Total War: ATTILA - Pre-Order & Release Date and Special Edition Announcement

[PhilipO'Hayda]

rather see the Irish, I always thought the Irish were a bigger deal in this age long before the Vikings come to rise.

[Teil]

Wow, Rome 2,5 without blood (Blood and Gore DLC is coming again = more money ...big lol)..... no thanks

[Caractacus]

Intentional or not I agree with the earlier post that the marketing pattern is exactly the same as it was for Empire to Rome II. Folks you have been warned - pre-ordering is a big risk and detrimental to gamers as a whole because you are buying a product unseen. Given CA's track record your best bet is to give it another year and come back to the game when it's been patched.

[Teil]

CA, please one Statement due to the bad feedback here. hmmm..... no word as always

[SandraDevilGirl]

CA, please one Statement due to the bad feedback here. hmmm..... no word as always

CA dont give a crap about our feedback. Ok ok, they do care about our bug feedback but that is not because they care about us,
it just saves them doing the testing themself.

[Leonidas480bc]

I will not pre-order this game or any other game due to Rome 2.

[_Tartaros_]

regarding good promotion, CA please remember this video?

way more quality and proof

compare this with free marketing of some mod


it´s the same sort of spirit, let the game present it´s qualities and stop this fake acting army drill monologues. As a player i want to see, what´s in the game not around them.

there´s even movie like filming possible

[Garensterz]

there´s even movie like filming possible

What? What is this? Is this a mod? did it ever existed? I needs the link now!

[youngfool]

What? What is this? Is this a mod? did it ever existed? I needs the link now!

I think some of the movie is made using mount and blade footage

[peregrino]

let´s hope they are doing a good work!

[SandraDevilGirl]

haha, they are never gonna do good work, but lets hope they will try this time...

[LinusLinothorax]

I hope CA and Sega are aware that if they will mess up a release again, they will loose like over 50% of their fanbase.

[Sharpe]

Don't get me wrong I like Germans, haha I'm dating one ffs.

I just think it's inaccurate to call the English 'German'.

King Arthur emergent faction?

[texoman81]

Don't get me wrong I like Germans, haha I'm dating one ffs.

I just think it's inaccurate to call the English 'German'.

King Arthur emergent faction?

I never called the modern English German. I have called their language Germanic, while also saying it was now more Latin than German. I also said the Anglo-Saxon tribes assimilated the Romano-Britons they conquered. Name a people who were assimilated and tell me how what happened to the Romano-Britains was different. They were partially assimilated by the Romans then fully assimilated by the Anglo-Saxons. Assimilated people do leave a genetic footprint and usually have varying degrees of influence on those that assimilated them in many ways.

The English of who spoke Old English i think it would be safe to still call them German. They had already began to diverge but the Saxons in England were still much like the Saxons on the mainland for a long time. Absorbing the Romano-Britons didn't change the Anglo-Saxon tribes much. It was later influences from Norse, French and Latin that changed them to the point you can't really call them a German people anymore.

As inaccurate as BI2 has been so far it wouldn't surprise me that much at this point if they did include King Arthur. But i really hope they don't go that far into fantasy. There will probably be mods that include King Arthur though, again if mods are allowed at all this time.

[Abdülmecid I]

The problem is that the written and archaelogical sources aren't always an accurate representation of the past. They always care more about the ruling class, so in our example they make you think that the Anglosaxonc element was much more prevalent than it really was. The same could be said for the Ptolemaic Egypt and so on...

[texoman81]

The problem is that the written and archaelogical sources aren't always an accurate representation of the past. They always care more about the ruling class, so in our example they make you think that the Anglosaxonc element was much more prevalent than it really was. The same could be said for the Ptolemaic Egypt and so on...

All evidence we have about the English early on shows they were more Anglo-Saxon than Celtic or Roman. The spoke a German language, that is a huge part of the identity of a people. There is little retained from there Celtic past. There is more Roman, Norse and Anglo-Saxon than Celtic. The degree of influence of the various groups can also be observed in modern English language and culture. There are many elements than can be recognized as Latin, French or Germanic, but little that can be called Celtic. The largest influence the Celts had was genetic, and even that is less in England than much of Europe. There are also many elements of modern English identity that are uniquely English.

The Celts were absorbed by the Germans in England just as they were in modern southern Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. These once Celtic lands were no longer Celtic after the Germans expanded into those areas. The reason modern English aren't a German people like the Saxons on the mainland continued to be is due largely to French influence. As I said a race that is assimilated still has some influence on the race assimilating it. It is a question of which is prevalent. It isn't even about who is in power. For example the conquering Parni were assimilated by the Parthians that they conquered. They gave up their Scythian identify and began calling themselves Parthians. They then considered themselves the heirs of the Persian Empire and founded the Parthian Empire. They changed their language, religion, culture and way of life.

[Sharpe]

Genetically the French are much more Celtic than the British.

The reason modern English aren't a German people like the Saxons on the mainland continued to be is due largely to French influence.

I'm sorry dude but your vision of this period of history is really skewed - where were you taught this stuff? Your statements are often contradictory to the publications of scholars on the topic.

A lot of what you say is outright false - what's the deal?

[texoman81]

I'm sorry dude but your vision of this period of history is really skewed - where were you taught this stuff? Your statements are often contradictory to the publications of scholars on the topic.

A lot of what you say is outright false - what's the deal?

You obviously just want to ignore history you don't like, for whatever reason. I am an American of partial Native American descent but i don't deny the the Trail of Tears happened.
England has been conquered by Romans, Angles, Jutes, Saxons, Vikings and Normans. All of them are part of what make up the English identity. Olde English is a German language. The culture of the people at the same time was as well. The majority of the modern English language is French/Latin as a result of influence from French. Especially while England was ruled by the Normans (Francified Vikings).

What do you think the genetic makeup of the French is? They are descended mostly from Romanized Gauls. When the Franks conquer Gaul they settled mostly in what is now the Netherlands and Belgium. There were more celts in Gaul than Britain, yet more Germans settled in Britain than settled in Gaul. That is why French is a Gallo-Romance language and English is a Germanic language.

If you have proof of anything i'm saying is false, other than the fact that you don't like it, i'm open to being corrected.

[kamikazee786]

Fool me once, shame on you !

Fool me twice, shame on me !

[youngfool]

A brand new independent triple A game for only $45? what a bargain!
That or this could be the most expensive DLC ever made... a new high by CA!