Might some other company fill the gap and produce a Rome nearer to our heart's desire?

[Kilgore Trout]

Many of the design decisions implemented in Rome II seem a clear indication that CA intends to move the Total War franchise in a different direction and market the series toward a different audience than some significant number of us here at TWC would have preferred. I think that many of us were primarily hoping for a more or less updated version of Rome I, with a bit more emphasis placed on improved historical accuracy and realism, a more challenging and realistic AI, and larger scale battles - that is, a more simulation orientated modern version of Rome I, if you will.

My question is then, if there is indeed a real potential demand for such a game as described above, to what degree might some developer other than CA simply undertake such an upgrade by creating a game almost identical to Rome I (or Medieval II), retaining essentially the same gameplay features that have been so time-tested, approved of, and improved upon by CA and the Total War community and modders, yet with a new engine, upgraded graphics, and a much smarter and more simulation orientated AI?

Would there be copyright infringements? Does such a game as Total War require such a massive financial investment that no company would want to take such a gamble of attempting to move in on CA's turf? Is our aging community of Total War computer game strategy fans who lean a bit more toward the realism and depth side of gaming just too small and insignificant in this day and age to warrant such an investment by another developer?

Just wondering. Could it happen? Might it happen?

[Rittsy]

If there's a market someone will fill it. I just don't think it's large enough to get a game of the same scope as Total War.

[geyserik]

I doubt it will happen but it would be nice, competition always leads to better products.Do you remember pyro put out Imperial glory a Napoleonic era game and it wasn't that bad C.A. used some of their ideas in Empire.Look at the company that makes the king aurthur series they tried but it is a buggy total war wannabe.I wish some company could do it so,it would lead to better strategy games overall.

[Velico]

I hope someone steps up to the plate and gives CA/SEGA a run for their money. They could use the competition, honestly. Their quality control has gone down the tubes over the years, and some healthy competition would be good, as it would make them sink or swim. Right now CA/SEGA has a monopoly on this genre, and they've become too lazy. Innovation subsides, creativity diminishes, and the product suffers as a result. A game like TW may be flamed by the public at first, but if it gives us a better product--or forces CA/SEGA to do so--then, as a consumer, it's a win-win.

[Kilgore Trout]

I understand the direction that CA seems to want to take the franchise, and I don't blame them for it. And once they iron out the bugs they may well be able to say that they achieved exactly what they intended. And I will most likely buy the game a few more years down the road after the patches, expansions, dlcs and mods make it all that it can be, and I expect to be at least fairly, if not quite, satisfied with it. But I still can't believe that the kind of game that I described above, that I believe many of us at TWC were hoping for, would only be of interest to such a niche audience that it would be financially unfeasible for some other company to produce. And yet to date, no other company has come close, as far as I know, to achieving what CA has achieved with Total War. Is the budget for Total War games really so vastly larger than that for so many other major games produced each year?

[geyserik]

I understand the direction that CA seems to want to take the franchise, and I don't blame them for it. And once they iron out the bugs they may well be able to say that they achieved exactly what they intended. And I will most likely buy the game a few more years down the road after the patches, expansions, dlcs and mods make it all that it can be, and I expect to be at least fairly, if not quite, satisfied with it. But I still can't believe that the kind of game that I described above, that I believe many of us at TWC were hoping for, would only be of interest to such a niche audience that it would be financially unfeasible for some other company to produce. And yet to date, no other company has come close, as far as I know, to achieving what CA has achieved with Total War. Is the budget for Total War games really so vastly larger than that for so many other major games produced each year?

Don't know the answer to that but you would think that some other company might take a stab at it maybe paradox?I do enjoy Rome2 but the complaints about it are genuine so it would be nice if CA had some competition in their niche monopoly.

[nameless]

Don't know the answer to that but you would think that some other company might take a stab at it maybe paradox?I do enjoy Rome2 but the complaints about it are genuine so it would be nice if CA had some competition in their niche monopoly.

If Paradox wanted to do it they already would've but they can't because TW games are massive in general compared to every other game.

The reason why Paradox games seem nice is because they keep it simple so while it looks big it's not that big of a deal as they keep everything the same. While they play it safe they end up being kept small.

And more competition doesn't necessarily mean better products.

ANd as already pointed out TW games fulfills a very niche market. Who the hell wants to get involved with something like that with the crazy fanbase? So far nobody has answered it because they can't. Granted there were a few but none of them were ever able to catch on or even bring out a decent game.

