New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

[caratacus]

I must say, I think the announcement of both Total War "The Three Kingdoms" and "Thrones of Britannia" have really been handled badly by CA. We have two games one of which is to be released as early as Spring, which we up to now know very little about save the subject matter and videos. The video of Three Kingdoms was rushed out without any proper presentation, leading to a lot of speculation much of which is negative. In fact this speculation features in very little discussion at all. In previous releases, the TWC forum was full of discussion about the period of the game and what features should be included. I really do think that releasing a video without providing more detailed background information is pointless and counterproductive if you want to generate interest for a game.

[PointOfViewGun]

I must say, I think the announcement of both Total War "The Three Kingdoms" and "Thrones of Britannia" have really been handled badly by CA. We have two games one of which is to be released as early as Spring, which we up to now know very little about save the subject matter and videos. The video of Three Kingdoms was rushed out without any proper presentation, leading to a lot of speculation much of which is negative. In fact this speculation features in very little discussion at all. In previous releases, the TWC forum was full of discussion about the period of the game and what features should be included. I really do think that releasing a video without providing more detailed background information is pointless and counterproductive if you want to generate interest for a game.

Everything you said is actually an indication that those two launches have been very badly handled by gamers, not developers.

[caratacus]

Everything you said is actually an indication that those two launches have been very badly handled by gamers, not developers.

Speculation can be one of two things, positive and optimistic or negative and pessimistic. Most people side on the former, we all want things to be better than they actually are, it's human nature. The fact that it is the latter in this case says a lot about previous releases than those being critical in their expectations. It seems to me a lack of clarity can only make such a situation that much more worse, if you are trying to counter the naysayers.

[PointOfViewGun]

Speculation can be one of two things, positive and optimistic or negative and pessimistic. Most people side on the former, we all want things to be better than they actually are, it's human nature. The fact that it is the latter in this case says a lot about previous releases than those being critical in their expectations. It seems to me a lack of clarity can only make such a situation that much more worse, if you are trying to counter the naysayers.

It's been literally not more than a week since the announcement of each game. A lot have been revealed about the Thrones of Britannia, so what you speak of is quite moot for that game. With Three Kingdoms, it's been 4 days and they haven't been keeping you in the dark for weeks or months. You're not supposed to have clarity at this moment. What do you want? For them to dump everything in a week?

[caratacus]

It's been literally not more than a week since the announcement of each game. A lot have been revealed about the Thrones of Britannia, so what you speak of is quite moot for that game. With Three Kingdoms, it's been 4 days and they haven't been keeping you in the dark for weeks or months. You're not supposed to have clarity at this moment. What do you want? For them to dump everything in a week?

Both games have been in development a considerable time, as well you know. The public release of a video should have been undertaken as part of a formal presentation explaining more about the features and how they will differ in terms of game play. Just putting out promotional videos (one of which wasn't very good) is not adequate and as I said, can only feed negative comments, which you really don't want at a games release.

Here on TWC you have a range of mod teams for Total War which provide detailed previews of their work. They spend a lot of time and effort doing so, because they take pride in their work and want others to share their fun in putting together a mod. I personally think those putting together the original game should be no different in their approach.

[EmperorBatman999]

I think it’s inevitable this game will have fantasy elements inspired by Romance. And for marketing purposes, it would only be natural to play into the mythology of the story, as that’s the part most people know.

It’s inevitable that we will see mythology play a part. We can likely expect the game to use a combination of the novel and straight historiography as sources and stylistic inspiration.

[ptoss1]

Why are people so upset? Shogun 2 had ninjas and geisha. Rome 2 has flaming pigs and incendiary gates. It's not like Total War has ever been anywhere historical. I'm super psyched for this.

[My_Name_Is?]

It's not really my type of era. But i am happy that CA takes it to a totally new area of the game and that is China. I am more a Victorian era guy. But i can see some potential expansions for the game, that can take us to the more modern era like the opium wars or boxer rebellion. China has a vast history. Maybe we could see many expansions that can cover that history.

[LestaT]

I must say, I think the announcement of both Total War "The Three Kingdoms" and "Thrones of Britannia" have really been handled badly by CA. We have two games one of which is to be released as early as Spring, which we up to now know very little about save the subject matter and videos. The video of Three Kingdoms was rushed out without any proper presentation, leading to a lot of speculation much of which is negative. In fact this speculation features in very little discussion at all. In previous releases, the TWC forum was full of discussion about the period of the game and what features should be included. I really do think that releasing a video without providing more detailed background information is pointless and counterproductive if you want to generate interest for a game.

