Dazed and Confused: Charlemagne vs. The Crescent

[Scamander]

The talk of a Charlemagne focused DLC confuses me. Why would CA put energies into creating a DLC that is chronologically more distant and geographically more narrow than dealing with say a Rise of Islam DLC that could include the already existing map and have vast more re-playability? I recall there was a thread previously about a Rise of Islam thread. There was a view that such would somehow be inappropriate to Muslims. This is of course absurd. The rapid expansion and conquests of the Muslim hosts was and is taken by the vast bulk of Muslims as a testament of the rightness of their cause. I don't understand CA's thinking.

[Broreale]

Well, people would get iffy about a depiction of Muhammad--but then again, the spread of Islam as a larger political force only happened after his death. I don't know enough about modern prevailing Muslim opinions on the depiction of the first Caliphs, but my guess is restrictions are lighter and I know there's a plethora of art on the Rashiduns (then again, there's plenty of medieval art depicting Muhammad but times change).

[Scamander]

The expansion out of the Peninsula occurred after the Prophet's death. There are no issues with Caliph depictions. Per Islamic rhetoric Mohammad is the seal of the prophets, no leaders that followed are of similar weight or standing.

[PeonKing]

I'll admit, I'm not very knowledgeable about the rise of Islam. What kind of faction diversity would you have? Is Rome (or it's inheritors) involved? Does it span anywhere in Europe, if so, where?

[Scamander]

I'll admit, I'm not very knowledgeable about the rise of Islam. What kind of faction diversity would you have? Is Rome (or it's inheritors) involved? Does it span anywhere in Europe, if so, where?

The East Roman Empire
The Sasanian Empire
The Ghassanids (Arab non-Muslim faction, more Greek influenced faction)
The Lakhmids (Arab non-Muslims faction, more Persian influenced faction)
Khazars ( Turkic people, North of Caucasus Mountains)
Berber Tribes (North Africa)
Visigoth Kingdom (Spain)
Merovingian Kingdom (France: could be divided into a host of smaller factions (given the decentralization of the kingdom: including Charles the Hammer "the grandfather of Charlemagne"
several small Saxon kingdoms on England: Mercia, Kent, Wessex etc.
Avars (in Hungarian Plain)
Bulgars ( North of Danube, Black See coastal areas)
Multiple Slavic options in Eastern Europe
Multiple Germanic options in Central Europe
Danes and Swedes in Scandinavia
Muslim armies from Arabian Peninsula

The above are a few options off the top of my head. I think there would be a host of interesting options, from replicating and possible doing better than the Muslim hosts, to opposing them, to using a different faction to form different hegemon in the region.

[Abdülmecid I]

I'll admit, I'm not very knowledgeable about the rise of Islam. What kind of faction diversity would you have? Is Rome (or it's inheritors) involved? Does it span anywhere in Europe, if so, where?

Mohammad and the Rashidun Caliphs have already been portrayed numerous times in various forms of art, from Persian miniatures to films and... video games. Perhaps, a British salafist will vandalize some innocent walls in Horsham with a couple of insulting graffitis, but that's about it, CA has no reason to be afraid of any harsh religious reaction. The truth is, imo, much simpler. The adventures of the early Caliphs are not as interesting (to the public) as Charlemagne's campaigns or the Viking raids. Why? Perhaps, the culprit is the pop art or the fact that the muslim expansion didn't include the lands where the majority of CA customers live. tl;dr, A Crescent DLC will most probably be much less profitable than Charlemagne.

[PeonKing]

The East Roman Empire
The Sasanian Empire
The Ghassanids (Arab non-Muslim faction, more Greek influenced faction)
The Lakhmids (Arab non-Muslims faction, more Persian influenced faction)
Khazars ( Turkic people, North of Caucasus Mountains)
Berber Tribes (North Africa)
Visigoth Kingdom (Spain)
Merovingian Kingdom (France: could be divided into a host of smaller factions (given the decentralization of the kingdom: including Charles the Hammer "the grandfather of Charlemagne"
several small Saxon kingdoms on England: Mercia, Kent, Wessex etc.
Avars (in Hungarian Plain)
Bulgars ( North of Danube, Black See coastal areas)
Multiple Slavic options in Eastern Europe
Multiple Germanic options in Central Europe
Danes and Swedes in Scandinavia
Muslim armies from Arabian Peninsula

The above are a few options off the top of my head. I think there would be a host of interesting options, from replicating and possible doing better than the Muslim hosts, to opposing them, to using a different faction to form different hegemon in the region.

