Total War

[KTNJR]

I was just on the web site and all I can saw is WOW!!

Does anybody know what it's going to take to run the new game??

[philturco]

Please tell ue more. Where can I find this new game.

[Mad Cow]

You talking about Total War: Empires?  Looks awesome. 

[JudgeDredd]

All I can think is "oooohhhh....another game that will make my computer look as powerful as a calculator"

[Hertston]

I don't think they've released system specs yet. With a Q1 2009 release date that tends to suggest they are trying to get them down, which does not bode well for those with less powerful PCs.

[JudgeDredd]

Meant to say also...I get an awful feeling of uselessness with the Total War series...like I'm going through a load of motions to get to battle.

I used to think "WOW"...but that was at Shogun...and it was more about battle than "the other bits"...but it's progressed so little that I feel I'm playing the same game with better graphics and more units...and that gets boring.

I bought Total War 2 pack (total war 2 and kingdoms?)...There is alot of game in there, but it's all been done nigh on a decade ago with Shogun. Yeah I know there are other options. I know there are new units. Ok...I know it's improved...but all I can really see is the base game.

The diplomacy options are still ridiculous and useless. The building? I just go through each turn building things and protecting borders and invading...and I live for the battles...that's all there is in the game. If you don't have the battles then it's an empty shell.

I know....it is total war...that doesn't excuse half arsed functionality. If they don't want to put diplomacy in because it's "total war", then leave it out. really...just make it Total War. I get bored very quick with the marriages, deaths, dimplotic actions...I just don't see the depth in it.

I want to like it. I want to love it...but I can't. I know it's got it's fans and I'm saying nothing against your taste in gaming...but I am always left feeling empty with it.

So I can't say I'm as excited about this title as I am about others.

And...I can say I feel the same way about Civilisation. I feel like I'm carried along for the ride...just sticking my mouse in every now and again to help steer the game the way it wants me to go....I love Civilisation...I truly do. From the graphics to the music to the gameplay...but I am still left feeling like I was on a ride rather than steering.

So they are both great games...??

Does anyone know or can anyone make sense of what I just wrote? I'm confused.com! [&:]

[Grell]

You make complete sense JD. I am sick and tired of Civ but I will probably try empire total war.

Regards,

Greg

[sterckxe]

ORIGINAL: KTNJR
Does anybody know what it's going to take to run the new game??

For me personally ? A lobotomy.

From a pure wargaming pov the series has worsened with every new release.

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

[Twotribes]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

Meant to say also...I get an awful feeling of uselessness with the Total War series...like I'm going through a load of motions to get to battle.

I used to think "WOW"...but that was at Shogun...and it was more about battle than "the other bits"...but it's progressed so little that I feel I'm playing the same game with better graphics and more units...and that gets boring.

I bought Total War 2 pack (total war 2 and kingdoms?)...There is alot of game in there, but it's all been done nigh on a decade ago with Shogun. Yeah I know there are other options. I know there are new units. Ok...I know it's improved...but all I can really see is the base game.

The diplomacy options are still ridiculous and useless. The building? I just go through each turn building things and protecting borders and invading...and I live for the battles...that's all there is in the game. If you don't have the battles then it's an empty shell.

I know....it is total war...that doesn't excuse half arsed functionality. If they don't want to put diplomacy in because it's "total war", then leave it out. really...just make it Total War. I get bored very quick with the marriages, deaths, dimplotic actions...I just don't see the depth in it.

I want to like it. I want to love it...but I can't. I know it's got it's fans and I'm saying nothing against your taste in gaming...but I am always left feeling empty with it.

So I can't say I'm as excited about this title as I am about others.

And...I can say I feel the same way about Civilisation. I feel like I'm carried along for the ride...just sticking my mouse in every now and again to help steer the game the way it wants me to go....I love Civilisation...I truly do. From the graphics to the music to the gameplay...but I am still left feeling like I was on a ride rather than steering.

So they are both great games...??

Does anyone know or can anyone make sense of what I just wrote? I'm confused.com! [&:]

Totally disagree. The turn process for strategic stuff is perfect. It gets rid of the click fest and NON strategic bullshit in real time games that make you build crap while fighting.