You probably have missed the bus not to realize that TWC is no longer the major target market for TW games.

[Evan MF]

CA doesn't cater to the likes of TWC anymore (if ever?), it caters to a mainstream PC gamer market and makes a lot of money doing so. TWCers should not conflate their dislike for the products CA have released in recent years with the success of the Total War titles (they do very well, year on year). Those of us who don't like the route the franchise has gone down have to face the fact that we have to look elsewhere for games that take historicity, plausibility and realism seriously. I have long given up hope with CA ever moving in the direction many of us have always wanted them to go down. In fact, Shogun 2 was a major foreshadowing of what kind of road they were going down, despite being an enjoyable and polished game to me, but for me Rome 2 was the true death of my fanboyism for the franchise. My hopes now lie on some indie or small developer signing on with a publisher like Paradox for example and delivering us the product that we crave, the product that Total War always projects in its advertisements but never truly delivers.

[SturmChurro]

CA doesn't cater to the likes of TWC anymore (if ever?), it caters to a mainstream PC gamer market and makes a lot of money doing so. TWCers should not conflate their dislike for the products CA have released in recent years with the success of the Total War titles (they do very well, year on year). Those of us who don't like the route the franchise has gone down have to face the fact that we have to look elsewhere for games that take historicity, plausibility and realism seriously. I have long given up hope with CA ever moving in the direction many of us have always wanted them to go down. In fact, Shogun 2 was a major foreshadowing of what kind of road they were going down, despite being an enjoyable and polished game to me, but for me Rome 2 was the true death of my fanboyism for the franchise. My hopes now lie on some indie or small developer signing on with a publisher like Paradox for example and delivering us the product that we crave, the product that Total War always projects in its advertisements but never truly delivers.

Not Paradox please! I don't want to pay a thousand dollars for 150 DLC expansions.

Granted the DLC policy for Warhammer seems to mirror paradox's. Releasing a very basic vanilla and DLC after DLC to flesh it out.

[Jurand of Cracow]

CA doesn't cater to the likes of TWC anymore (if ever?), it caters to a mainstream PC gamer market and makes a lot of money doing so. TWCers should not conflate their dislike for the products CA have released in recent years with the success of the Total War titles (they do very well, year on year). Those of us who don't like the route the franchise has gone down have to face the fact that we have to look elsewhere for games that take historicity, plausibility and realism seriously. I have long given up hope with CA ever moving in the direction many of us have always wanted them to go down. In fact, Shogun 2 was a major foreshadowing of what kind of road they were going down, despite being an enjoyable and polished game to me, but for me Rome 2 was the true death of my fanboyism for the franchise. My hopes now lie on some indie or small developer signing on with a publisher like Paradox for example and delivering us the product that we crave, the product that Total War always projects in its advertisements but never truly delivers.

This is an opinion a fully agree with.
If you define "us" as "guys who care about history and would like to play games resembling / giving historical immersion / giving feel for history, then our path with CA have parted already.

Two additional points:
1) The mods for the older TW games should be added to the options of history fans (I mean RTW and M2TW). I think they're still great and some (especially Europa Barbarorum) are getting even better.
2) I do play ATW-Age of Charlemagne happily but it's just a game with historical flavor, that's all. There're so many arcade and gamey things that even good mods cannot get away with (DeI for R2TW is good, but still cannot fix most of the issues). At the same time when I play Aleia Iaca Est or Europa Universalis, I have a feeling for history (with all simplifications a computer game requires). What I'd like is to have battles in the Total War style also in those games - or rather more simple but more realistic. In this sense I find the Universal General operational level to be the best. So maybe DarthVader as game producer will save us once again, as he did with the mods for the TW games?

Not Paradox please! I don't want to pay a thousand dollars for 150 DLC expansions.
Granted the DLC policy for Warhammer seems to mirror paradox's. Releasing a very basic vanilla and DLC after DLC to flesh it out.

Producers have to finance themselves somehow. Only the modders don charge you - and not all of them.
I think CA policy will be to sell again the same product for full price with some minor changes. Take Thrones of Britannia: this will be a DLC for Attila, but you'll buy it standalone. It means: you'll buy the engine of Attila again plus some add-ons (map, slightly modified units, new scenario) for a price of a new game (it will be advertised as a "new game"). This is going to be exactly the same in terms of money with the Paradox way of charging you for the DLCs. Or maybe rather worse - you still get free upadates for your basic Europa Universalis when a DLC comes. With the Total War games you wouldn't.
JoC

[izzi]

CA doesn't cater to the likes of TWC anymore (if ever?), it caters to a mainstream PC gamer market and makes a lot of money doing so. TWCers should not conflate their dislike for the products CA have released in recent years with the success of the Total War titles (they do very well, year on year). Those of us who don't like the route the franchise has gone down have to face the fact that we have to look elsewhere for games that take historicity, plausibility and realism seriously. I have long given up hope with CA ever moving in the direction many of us have always wanted them to go down. In fact, Shogun 2 was a major foreshadowing of what kind of road they were going down, despite being an enjoyable and polished game to me, but for me Rome 2 was the true death of my fanboyism for the franchise. My hopes now lie on some indie or small developer signing on with a publisher like Paradox for example and delivering us the product that we crave, the product that Total War always projects in its advertisements but never truly delivers.