[geyserik]

If Paradox wanted to do it they already would've but they can't because TW games are massive in general compared to every other game.

The reason why Paradox games seem nice is because they keep it simple so while it looks big it's not that big of a deal as they keep everything the same. While they play it safe they end up being kept small.

And more competition doesn't necessarily mean better products.

ANd as already pointed out TW games fulfills a very niche market. Who the hell wants to get involved with something like that with the crazy fanbase? So far nobody has answered it because they can't. Granted there were a few but none of them were ever able to catch on or even bring out a decent game.

I guess you are right about paradox although if they wanted to make a powerplay they could hire former CA employees to make a run at it.What about THQ maybe they could do it?But you are right about the crazy fanbase l.o.l.

[AlexCouceiro]

If Paradox wanted to do it they already would've but they can't because TW games are massive in general compared to every other game. The reason why Paradox games seem nice is because they keep it simple so while it looks big it's not that big of a deal as they keep everything the same. While they play it safe they end up being kept small. And more competition doesn't necessarily mean better products.ANd as already pointed out TW games fulfills a very niche market. Who the hell wants to get involved with something like that with the crazy fanbase? So far nobody has answered it because they can't. Granted there were a few but none of them were ever able to catch on or even bring out a decent game.

Everything is so very wrong in this post. I mean everything. Anyway, I'm not even going to waste my time discussing such absurd claims.

[Kilgore Trout]

I've looked at and read up on Imperial Glory, Real Warfare II - Northern Crusades, King Arthur, Lionheart - King's Crusade, History Great Battles Medieval, Cossacks, and a few others, but none of them appear to be as well done and epic as the Total War games. I know Knights of Honor was supposed to have been pretty darn good in it's day though. Other than Paradox's games, which I have not yet tried but am really looking forward to one day, I am also very interested in Histwar - Les Grognards, and Scourge of War - Gettysburg, but both of these are real time battle sims only, so not quite the same thing as Total War.

[geyserik]

I've looked at and read up on Imperial Glory, Real Warfare II - Northern Crusades, King Arthur, Lionheart - King's Crusade, History Great Battles Medieval, Cossacks, and a few others, but none of them appear to be as well done and epic as the Total War games. I know Knights of Honor was supposed to have been pretty darn good in it's day though. Other than Paradox's games, which I have not yet tried but am really looking forward to one day, I am also very interested in Histwar - Les Grognards, and Scourge of War - Gettysburg, but both of these are real time battle sims only, so not quite the same thing as Total War.

I have lionheart &Knights of Honor both are fun games but not near as good as total war I also have Imperial Glory a fun game but really shallow overall.

[Achilleslastand]

I have lionheart &Knights of Honor both are fun games but not near as good as total war I also have Imperial Glory a fun game but really shallow overall.

Knights of honor campaign were on par if not better then anything CA has done lately by far. The battles however were very subpar.

[krisslanza]

I don't see why people seem to claim CA is "moving away" from its fans. Far as I can recall, none of the TW games have ever been that historically accurate. They aim for historical authenticity, nothing more. If you want historical realism/accuracy, that's what modders are for.

Based on my own experiences, Rome 2 isn't really fundamentally any different then any prior vanilla TW I have played - Rome 1, Medieval 2 and Shogun 2. They're all fundamentally the same, the only difference is in the setting and how the mechanics and such have evolved over the years.

[geyserik]

I don't see why people seem to claim CA is "moving away" from its fans. Far as I can recall, none of the TW games have ever been that historically accurate. They aim for historical authenticity, nothing more. If you want historical realism/accuracy, that's what modders are for.

Based on my own experiences, Rome 2 isn't really fundamentally any different then any prior vanilla TW I have played - Rome 1, Medieval 2 and Shogun 2. They're all fundamentally the same, the only difference is in the setting and how the mechanics and such have evolved over the years.

I would agree I do really enjoy Rome 2 and am having a blast with it but it would be great if other companies would try and compete with C.A. It would only lead to more great games IMO.

[stackero]

'Might some other company fill the gap and produce a Rome nearer to our hearts desire?'

Here's a post, slightly edited where I mentioned this very thing a while back.

We can only hope, but a person with that passion or a company that smells blood in the water, would still want to appeal to a wider audience for a larger cash flow. Simple enough. You build a historical game that 'would blow the socks off' anything CA ever done and is now incapable of doing. Awing us, our wallets and allegiance to support them to the max, as long as their honest with us .

