playing them in Mortal Empires or trying Vampire Coast in Vortex/Mortal Campaign... Adding new rites, they could be easily translated like events and such stuff. And main WH2 Vortex campaign is offering whole Vortex mechanics which is not available in Mortal Empires. So maybe something along those lines....But then those changes are visible due to the fact that we are talking about two games in row...

The release dates between those two games naturally creates a different take on each version. It would be very unfair to compare it to a duo like that.