I do understand your concern. I love the Total War franchise, because it's the only one in it's genre. There is no game company that makes a turn based RTS game like CA. Maybe if they had competition, it could work out to be better? I don't know really. I have all games of CA and i still play them if i had the time (except fantasy games like Warhammer). Games now are a multi billion dollar business. Even bigger than movies this days. The developers are sometimes not to blame, as bigger gaming companies like Sega or EA are putting a pressure on them. They have to make their shareholders happy by earning a good amount of money. I do understand that they have to earn money (a company can't survive without it off course), but sometimes i don't understand completely some of their decisions. But okay, my opinion guys (don't kill me for that). I will look the cat out of the three of this one. See how it goes (the reviews) and see if they have any nice expansions.

[ptoss1]

We already know from the trailer that the game follows the novel events, so for some people it's already pretty much "fantasy" no matter how "realistic" the game is.

[ggsimmonds]

I feel like too many are acting like the Three Kingdom novel is fantasy like Lord of the Rings or Warhammer.

Its not. It is more akin to Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. The game can be derived from the novel while still presenting an historically authentic TW game.

As far as speculation goes, my best guess for how heroes will be handled is that it will not be like single person units stomping around the battlefield. They will be like normal units only with unique officer avatars that have special abilities and will probably be very difficult to defeat. So elite units in other words.

[Evan MF]

I feel like too many are acting like the Three Kingdom novel is fantasy like Lord of the Rings or Warhammer.

Its not. It is more akin to Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. The game can be derived from the novel while still presenting an historically authentic TW game.

As far as speculation goes, my best guess for how heroes will be handled is that it will not be like single person units stomping around the battlefield. They will be like normal units only with unique officer avatars that have special abilities and will probably be very difficult to defeat. So elite units in other words.

It will more than likely by a re-use of the Warhammer 1-man general unit. They've just come off the back of - in their eyes - 2 successful games which feature the 1 man hero/monster unit paradigm and are heading into a new title based on a fiction novel, where they clearly telegraph the importance of heroes in the trailer, through the highly stylized appearance and elaborate fighting moves. It's staring us in the face. I would put good money on 1-man hero units.

[ptoss1]

It all depends on the setting. If you like the setting enough you'll just overlook things like ninja or gladiator women on the battlefield. When you don't like the setting every single thing becomes pronounced because you don't have the same sort of idealized context for it. I'm betting that most of the people getting angry over the "fantasy" have no previous knowledge of the Three Kingdoms era anyways.

[craziii]

It all depends on the setting. If you like the setting enough you'll just overlook things like ninja or gladiator women on the battlefield. When you don't like the setting every single thing becomes pronounced because you don't have the same sort of idealized context for it. I'm betting that most of the people getting angry over the "fantasy" have no previous knowledge of the Three Kingdoms era anyways.

spot on bro. imo, alot of the msm hate leaks into every aspect of western lives. which is why I think CA is brave to try this.

[FrozenmenSS]

By the look of it CA knows a lot of people wont play Warhammer and that there will be lots of them also who wont like the Theme of the ''3 Kingdoms'' so my prediction is that the Saga DLCs will be with us in the next 2-3 years as a compromise.

[Bigbossbalrog]

By the look of it CA knows a lot of people wont play Warhammer and that there will be lots of them also who wont like the Theme of the ''3 Kingdoms'' so my prediction is that the Saga DLCs will be with us in the next 2-3 years as a compromise.

Please, history purists like you are in the tiny minority. The Warhammer series is selling like hot cakes. Of course their going in that direction of the market says it's good to go that way. It's time to accept that the Total War series has always been a fantasy series. Roman Duel wielding Ninjas never existed, as did Elephants that act like medieval tanks with giant cannons attached to their backs.

Three Kingdoms will sell more then Attila, Thrones, and Rome combined. The Chinese market will eat it up, and about 95 percent of the Total War fandom will here in the west will buy it. End of discussion.