Then to increase your sales and customers (casual players) you want to widen the game's appeal. Simple enough. Include in the game, play preference categories;
casual, intermediate and TW FAN Level('What's the hell is auto-resolve) level. Each category would still have its easy, medium, and hard setting

Awing us even more with real content DLC we don't mind paying for. There's where a lot more of the revenue would come from to help keep the company in the black.

Same game engine, but each category would play different, in that, a new layer of realism would be added to each. Casual more streamline but still filled with lots of fun, intermediate adding another layer of realism, complexity and realism, and then Hard core gamers level, increasing the realism, historical and complexity play even more.

And not only that, each category could still tweak things, like TW has, #of soldiers, auto-management of cities, etc, etc. You get the point.

As I understand it, there would be no copy right problems as long as the new game used a different engine, please God yes. New engine that fits the time period, and gunpowder era for future games.

Add in a good honest innovative marketing plan, that delivers what it promises and a whole new age of strategy gaming begins. TWC may have to at least vary it's name a bit if that ever happens. If?

Its a dream I have. But not holding my breath.


Edit: This ides was shot down as very unlikely for various reasons, one being its easier to attract casual gamers than spend $$ more just to attract hardcore gamers too.

[Achilleslastand]

Hegemony Rome is supposed to be out in spring of 2014 and while not on the scale of a TW game I expect it to be top notch. http://www.longbowgames.com/rome/

[stackero]

Hegemony Rome is supposed to be out in spring of 2014 and while not on the scale of a TW game I expect it to be top notch. http://www.longbowgames.com/rome/

Looks interesting. No TW game, but it just might scratch an itch.

[Kasswok]

I kinda want Koei's Romance of Three Kingdoms series combined with the battles of Total War...

[PointOfViewGun]

Many of the design decisions implemented in Rome II seem a clear indication that CA intends to move the Total War franchise in a different direction and market the series toward a different audience than some significant number of us here at TWC would have preferred. I think that many of us were primarily hoping for a more or less updated version of Rome I, with a bit more emphasis placed on improved historical accuracy and realism, a more challenging and realistic AI, and larger scale battles - that is, a more simulation orientated modern version of Rome I, if you will.

My question is then, if there is indeed a real potential demand for such a game as described above, to what degree might some developer other than CA simply undertake such an upgrade by creating a game almost identical to Rome I (or Medieval II), retaining essentially the same gameplay features that have been so time-tested, approved of, and improved upon by CA and the Total War community and modders, yet with a new engine, upgraded graphics, and a much smarter and more simulation orientated AI?

Would there be copyright infringements? Does such a game as Total War require such a massive financial investment that no company would want to take such a gamble of attempting to move in on CA's turf? Is our aging community of Total War computer game strategy fans who lean a bit more toward the realism and depth side of gaming just too small and insignificant in this day and age to warrant such an investment by another developer?

Just wondering. Could it happen? Might it happen?

Total War games are one of the most complex games one can make. I can't think of any other game with the same level of complexity. It pretty much has all aspects of any game while others focus mostly focus on few. It has design concerns, A.I., storyline, content, customization, etc... Especially A.I... If they managed to score an A.I. that satisfied all of us then after the first game the guys that wrote the A.I. code would be working for NSA. That's why you don't have many companies have a shot at this genre. With each year, developing such a game requires more resources and the risk is getting larger.

It still could happen and probably require an other large company like SEGA to finance. The question is what other companies out there that can run such a project. That company would consider the question of why they'd make an identical game. It's still a limited market. Not every gamer likes such games. It's basically a niche market. CA already has the lead and despite major and minor performance issues people are more exposed to their product and would have more faith in what they can do as they're still the more experienced ones. An investment on a different game by a different company would need to consider two games. First one to show that they can be at least as good as CA or better. The second is the one that would really make money. So, the entry requirement to this niche market would be the price of an additional game to be successful or utterly fail.

Sort of like the question of why nobody made a real action movie on Tolkien's books till Peter Jackson.

[AngryTitusPullo]

I bought Imperial Glory on GOG for 3 dollars. Have played maybe 10 minutes. If CA has not released ETW/NTW then Imperial Glory might be a good game to spend time with. The thing is that not other companies haven't tried. Most have done it and some (from what I've read) excel in doing it. The only thing is that they either only do real time battle or world campaign but not both (except Imperial Glory).

If CA which have more than a decade experience of making these type of game can't get it right (according to some people) then what can we expect from some newbies ? Of course we can hope since competition almost in many ways are good.