Were all those Kingdoms involved in the rise of Islam, or were they just the existing Kingdoms at the time? CA seems to really focus their DLC campaigns, to the point where they cut the Greeks out of Hannibal at the Gates for R2, they even cut out parts of the map that actually had battles in the real world conflict in Wrath of Sparta. They seem to focus on tight conflicts with a 'Heroic' personality to build it around, save for Wrath of Sparta, which they clearly tried to draw people who liked 300 (Which I mean, was a smart move if you look at all the Epic Sparta mods for Rome 2)

Mohammad and the Rashidun Caliphs have already been portrayed numerous times in various forms of art, from Persian miniatures to films and... video games. Perhaps, a British salafist will vandalize some innocent walls in Horsham with a couple of insulting graffitis, but that's about it, CA has no reason to be afraid of any harsh religious reaction. The truth is, imo, much simpler. The adventures of the early Caliphs are not as interesting (to the public) as Charlemagne's campaigns or the Viking raids. Why? Perhaps, the culprit is the pop art or the fact that the muslim expansion didn't include the lands where the majority of CA customers live. tl;dr, A Crescent DLC will most probably be much less profitable than Charlemagne.

I guess you accidentally quoted me, since this has nothing to do with what I was saying. I'd have to agree with the idea that they want to do a Eurocentric campaign over an Eastern centered one. It just seems to be that way, I don't know if they haven't seen any Eastern centered games sell well (Prince of Persia? That's the only one I can think of.) or if they just have a lot of assets devoted to western stuff, or maybe they want to keep the idea of Rome the centerpiece. Frankly, I think that the Rise of Islam would sell better. It's because you could actually do something different, nearly every DLC for the last 2 games has been centered on Rome, some enemy, and then a bunch of Barbarian factions with spears hiding in the woods. I'm so sick of 2/3rds of the map having that generic german accent leader that keeps talking about spears. If they do think nationalism has a part in sales, I think they are way overplaying it. I would much prefer a different cultural campaign, like maybe some Eastern factions that don't all have the same building trees. It would break the monotony of generic 'ahhh barbarians!' I get it, people freak out about Islam (There has been some very dumb things in the News here in the US about people freaking out that they teach about what Islam is in public schools) but this is a relatively niche war game, it's not like they're going to outlaw it, and honestly I think the controversial press around it would likely help CA more than hurt them, since frankly even though we complain a lot, Total War games are a lot of fun, and making them a household name via some crazy firebrand news stories.

Speaking of which, for a game named after a Nomadic Steppe Warlord, past the initial 'horde' mechanic at the release, I feel like this game is not very much about Nomadic Steppe people. I really wish they had fleshed that part of the map. When playing the Huns, I really felt no big strategic pull besides don't piss off the Sassanids and their endless satrap armies.

[Abdülmecid I]

Were all those Kingdoms involved in the rise of Islam, or were they just the existing Kingdoms at the time? CA seems to really focus their DLC campaigns, to the point where they cut the Greeks out of Hannibal at the Gates for R2, they even cut out parts of the map that actually had battles in the real world conflict in Wrath of Sparta. They seem to focus on tight conflicts with a 'Heroic' personality to build it around, save for Wrath of Sparta, which they clearly tried to draw people who liked 300 (Which I mean, was a smart move if you look at all the Epic Sparta mods for Rome 2)

Well, if the DLC strictly covered the area conquered by the muslim warriors and the starting date was just after the death of Mohammad, then I guess that the following factions would be included: The Arab rebels, who disputed the authority of the Caliph (Ridda Wars), the Byzantine and Persian Empires, the Berbers, the Visigoths, the Merovean Franks and the Turkish Khaganate. However, if we assume that Italy and the Balkans would also be included, then perhaps, we should also expect the Lombards, the Avars and the Bulgars, who did play a decisive role in the Arab defeat outside the walls of Constantinople.

I guess you accidentally quoted me

Yeah, I tried to delete my answer, when I saw that someone had already responded, but I forgot to also delete the quoted post.

