Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Total War ideas.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Total War ideas.

    Where would you like a total war game to be set next? I would like the it to be maybe set in the dark ages.
    27
    Bronze Age -1200 BC
    0.00%
    0
    Iron Age 1200-800 BC
    3.70%
    1
    Archaic Greece 800 BC - 480 BC
    3.70%
    1
    Hellenic Period (Alexander) 450 BC - 350 AD
    11.11%
    3
    Middle Ages 500 AD - 1000 AD
    22.22%
    6
    Other (please state)
    59.26%
    16

  • #2
    I can almost guarantee that CA will be revisiting Rome: TW next. However, the medieval era will always be my preferred venue. On the wild side, I think a sci-fi TW would be really cool. Something along the lines of Alpha Centuri.
    Burke's Joystick: Because Edmund Burke would have been a gamer.

    Comment


    • #3
      Curses! Y'all beat me to the punch. I was just going to post this article.

      What's Next For Total War

      With seven fully-fledged titles as well as a host of expansions and add-ons, all encompassing almost 2000 years of human history, the Total War series has just about seen it all. With what would appear to be one of the last DLC packs for Shogun 2 on the horizon, the team at Creative Assembly are sure to be racking their brains in search of the next great Total War concept. But what about us, the loyal fan base - can we not have our say to decide whatís next for Total War? Iíve been racking my own brain as a long time fan and digging around the forums and fan pages in search of a clue to the world for the next potential game. From sequels to Civil wars, from Middle Earth to Dino-land, read on to see what Iíve dug up.

      Full Article
      I have to agree, I think Rome II is most probable, and it's also what I would most like to see. As long as they don't botch it, which is asking a lot lately.
      ...how useless it was to struggle against fortune, this being the burden of wisdom which the ages had bequeathed to him.

      Comment


      • #4
        That was a good article!

        The author has intrigued me with his idea of a pan-Civil War TW, one game that covers multiple battles from civil wars throughout the ages. However, what if we take that a step further? How about a TW that is not limited to any particular period or subject? One that covers campaigns from across history, with new campaigns available as regularly arriving DLC? Perhaps there would even be a service for the mod community to upload new maps and campaigns directly to an official CA server that can be accessed by all players from within the game itself? In other words, you wouldn't be buying a set campaign as much as just an open-ended TW engine, with the players being free to pick and choose which specific campaigns they want to buy as DLC (of course, I expect the engine to come with at least three starter campaigns of some type so you get some value for your money from the get-go.)
        Last edited by Rooks Bailey; 08 Sep 11, 22:41.
        Burke's Joystick: Because Edmund Burke would have been a gamer.

        Comment


        • #5
          Felt a little guilty about clogging up ACG with my endless ramblings about the Total War games so I started a blog. My latest post is about which path Creative Assembly should take. I'll give you a hint, it's in the Mediterranean. If you feel like a read, you can check it out HERE. Any constructive criticism offered is also appreciated.
          ...how useless it was to struggle against fortune, this being the burden of wisdom which the ages had bequeathed to him.

          Comment


          • #6
            Hurray! A new blog! I love blogging.

            I like the look of your blog, particularly the title banner.

            As for the post, I agree! R2:TW would make the most sense for the next game. While I didn't like ETW, and skipped Shogun 2 (I have no interest in that period), I would jump on a new Rome TW in a heartbeat!

            Whatever the next title turns out to be, I just hope CA gives the multiplayer portion the StarCraft treatment. I would love for TW to develop into the next big e-sport title (not the strategy game, obviously, but the real time battles). Leagues, comprehensive stat tracking, broadcasting tools, and effortless matchmaking - it all needs to be in there.

            I recently wrote a blog entry about one of my favorite sci-fi short stories of all time, On the Shadow of a Phosphor Screen. In that story there is a game that is described in terms that make it remarkably similar to Total War (the story was written in 1979, so that's impressive when you think about it). The cool factor is that this story anticipated competitive gaming (e-sports) for big prizes, sort of like what we have with SC2 right now. Difference being, instead of Terrain Marines and Zerg, pro-wargamers fight out battles from history.