I do agree that the marriage thing and the total randomness of births is a problem. here should be some input from the player on those events. Maybe add the fun of mistresses as well ). Bastard children to keep the line alive and all.

[undercovergeek]

still waiting for someone to combine Crusader Kings family tree and political intrigue with Total War's battles.
 
Imagine receiving France as England because their king had died and your grandson was next in line - perfect

[JudgeDredd]

I suppose they should be commended for at least trying to create a tactical game within a strategic game...after all, that's what I crave...but I don't think they've pulled it off tbh.
 
It needs looking into and they need to stop buying shares in Intel and nVidia then improving the graphics and spend more time on the strategic element...it is lacking imo.
 
And TT...it is the strategic element of the game that stops me firing the game up. Hell it's been on and off my hard drive for over a year.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

I suppose they should be commended for at least trying to create a tactical game within a strategic game...after all, that's what I crave...but I don't think they've pulled it off tbh.

It needs looking into and they need to stop buying shares in Intel and nVidia then improving the graphics and spend more time on the strategic element...it is lacking imo.

And TT...it is the strategic element of the game that stops me firing the game up. Hell it's been on and off my hard drive for over a year.

We seem to be exactly opposite Judge. I fire up Medieval Total War and Viking Invasion soley to play the strategic came.

The stupid little tactical battles are what I can't stand.

[Twotribes]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

I suppose they should be commended for at least trying to create a tactical game within a strategic game...after all, that's what I crave...but I don't think they've pulled it off tbh.

It needs looking into and they need to stop buying shares in Intel and nVidia then improving the graphics and spend more time on the strategic element...it is lacking imo.

And TT...it is the strategic element of the game that stops me firing the game up. Hell it's been on and off my hard drive for over a year.

We seem to be exactly opposite Judge. I fire up Medieval Total War and Viking Invasion soley to play the strategic came.

The stupid little tactical battles are what I can't stand.

I like the fact I can pick and chose which battles to fight. Leads to some gamey play though. If the forces are close and I know I might lose if I let the computer play it, I will play out the battle, depending on if I have combined arms. Waste of time if you have no archers or only archers. Cavalary is not a must be is nice.

Haven't played in months though.

[sol_invictus]

I have had a love/hate relationship with TW since Shogun. I am so attracted to the idea of the real-time tactical battles married with turn-based strategic element that I keep coming back, only to be disappointed. The strategic gameplay has always been rather thin, though getting better, but the tactical gameplay has actually regressed imo. The move to the 3D strategic map has really gimped the AI and that is the part that I am most interested in. If CA can just get the AI to a point that it isn't so obviously flawed, this may be the one. Like a gilted lover, I will come crawling back when Empires shows up. I just hope that this time things will be different and we can truely bond in a long-term relationship.

[KTNJR]

I really hope my computer will run Empires.
I want to update my graphics card but when I do that I also have to get a better PSU.
First thing first, I have to get back to work. Sitting around for one month is killing and I have one more month left!!
At least I have WITP and im waiting for AE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[JudgeDredd]

When is AE due out? Do you know?

[KTNJR]

No, I don't know[:@]

[andym]

2009 by all accounts.

[anarchyintheuk]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

All I can think is "oooohhhh....another game that will make my computer look as powerful as a calculator"

Unfortunately, my feelings as well. I liked Viking Invasions best probably. It was a small geographic area, didn't concentrate all that much on building up infrastructure and the battles tended to have fewer troops.

[mikul82]

Some of you guys might like reading the article I posted on twcenter, it did raise some hell I suppose.
 
I agree that the TW series has been SEVERLY dumbed down since Medieval 1 (didn't play much Shogun until after MTW), the developers have gone for better graphics and glitz while downgrading the gameplay, both with inferior AI, and adding in features that don't work properly or that the AI can't take advantage of (3D Strategy map, broken diplomacy, etc).  I don't want to take up a huge amount of space posting this here, so here's a link:
 
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=187723