Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 48 of 48

Thread: Games i would like to see

  1. #41
    Daruwind's Avatar Moderator
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,307

    Default Re: Games i would like to see

    I can redirect you guys again in near thread :
    https://www.twcenter.net/forums/show...-player-counts

    By number of sold units, Empire was still number one year and half ago. And while games generate massive income in first half year those additional buyers are simple showing the potential is there. But any gunpowder game would require extensive naval combat and I think CA has data showing that is not popular feature (popular enough) and question is about colonialism/slavery in current times... But the overall owners number is over long period of time and with multiple sales (many actually).

    So from short/mid term view, fantasy,heroes and other formats are probably more financially viable. If CA would get LotR/Tolkien rights, you bet next trilogy/line will be about that. But letīs face it. Wh will be done sooner or later, 3K too. So there must be something after that. CA especially said there is no more rule for "no third installation" so Med3/Rome3 are possible. Just look at Paradox and others. Rome/Med setting is still viable.
    Last edited by Daruwind; November 04, 2019 at 02:28 AM. Reason: number one :)

  2. #42

    Default Re: Games i would like to see

    I'd caution you against using only a single statistic to extrapolate financial success. I'm honestly hesitant to suggest anything, I'm not sure how CA plans out their next game. Their success rate with games is rather... mixed, but this also doesn't tell us much about their finances. We could look into CA's filing history and see if we can derive any kind of conclusion from there. Certainly not something I have the inclination to do at the moment, but if someone wants to have some fun...

  3. #43

    Default Re: Games i would like to see

    In all reality, all the tools are there for CA to pump out what could be a very good pike & shot era game or victorian era pre WWI TW. You've got amphibious assaults from Rome 2, Coloniees, Trade Networks, Naval Bombardment, Agents, Diplomacy, gunpowder units, Railroads, Naval Warfare, etc.

    There are really endless possibilities for a game of this kind but it all comes down to will to make it which I am not sure there is any. My preference would be for a Victoria II setting beginning in the Post Napoleonic War Era and finishing just prior to the outbreak of WWI. I am not so concerned about Historical Accuracy per se and part of what makes TW Games special is the ability to make your own history.

    Again though, as great as this game would be, I doubt its getting made any time soon. TW seems to be moving further and further away from historical games and more and more in to the realm of fantasy strategy games. Why? Because it sells more, just look at the people playing Warhammer vs every other TW game for proof of that.

    I also think CA is very conscientious of present day political sensitivities surrounding everything today and wouldn't be comfortable making a serious strategy game covering topics like Imperialism, Slavery, Colonialism, etc. It's too risky and like everything else, gaming is becoming watered down. You could never release a "Warpath Campaign" like they did with Empire TW in todays political climate.

    It's sad because I feel like M2TW, Empire Total War, Shogun 2/FoTS were just better overall games then what CA is releasing now. FoTS is the most polished and best game CA ever made, hands down and it along with Shogun 2 hold up very well to todays games.

  4. #44

    Default Re: Games i would like to see

    I would also love to see a game based on victorian era or pike & shot but I see CA is moving forward in another different direction. I also see the pattern mentioned before, if they think they succeded with ancient periods and melee units and those are their strength, they are likely to release games based in those same patterns. Let's say, they take Rome 2 or Attila units and they just change the setting and all the development/programming work associated with the production and release of a new game but based on the same units. I see that this business scheme is working well for them for now and requires less effort and resources than a new 'game engine' or mechanics.


    I agree with the term 'poor designed' to describe Total War gunpowder units and is clear that they must put a lot of resources and time to fix previous games based in modern eras. If I were CA and I would like to switch to a modern period with gunpowder units, I would probably go with American Civil War. It fits Total War philosophy, is historical, they already have a map covering America, there is even a mod about it and units would not require a lot of work because most of them would look mostly alike and there would be only two factions. There are lots of people out there interested in American Civil War as well since America is a big market. Just thinking, if other game developers succeded with American Civil War (Game-Labs, NorbSoftDev), why CA not?


    But Total War Troy indicates me that they are sticking in their "comfort zone" and surely they "did their numbers", knowing then that they will be successful at a minimum risk, why investing in more resources if they will make a fair profit?

  5. #45

    Default Re: Games i would like to see

    A lot of the time periods in this thread could certainly make good games, and given that CA was able to pull off Alien: Isolation they could certainly do these as games. I just don't think they're really suitable as Total War games.