            Here we are in the 21st Century where competitive gaming is becoming a reality. Why shouldn't Total War get in on it? Granted, the MP portion of the TW franchise has never been their strong point, but maybe it could be so now? I hope CA takes a long, hard look at the professional polish that Blizzard put into SC2's e-sport enhanced multiplayer component, and do likewise. The e-sports arena is wide open at the moment; CA shouldn't waste this opportunity to make my favorite short story come true!
            Burke's Joystick: Because Edmund Burke would have been a gamer.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Rooks Bailey View Post
              I recently wrote a blog entry about one of my favorite sci-fi short stories of all time, On the Shadow of a Phosphor Screen. In that story there is a game that is described in terms that make it remarkably similar to Total War (the story was written in 1979, so that's impressive when you think about it). The cool factor is that this story anticipated competitive gaming (e-sports) for big prizes, sort of like what we have with SC2 right now. Difference being, instead of Terrain Marines and Zerg, pro-wargamers fight out battles from history.

              Here we are in the 21st Century where competitive gaming is becoming a reality. Why shouldn't Total War get in on it? Granted, the MP portion of the TW franchise has never been their strong point, but maybe it could be so now? I hope CA takes a long, hard look at the professional polish that Blizzard put into SC2's e-sport enhanced multiplayer component, and do likewise. The e-sports arena is wide open at the moment; CA shouldn't waste this opportunity to make my favorite short story come true!
              A very good Read! I have to say, I identified with most of those excerpts from the short story. I've never read it, but I will now. Small confession; I'm afraid that I've been shallow in my assessment of Starcraft. A friend mentioned that I would like it, and I for the most part discounted it. I thought it reminded me too much of the old style RTS in the same vein as C&C and the like, at least from the little I'd seen of the game. I can admit, I may have been wrong. That video was staggering. I had no idea it had become competitive to that level.
              Originally posted by Rooks Bailey View Post
              As for the post, I agree! R2:TW would make the most sense for the next game. While I didn't like ETW, and skipped Shogun 2 (I have no interest in that period), I would jump on a new Rome TW in a heartbeat!

              Whatever the next title turns out to be, I just hope CA gives the multiplayer portion the StarCraft treatment. I would love for TW to develop into the next big e-sport title (not the strategy game, obviously, but the real time battles). Leagues, comprehensive stat tracking, broadcasting tools, and effortless matchmaking - it all needs to be in there.
              That's fine. Empire took a looooong time to grow on me, and only because of the mods available. I skipped Napoleon, because the campaign was solely story driven; not what I'm interested in. I don't mind if it's additional content, like the American Revolution campaign in Empire, but I was very disappointed that it was all there was to Napoleon. One of the bedrock features of the Total War games imo has always been the fact that the campaign map was huge, and your nation's borders were only limited by victory in battle. That didn't justify the purchase. Shogun; also don't have much interest in the time period and I won't be buying that title. Which has got me worried. I know that many Total War players were very displeased with Creative Assembly's execution in Empire (which really could be called Napoleon:Beta), and I also feel like I'm drifting further and further out of touch with the series. That's why I believe that need a win -in the form of Rome 2. Selling units isn't their problem, to put it plainly, they're makin' bank. The only thing that terrifies me is a decline in quality, especially in the form of graphics trumping gameplay.

              Originally posted by Rooks Bailey View Post
              Hurray! A new blog! I love blogging.

              I like the look of your blog, particularly the title banner.
              Thanks. Photoshop and a Screenshot.
              ...how useless it was to struggle against fortune, this being the burden of wisdom which the ages had bequeathed to him.

