Concern Over TW's Growing Lack of Interest in Historical Accuracy And Bad Battle Animations

[Lucius Verenus]

I am well aware of these practices historically but if you expect me to believe that TWs recent arcade style cartoon like animations, where heroes pair off in the middle of a melee of hundreds of men and they just make space for it, is historically accurate of these customs, then i am going to have to strongly disagree. 'Heroes' or distinguished warriors in any culture were part of the line of combat, his comrade was to his left and right, the foe was in front. They were fighting and defending against all men to their front, there was no heroic pairing off in a melee. This is hollywood.

I didn't think anything different Butty, I was just making something of a joke. I also am totally in agreement. When they did Heroic/single Combat (where it was a thing in history), I have never seen an account that says anything other than the 'Hero's fought their single Combats between the opposing bands/tribes/armies while everybody watched. In every case I read of it was prior to general combat or as a 'let's settle this between the two of us' thing. It looks so unreal having them do it in the middle of a ruck. It's funny because the Troy Movie actually got the single/heroic combat right, which was something. But if you think they didn't do that, I guess I will pass and wave you off to talk to Homer about it - as well as a few of our own peoples bardic tales.

[Lucius Verenus]

Is there any other game that does the opposite? One that focuses on historical accuracy and detail much more?

I am just starting to look. Way before PC's I played board wargames using the Krieg Spiel rules (Antietam/Sharpsburg;Gettysburg;Market Garden and a bunch of others)
Krieg Spiel based games are going to be very much more accurate, I only know of actual battles rather than campaigns but they are online now so I am going to check this lot:

https://www.tabletopia.com/games/kriegs-spiel

[Huberto]

Lot of ground to cover here. First, I don't think the question is settled at all whether there will be single entity heroes or other non-realistic/fantastic elements in this game. Announcing factions that are leaders like in 3K and Troy, suggests that gameplay will be quite similar and focused on individuals and/or hero units, whether single entity or elite guards. We'll see soon enough. For me, heroes done in the style of Troy or 3K immediately kills my interest in this title. I think it's been shown beyond a doubt that "records mode" in 3K didn't restore the feeling of all arms being necessary to win a battle.

Second, it's been shown that the battles in recent Total War games involve less terrain, positioning and fatigue factors and are more stat-driven combat encounters that spoil a lot of the fun. 3K and Troy battles were driven by overpowered units or heroes running amok. If the combat in TW PH is an evolution of this approach it won't be very much fun and would certainly kill my interest.

Third, the way this game is being marketed raises serious concerns. If we think of the late Bronze Age we immediately recognize that many cultures are absent from the game certainly as playable factions, but worse, the DLC bait suggests many cultures are being withheld entirely from a full priced game at release. Add in sleazy business practices such as selling cosmetics and "early access" and we have this title charting a new low in business practices for CA/SEGA. Again, TW PH appears designed not so much to appeal to the historical fan as much as to capitalize on gaming trends and more casual or WH centric gamers.

I think what we see here so far is another example of the way in which the Warhammer titles pushed CA/SEGA down the road of greed or less for more. Less serious/challenging tactical gameplay, less immersive detail or simulation, less playable content, more pointless bells and whistles to dazzle the casual or unsuspecting. Bringing back a few cut mechanics from earlier titles isn't enough. The only CA I recognize here is the one joined at the hip with Games Workshop. It's sad to see. I haven't bought anything since 3K and honestly I regret buying that.

[Welsh Dragon]

First impressions, cautiously optimistic with a couple of concerns.


* While I prefer the broader settings of the Romes, Medievals, etc, and I'm bit disappointed they don't seem to have gone for a wider portrayal of the Bronze Age (Old World has shown me quite a few cultures I'd like to play from then,) I'm not too concerned if it is focused on "Egypt, Canaan and Anatolia." I mean Shogun 2 and Fall of the Samurai both take place in a single country, and are still two of the best Total Wars in many players books, mine included, so if they take advantage of that to really immerse the player in the setting that could be could.


* Not too keen on the focus on characters again, though good to hear it sounds like bodyguards are back. Overall it doesn't sound like a Troy/3K style hybrid from what's been revealed thus far, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed it's closer to the Historical gameplay I prefer.


* Never thought I'd see the sort of customisation the Steam page is mentioning come to Total War, so that's definitely a plus. Hope that extends to graphics, giving me more tools to play with to find just the right setting for my light sensitivity.


* I find it interesting they also highlight weather as well, which is something that's been part of Total War for quite a while, so I do wonder what about it is making it something worth highlighting this time.


* Bit concerned about the cosmetics packs and season pass. That's not a direction I really want CA going in, as I've been burned before.


In conclusion, it wouldn't have been my first pick for next game. But it does look like it could be fun. And as someone for whom the Warhammer games have never really clicked, it is really nice to have something new to look forward to on the Historical front.


All the Best,


Welsh Dragon.

[PointOfViewGun]

* I find it interesting they also highlight weather as well, which is something that's been part of Total War for quite a while, so I do wonder what about it is making it something worth highlighting this time.

They seem to be talking about dynamic weather events within the battle. So far, as far as I remember, the weather state you get in the beginning of the battle is static for the entire battle. In this one, they're talking about sand storms appearing during the battle. Perhaps there will be sudden expansion of the river in a river crossing battle as well.

[Flinn]

They seem to be talking about dynamic weather events within the battle. So far, as far as I remember, the weather state you get in the beginning of the battle is static for the entire battle. In this one, they're talking about sand storms appearing during the battle. Perhaps there will be sudden expansion of the river in a river crossing battle as well.

I'm pretty sure in Med 2 weather can vary during a battle

[Lucius Verenus]

They seem to be talking about dynamic weather events within the battle. So far, as far as I remember, the weather state you get in the beginning of the battle is static for the entire battle. In this one, they're talking about sand storms appearing during the battle. Perhaps there will be sudden expansion of the river in a river crossing battle as well.

I am just watching the great Lionheartx10, who playing some Alpha Battles, the weather situation can affect your units, even causing damage (like a sandstorm)

Edit: Just to clarify, yes the weather can change during the battle, there is information on this in the UI at battle setup. The battle Lionheartx10 was setting up was fine but was warning a sandstorm would come and what negative effects it would have. Hopefully they wont go overboard with weather switching, having a sandstorm and a flood in a 30 min RT fight could be a bit irritating

[EireEmerald]

I just saw the gameplay. The animations look really bad guys. Remember when you used to be able to zoom in and get goosebumps as you got closer, it felt real. Now an axeman swings his weapon and his opponent seemingly doesn't get hit by it but falls back a metre. Also theres just so much wrong with it, the last time I liked the look of the engine was Attila. Now this looks worse than shogun 2, and that was ten years ago.

It looks like a re-skin of Troy Total War.

[Lucius Verenus]

I just saw the gameplay. The animations look really bad guys. Remember when you used to be able to zoom in and get goosebumps as you got closer, it felt real. Now an axeman swings his weapon and his opponent seemingly doesn't get hit by it but falls back a metre. Also theres just so much wrong with it, the last time I liked the look of the engine was Attila. Now this looks worse than shogun 2, and that was ten years ago.

It looks like a re-skin of Troy Total War.

Not gunna disagree with you on any of those points. But while I saw those I also know it's an Alpha Build.

My advice to anyone is NEVER Pre-Order. Make them fully aware that the release date is when the money starts to come in and not before, there is no physical media so you pay and get, no 'sold out' at the local store so no need to pre-order them, right?.
This was always normal, you don't pay for something you don't even know will be fit for purpose. There is no real reason for a consumer to pre-order games.
That way the state of, say, Empire or Rome II at release would have been a serious problem for them, the answer to which is DO.IT.RIGHT. Then sell it !!

On a more positive note, The time period is good for lots of goings on from Greece to Ethiopia, Sudan to the North of the Caspian sea.
We have data - de-magicalise 'myth' (or pay extra and get ''hero mode' - which is the same in all other respects, not make normal mode a barebones version like in Troy). Have the Hebrews start as slaves in Egypt and give them un-miraculous ways to get out. The Whole 10 year Trojan war is possible, the progression of the saga as each side attacked settlements allied to the big cities to undercut their support would work well without Zeus or Athena etc
The Hittites, Egypt, Crete, Cyprus, the Mitanni and all the city states of Mesopotamia. In that time period until the collapse of the whole system, they might have fought, but they also had to trade. Like us really they were interdependent on each other and all needed the vital Copper and Tin to make Bronze.

The Sea peoples at the collapse is another great scenario to have in there. Interesting and little known fact, in the Odyssey, Homer records Odysseus and his companions joining a fleet of the sea people, so obviously lot's of Greeks in among them, in the attack that was defeated by Ramesses III at the Battle of the Delta, he also defeated them in Israel at the Battle of Djahy (Slightly NE of Nazareth).
As that whole collapse period destroys powerful and rich city states while others lost much power and land - and access to tin, like us not having any oil any more - left them weak and vulnerable (like Assyria) . Copper weapons don't beat Bronze and Northern peoples were coming into the vacuum who worked and used Iron.

That whole period, being able to play one or another of those states - or even the Sea peoples themselves ? If they make it right I would tell them to take my money - first time for a lot of years.
They have a chance to make a legendary game - or just another rip-them-off as much as possible game.

[Mars_Ultor]

Hi, you are spot on regarding the historical accuracy, initially I was looking forward to the time period of the Late Bronze Age, but only to be disappointed. I mean how can they make a game claiming to represent the period without the Acheans, Minoans, Assyrians, Babylonians and Mitannians not to mention other less powerful states, and then of course the Sea Peoples. I for one won't be purchasing the game, unless with time it becomes moddable and becomes a true reflection of the time period.

[PointOfViewGun]

Remember when you used to be able to zoom in and get goosebumps as you got closer, it felt real.

Remind us please.

[EireEmerald]

Remind us please.

you ok?

[PointOfViewGun]

you ok?

Can't think of a single example?

[Basileos Leandros I]

Shogun 2 TW had some very interesting hand to hand battles, especially in sieges. The ones in Attila TW were a bit more simplified, I don't know how to explain it properly, but they were interesting.

[spitfire]

I really haven't followed Total War much for quite a while. Once they went down the Warhammer path I mostly lost interest. Now I did buy Warhammer I and II, and i even completed a campaign in Mortal Empires. They aren't bad products, and I had a good time with the experience but it's just not my cup of tea. The whole fantasy thing just doesn't do it for me. In a certain sense I'm still stuck in the Days of Rome, Medieval 2 and Empire. I'm actually going to go back and try Attila again and maybe even Thrones of Britannia. I'm mostly indifferent to Pharaoh since I have no interest in the Bronze Age, but I'm willing to take a good look and play it if I'm interested. I skipped Troy entirely.

Oh and I actually liked Rome: Remastered. I know most people didn't care for it and didn't play it but I guess I'm an outlier. Hell, they fixed bugs in the Remastered edition that have been in the game since it came out! All that said, I do hope Pharaoh does well. A failed product doesn't do any of us any good. If there's any hope for a Medieval 3 or an Empire 2 it's better if what we do have succeeds.

Much the same as i feel..if we dont get an Empire 2 or Medieval 3..lets hope for both to be Remastered.

[Lucius Verenus]

Can't think of a single example?

Dude it's literally a subjective thing, what is your drama?

I have one from NTW. I used to fight custom battles using very small forces against each other. One was a Company of French Infantry against a Platoon of Brit Rifles - zoomed in and watching as the action - too long to describe but this was not them standing in lines and shooting at each other - but it was like watching some of the footage from Ukraine, but prettier and in higher resolution.

[PointOfViewGun]

Dude it's literally a subjective thing, what is your drama?

I have one from NTW. I used to fight custom battles using very small forces against each other. One was a Company of French Infantry against a Platoon of Brit Rifles - zoomed in and watching as the action - too long to describe but this was not them standing in lines and shooting at each other - but it was like watching some of the footage from Ukraine, but prettier and in higher resolution.

Not my drama that I asked you to give an example so that I can understand where you're coming from. Relax.

Does this show what're talking about?

[Ukiah]

These games have been having historical inaccuracies since the original Shogun Total War. The decision makers of these games are mainly interested in making money, which is why they fail. I don't think they have any passion in history.

[PointOfViewGun]

These games have been having historical inaccuracies since the original Shogun Total War. The decision makers of these games are mainly interested in making money, which is why they fail. I don't think they have any passion in history.

You mean to say that they never made a successful game?

[Ukiah]

You mean to say that they never made a successful game?

All of the TW games I own crashed. We still continued to play because of our passion for these type of strategic games and history. The history wasn't totally accurate, but TW was one of the best ones out there. But every people I know of outside this forum would never play another TW game if they tried one because of the tendency to crash. If another game crashed as much as the TW games do, then I'd quit. The fact is that these people are scamming us to buy their incomplete games. I stopped buying any new TW games after Shogun 2.