[Lugotorix]

Can anyone tell me if Heraclius or Mohammed died first. There would be no issue with starting with Abu Bakr or whoever.

[Scamander]

Can anyone tell me if Heraclius or Mohammed died first. There would be no issue with starting with Abu Bakr or whoever.

Mohammed died in 632. Heraclius died is 641.

[Gillam I]

The thing is, some people are not mature enough or responsible enough to have such a faction/dlc.

[Bust Nak]

Do you need a better explanation than "Charlemagne will sell more?"

[Aurelius Silvanus Tacitus]

I think that the Muhhamad thing was just an excuse: a Rise of Islam DLC would have required actual work and dedication and most of all it could not be rushed because it NEEDED a grand campaign map.

Also, CA seems to have joined the franchises that wallow in US pop culture recently ("VIKINGS, SPARTA, BADASS.... YEA!1!1!" and other such things)

[Darios]

Also, CA seems to have joined the franchises that wallow in US pop culture recently ("VIKINGS, SPARTA, BADASS.... YEA!1!1!" and other such things)

Yeah, it's absolutely disgusting...VIKINGS! SPARTA! BADASS! You'd think that they learnt their lesson from Wrath of Sparta. I'm okey (I guess) with the idea of a Charlemagne campaign but it looks like CA is about to create a badass, pop culture, Hollywood portrayal of his adventures, full of other barbarian tribes (including VIKINGS!) while ignoring the historical political/dogmatic ramifications of his reign (conflict with the Roman Empire.)

[Gebilde]

Also, CA seems to have joined the franchises that wallow in US pop culture recently ("VIKINGS, SPARTA, BADASS.... YEA!1!1!" and other such things)

It did not join it always was total war was always a playable "historie"-movie battle simulator
I mean go ahead and look at the scoots in med2 that braveheart, or the tom cruise dlc for shogun 2

[Keyser]

I think that the Muhhamad thing was just an excuse: a Rise of Islam DLC would have required actual work and dedication and most of all it could not be rushed because it NEEDED a grand campaign map.

Also, CA seems to have joined the franchises that wallow in US pop culture recently ("VIKINGS, SPARTA, BADASS.... YEA!1!1!" and other such things)

As if it ever was different...


Rome surfed on Gladiator's references and the spartan there were already "badass... YEA!1!1!1"...

Medieval 2 followed the release of Kingdom of Heaven.

Shogun is built on stereotypes about medieval japan.

The less "pop culture" influenced totalwar was Medieval, but even then, it was, in a less obvious way, since it totally followed the sinister theme for the medieval ages.
And they added Vikings to it too...

[Darios]

As if it ever was different...


Rome surfed on Gladiator's references and the spartan there were already "badass... YEA!1!1!1"...

Medieval 2 followed the release of Kingdom of Heaven.

Shogun is built on stereotypes about medieval japan.

The less "pop culture" influenced totalwar was Medieval, but even then, it was, in a less obvious way, since it totally followed the sinister theme for the medieval ages.
And they added Vikings to it too...

You'd think that after seeing the success of mods like Europa Barbarorum that CA would have learnt by now that sticking closely to history in these type of games is usually better received than 300, Rome, Spartacus, Braveheart, etc references...

Attila is a badass game; as badass as a Metallica song. That's CA's artistic license and in some respects I like the whole "End of Days" theme it has...I just think that sometimes they take these things way too far and it ends up hurting the game. I think that in CA's quest to make this game even more badass that they omitted some very interesting stories for DLC related to Late Antiquity (Campaigns of Aetius/Majorian, Slavic migration into Eastern Europe, Anglo-Saxon conquest of Britannia, etc) and instead we're getting content that's very "out there" (i.e. Vikings and Charlemagne)

[Sharpe]

It's sounds really shallow but Norse, Celtic, Germanic mythology, their culture and their portrayals gets me pumped:



Lmao I love the fact my ancestors were probably one of the there barbaric cultures. I'm lame as haha.

Islam on the other hand and it's portrayals, not so much.

I want to defend Europe from the Moors, not play as them. That probably encapsulates the view of a lot of people. But I suppose you could argue you could fill out both sides.

[spiderknight]

was a new thread really nessicary? hasnt this been done to death in other places?

[Arimahn]

Nobody is willing to touch the topic of the rise of Islam. The anger you'll be confronted with just isn't worth the potential sales.