    As far as any sort of fantasy title I'd much rather CA not touch Tolkien since they'd water down everything he stood for (and I think JRR would be aghast at his oft-times anti-war series being turned into war games as it is.) But games like Battle for Middle Earth and even Shadow of Mordor/War show that there's a huge market for LOTRs games even in the strategy genre and the acquisition of rights by Amazon show that despite his stances in the past Christopher Tolkien wants something for his children and grandchildren to live off of so selling the rights to all sorts of things is probably inevitable. And if not him, his son would certainly be happy to have the legacy of JRR Tolkien be in someone else's hands.
    ORANGE MAN BAD

  6. #46
    Alwyn's Avatar Frothy Goodness
    Content Director Patrician Citizen

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    7,976

    Default Re: Games i would like to see

    Quote Originally Posted by Stymiest View Post
    In all reality, all the tools are there for CA to pump out what could be a very good pike & shot era game or victorian era pre WWI TW. You've got amphibious assaults from Rome 2, Coloniees, Trade Networks, Naval Bombardment, Agents, Diplomacy, gunpowder units, Railroads, Naval Warfare, etc.
    I agree, there are a lot of game-play elements which could be used in either of these era. I wonder what attracts players to the pike and shot or Victorian era, more than the 18th century setting of Empire. Are you interested in specific 17th or 19th century wars, or aspects of the warfare of those times? While I can see the attraction of 17th century game-play, and I understand that a lot of people would want to play an American Civil War strategy game, I wonder what makes mid to late 19th century warfare interesting, for those who'd like to see such games.

    My reservation about this later period is that I enjoy the way that cavalry is still useful (not only for scouting or cavalry raids) in the 18th century, because infantry mostly carry muskets which are inaccurate, slow to load and have a short range. When every infantryman carries a decent rifle, who'd want to ride a horse into battle? Already, by the era of Napoleon Total War, winning seems to involve flanking the enemy in every battle, because a frontal attack causes too many casualties - I imagine it was even more like this in the mid to late 19th century. Maybe the answer to this is that mid to late 19th century warfare is about which commander can outmanoeuvre the other - I wonder if this era of warfare would benefit from larger battle maps than Total War games previously had, so that there's a period of scouting, finding the enemy and trying to ensure that the battle will be fought in a favourable location?

    Quote Originally Posted by Stymiest View Post
    I also think CA is very conscientious of present day political sensitivities surrounding everything today and wouldn't be comfortable making a serious strategy game covering topics like Imperialism, Slavery, Colonialism, etc. It's too risky and like everything else, gaming is becoming watered down. You could never release a "Warpath Campaign" like they did with Empire TW in todays political climate.
    I see what you mean about imperialism, colonialism and slavery - even so, I don't see these issues as restricted to gunpowder-era Total War games. In Rome II, for example, players build empires and enslave our enemies. For me, the most inspiring part of Empire Total War is fighting against British colonialism in the third part of the Road to independence campaign, fighting for freedom and independence (I found this inspiring even though my country were historically the bad guys!). One way to respond to modern concerns about imperialism is to give players the opportunity to fight either for or against it, allowing us to play as smaller factions and as nations which were historically invaded as well as playing as the colonisers.
    Last edited by Alwyn; November 09, 2019 at 07:17 AM.

  7. #47

    Default Re: Games i would like to see

    I can speak by myself that Pike and Shot Total War would be my dream coming true. I strongly believe that neither the mod 1648 for Medieval 2 Total War and 1600 colonialism IIRC for Empire fill the gap and we therefore need a new brand game to cover this amazing period in military history, full of wars and with a variety that no other historical period will never offer us. You have everything: melee, firearms, naval combats, sieges, amphibious battles and tons of technological changes. I am now reading a book covering the tactics of this period -italian wars, english civil war, thirty years war-



    The problem is that battle formations would be really difficult to implement in a Total War game, it basically requires a new game engine, if not, you'll never expect any level of historical accuracy.

  8. #48
    Daruwind's Avatar Moderator
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,307

    Default Re: Games i would like to see

    I think people are drawn to some familiar wars and to some mechanics, settings, features. I wrote lower 4 major break points in my eyes and for each we can make little list of importance of various aspects...like importance of cavalry, artillery, how advace ships were, industralization.....For example first one has in my eyes this explorer sense, wild NA frontier,indians while at the same time Europe is in full brawl. The last one is on opposite side very technological, steamers, gatling guns... First one was not properly covered in in TW, end of first/second are basically in Empire, third is Napoleon while for latest we have FotS. So honestly we should discuss what exactly each person wants. If you ask me, I would like two games. Either Empire II covering 1 up end of 2 stage. Or game covering 3+4.

    30 Years war/Indian Wars (1600-1650) --> pike+shot almost no artillery, lot cavalry, early colonialism, age of sails
    7 Years war/War of Independence (1750) --> early proper gunpowder era, age of sails
    Napoleon era (1800ish) --> high gunpowder era, more artillery
    ACW/Victoria/FotS/Prusso-France War (1850-1875) --> steam, industrialization, ironclads, late colonialism, cavalry in decline

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •