Warhammer and Warscape?

[helmersen]

I'm just wondering if Total War: Warhammer will be using the Warscape engine. Is it true that it only takes advantage of a maximum of 4GB RAM? And if so, if a new engine is being used and is able to take advantage of 8, will this mean that Warhammer might be able to both look better and run better than Attila?

[vinxente]

I'm just wondering if Total War: Warhammer will be using the Warscape engine. Is it true that it only takes advantage of a maximum of 4GB RAM? And if so, if a new engine is being used and is able to take advantage of 8, will this mean that Warhammer might be able to both look better and run better than Attila?

Warhammer will use Warscape engine, and the amount of memory allocated by the engine has little to do with graphic quality or the game performance.

[Humble Warrior]

Warhammer will certainly be using the Warscape engine. They`ll be a lot of new users to Total war for that game who won`t have a clue about Warscape`s disadvantages and CA know it, so they squeeze another game out of it. CA does a lot of things hoping no one reads the TWC forums.

[Bust Nak]

CA has taken every opportunity to correct this misconception. The engine is TW3, warscape is responsible for graphics within TW3. The engine itself have receiver constant upgrade for each iteration of total war since Empire.

[Garensterz]

So the question should be, will CA still use the same TW3 engine for Warhammer? Or will they rewrite everything from scratch? Or just another copy pasted scripts and textures from the TW3 games?

[DisgruntledGoat]

So the question should be, will CA still use the same TW3 engine for Warhammer? Or will they rewrite everything from scratch? Or just another copy pasted scripts and textures from the TW3 games?

TW3 will be used with Warhammer, Will has already confirmed that. But, as with every TW3 game it will be updated. So Warhammer will use an updated version of the engine that was used in Attila. Not a bad thing in my opinion as Attila is a great game.

[AnonMilwaukean]

In full disclosure: I like Attila and am very disappointed that Warhammer got announced as quickly after Attila's release as it did.

That said, though, I actually think Warhammer can use the current engine acceptably. Attila uses it pretty well right now, and if Warhammer also tries to downplay naval gameplay while playing up land-based combat, then I think Warhammer will make the engine do just fine. As much as I'm not a Warhammer fan, I imagine that they will give the trilogy of games ample attention and will update parts of the engine that need it. In short: they know by now what TW3 does well and what it doesn't, and will certainly play to its strengths.

Edit: As an additional thought, I am really curious if they intend to use the same engine for all 3 games... after all, if the third game is a year or two later, it's entirely possible that they might have improved tech by then, and TW3 isn't brand new, obviously. Not sure on the time-frame in which each Warhammer game is supposed to come out, so it'll be interesting to see if they stick to the same engine for all three games.

[Faiakas]

I believe that Warhammer should be much better because all the problems and Bugs that Rome 2 had and are resolved in Attila will make a huge difference for Warhammer.
Fingerscross...

[Garensterz]

So Warhammer will use an updated version of the engine that was used in Attila. Not a bad thing in my opinion as Attila is a great game.

This might be good in some ways. However, apart from the big improvements for Attila, you can still feel the similarities between the (Rome 2/Attila) two. That's why playing it doesn't actually feel like playing a whole new game. This method for Attila is fine with me though, but implementing it to a fantasy game like Warhammer makes me think that this might feel too similar from the previous TW3 games.

It's still too early to tell though. Just gonna wait for that first gameplay footage to come and reflect on it.

[Mr.Freud]

Ihope it will be Dx12 game. I also hope they release dx12 patch for Attila.

[Dewy]

Don't hope for a DirectX12 game, you're just falling into the hands of Microsoft marketing. Ever wondered why they market a graphics API to gamers rather than graphics programmers?* What you should be hoping for is Vulkan support (man that name would be so fitting if this was WH40k).


*Which is off topic and a long story feel free to send me a PM if you want to know.

[xjlxking]

I think warscape is great for WH

It is the only reason I'm okay with this

[Imperator Artorius]

For those that argue that because Shogun 2 and Attila are examples of good warscape/TW3 games that the engine itself is good, I would counter that these, especially Shogun, are good despite TW3, not because of it.

[DavidtheDuke]

This thread (no I don't think it should be closed) clearly demonstrates we need a Warhammer forum. If it's that difficult to set up I'm willing to be a mod or something, though I don't know if I'd be considered qualified etc.

[DisgruntledGoat]

For those that argue that because Shogun 2 and Attila are examples of good warscape/TW3 games that the engine itself is good, I would counter that these, especially Shogun, are good despite TW3, not because of it.

Okay, now back that up. I honestly can't wait to here what it is that the TW3 did so wrong and what it was specifically about Shogun 2 and Attila that is not dependent on the TW3 engine that made it up for the engine's short comings. Please elaborate. Most people only ever seem to bring up the animation syncing, which has been changed and also its game play impact debunked numerous times (it is also a problem that existed in M2TW). Or they complain about unit collision. Which is a legitimate complaint (although one I consider minor, but it has existed to some extent in all TW3 games).

[Humble Warrior]

Don't hope for a DirectX12 game, you're just falling into the hands of Microsoft marketing. Ever wondered why they market a graphics API to gamers rather than graphics programmers?*

Yep. Before people were wetting themselves over DirectX11 and when that came along it took years and then the differences were small. It took absolute ages before DirectX11 even really made serious inroads in games and by then almost everyone had forgotten about it. DirectX 12 will no doubt promise the earth (to sell graphics cards or something) and give very little.

[PointOfViewGun]

I'm just wondering if Total War: Warhammer will be using the Warscape engine. Is it true that it only takes advantage of a maximum of 4GB RAM? And if so, if a new engine is being used and is able to take advantage of 8, will this mean that Warhammer might be able to both look better and run better than Attila?

They would upgrade the graphics engine, Warscape, to utilize 8GB if that's what the new game requires.

[Imperator Artorius]

Okay, now back that up. I honestly can't wait to here what it is that the TW3 did so wrong and what it was specifically about Shogun 2 and Attila that is not dependent on the TW3 engine that made it up for the engine's short comings. Please elaborate. Most people only ever seem to bring up the animation syncing, which has been changed and also its game play impact debunked numerous times (it is also a problem that existed in M2TW). Or they complain about unit collision. Which is a legitimate complaint (although one I consider minor, but it has existed to some extent in all TW3 games).

My argument is that the rest of Shogun 2 was so good (in my opinion) that it largely outweighs the downsides of the engine, which I consider to be a lack of weight in battles, lack of collision and the 1v1 synched animations. And again, these issues were present in Shogun 2. Personally Im not entirely convinced that Samurai fought exclusively 1v1 in battles and Im going to say its safe to assume that Ashigaru did not and therefore the entirely synched duel and fight animations are a draw back, even for me. And of course, the battles to an extent feel just as weightless as the other TW3 games. Moreover, siege battles are basically field battles with an obstacle course in the middle that can just be climbed over, which again is a con for Shogun 2. But what Shogun 2 provides imo is sheer polish, atmosphere and more immersion than the other TW3 games have since provided (although as seen above, its not perfect). The art direction, and especially the music as well, really drew me in. The campaign map is also superior mechanically to the other TW3 games imo, in that its narrow focus means the AI isnt quite as idiotic, no instant-transports or the arbitrary imperium and required general bollocks that Rome II introduced. The agents also felt largely balanced and each had distinctive and separate roles. The intro video for the campaigns got me pumped and I really enjoy the time and effort put into the agent videos. That said, Realm Divide in vanilla is terrible without mods, and was implemented much better in Fall of the Samurai.

As for Attila, I think its a decent game mechanically that has been gutted for DLC and let down by less than ideal execution of potentially good ideas, i.e. climate change, immigration, religion and a questionable AI.

tl;dr Shogun 2 is good enough of a game in other areas that it outweighs the flaws of its battle engine,whereas the same cannot be said for Rome II or Empire.

[PointOfViewGun]

Warscape actually didn't create 1vs1 combat, and not all of it's combats are 1v1. It simply made it worthy to watch individual soldiers fight with proper 1vs1 animations. Previous games still had soldiers directing their air-slashing movement towards single soldiers which was meaningless. So, Warscape, in that regard, was a step forward.

[jorfik]

I would love to see some video evidence that demonstrates the lack of weight & unit collision in TW3 games versus RTW and M2TW.
I pefer the old animation style though, more generalised and fewer over-the-top silly animations in melee.