              Comment


              • #8
                Make the next Total War game playable by all PC gamers and not just those who use Steam.
                "I have never known a combat soldier who did not show a residue of war." --Sergeant Ed Stewart, 84th Division, US Army, WWII

                Comment


                • #9
                  Pike and Shot/Renaissance without Steam
                  Last edited by Colonel Sennef; 18 Sep 11, 01:59.
                  BoRG

                  You may not be interested in War, but War is interested in You - Leon Trotski, June 1919.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    What about a counterfactual TW? It's not like TW is very historically accurate anyway. How bout this: Imperialism: Total War, where you can experiment with an era of actual total war (1861-1925ish). You can play the Civil War, WWI, or see how total war would work in 1881. With the huge technology differentials, naval warfare, alliance potential, the ways to create mass carnage and dominate the world are innumerable!
                    How many Allied tanks it would take to destroy a Maus?
                    275. Because that's how many shells there are in the Maus. Then it could probably crush some more until it ran out of gas. - Surfinbird

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I think they should spend about five minutes deciding where to go next, and 12 months concentrating on the strategic engine and map.

                      This series has always been a little disappointing to me. I played the original game endlessly, and played Rome plenty, but have just found the thing hasn't progressed strategically. I had hopes this would be one of the best ever, but it looks like a cash cow now, with money spent endlessly improving graphics, but no desire to take the strategy and campaign map beyond beer and pretzels.

                      Having three maps hid the flaws in Empire, as there were real choices to be made for certain factions. That said, I gave shogun a miss. Battles are fun, but they are much more fun in a strategic context. Failure to improve that strategi context is CA's greatest failure.

                      Rant over.

                      ID

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by IronDuke View Post
                        This series has always been a little disappointing to me. I played the original game endlessly, and played Rome plenty, but have just found the thing hasn't progressed strategically. I had hopes this would be one of the best ever, but it looks like a cash cow now, with money spent endlessly improving graphics, but no desire to take the strategy and campaign map beyond beer and pretzels.
                        I completely agree with you. In fact, I sort of think the series took a step backward when they went from the original's "game board" map, to the more "realistic" 3D maps. I liked the idea of plotting my strategy on a game board!

                        I am also growing tired of the turn-based strategy / real time battles duality. That worked back in the day, but today there are more innovative ways to proceed. I like what Eugen did with RUSE, for example, where the game makes a seamless transition from a strategic overview down to a ground-level real time battle. I think that system would work really well for a TW title, too.
                        Burke's Joystick: Because Edmund Burke would have been a gamer.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Lucky 6 View Post
                          A very good Read! I have to say, I identified with most of those excerpts from the short story. I've never read it, but I will now.
                          Thanks! And good luck finding the story. It is one of those hidden gems that never got much exposure for some reason. I only came across it in the superior mil sci-fi collection, Battlefields Beyond Tomorrow. If you can find a copy of this masterful anthology, grab it! Otherwise, you might have to settle for William Wu's novelization of the story, entitled Masterclass. I didn't even realize he wrote a novelization until I did some research for that blog entry. I have since snatched a used copy but haven't had a chance to read it yet. But I can't wait to!

                          Small confession; I'm afraid that I've been shallow in my assessment of Starcraft. A friend mentioned that I would like it, and I for the most part discounted it. I thought it reminded me too much of the old style RTS in the same vein as C&C and the like, at least from the little I'd seen of the game. I can admit, I may have been wrong. That video was staggering. I had no idea it had become competitive to that level.
                          Don't worry, you're not the only one. I never would have purchased the game but for the demo. It was only after I tried the demo that I really appreciated what Blizzard had done with SC2, both in terms of making a solid, old school (and yes, it is old school) PC-centric RTS, but also the world's first piece of dedicated e-sports software. There's a reason why Blizzard is worth many millions I guess. Those guys are genius.

                          I don't mind if it's additional content, like the American Revolution campaign in Empire, but I was very disappointed that it was all there was to Napoleon. One of the bedrock features of the Total War games imo has always been the fact that the campaign map was huge, and your nation's borders were only limited by victory in battle.
                          That was my thoughts, too. I never purchased the expansion either.

                          Which has got me worried. I know that many Total War players were very displeased with Creative Assembly's execution in Empire (which really could be called Napoleon:Beta), and I also feel like I'm drifting further and further out of touch with the series. That's why I believe that need a win -in the form of Rome 2. Selling units isn't their problem, to put it plainly, they're makin' bank. The only thing that terrifies me is a decline in quality, especially in the form of graphics trumping gameplay.
                          Yeah, I agree. Empire was an example of one step forward, two steps back. Sure, you had those great naval battles (the only thing really innovative in the title), but a lot of what made other TW titles so great seemed to be missing, such as the animated cut scenes after an assassination for example, or the excellent song that I always looked forward to hearing while the credits rolled. E:TW was an example of pointless extravagance.

                          Well, on the good side Shogun seems to suggest that CA got the message and are returning to the original formula. On the bad side, CA has yet to really do anything that takes the game to a new level.
                          Burke's Joystick: Because Edmund Burke would have been a gamer.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Wolery View Post
                            What about a counterfactual TW? It's not like TW is very historically accurate anyway. How bout this: Imperialism: Total War, where you can experiment with an era of actual total war (1861-1925ish). You can play the Civil War, WWI, or see how total war would work in 1881. With the huge technology differentials, naval warfare, alliance potential, the ways to create mass carnage and dominate the world are innumerable!
                            Originally posted by Rooks Bailey View Post
                            I completely agree with you. In fact, I sort of think the series took a step backward when they went from the original's "game board" map, to the more "realistic" 3D maps. I liked the idea of plotting my strategy on a game board!

                            I am also growing tired of the turn-based strategy / real time battles duality. That worked back in the day, but today there are more innovative ways to proceed. I like what Eugen did with RUSE, for example, where the game makes a seamless transition from a strategic overview down to a ground-level real time battle. I think that system would work really well for a TW title, too.
                            The Nexus of these two posts I think would make a great game. I too am getting tired of the turn-based feel. I looked at some R.U.S.E. clips on YT to see what you meant, and I liked what I saw. The seamless galactic-to-ship zoom in Sins of Solar Empire came to mind also.

                            I think that a game set in the Victorian era would make for great entertainment, but it's going to require a re-imagining of their mechanics. If their setting gets anywhere near the time period of WWI, their current layout simply won't work. WWI battles were not fought in 18th century style with less than 5,000 men on the field at one time. I think that moving the strategic map into the 4X dimension has real possibilities. But, I think that it should be the title after the next. Stick with a sop to the traditionalists --hopefully in the form of Rome--, make it easily moddable, and then when they feel they have their cash cow that'll be around for some time...release something truly innovative.
                            ...how useless it was to struggle against fortune, this being the burden of wisdom which the ages had bequeathed to him.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I agree with Wolery's 1861-1925 Total War idea. But once you get to battles involving multiple corps/armies on a battlefield its simply too much for most computers to handle, especially with guns where hundreds of thousands of bullets are flying, thousands of artillery guns firing and exploding. Multiply it be a factor of four in WWI with machine guns, bigger artillery guns, gas, plane bombs, etc.

                              It would seem a natural progression for the game as well, as it would pick up where Empire left off. People's ideas of dropping the turn based idea seems to me, the antithesis of the Total War idea. Perhaps change the intervals of the turns but still have a turn based game. Perhaps have turns for each battle, where you get to control a division at a time on one section of the front, then one mini-turn later, you are controlling a division at another section of the front. That way it keeps to scale of the numbers of men you have to control. And then when no major offensive or counter-attack is happening it goes back to one season long turns.

                              Eventually I'd like to see Total War progress through WW2 to the Cold War and up to modern day, being able to alter history by commanding current nations. Integrating modern artillery, naval and air power will be the challenge. Also logistics of global troop movement will have to be accounted for.
                              The Europa Barbarorum II team [M2TW] needs YOUR HELP NOW HERE!

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X