337 In-Game

[Moth]

337 In-Game

[Adventurous350]

Originally posted by norfsled:

Originally posted by Defmonkey:

Because of mods.... They aint playing the base game. I can assure you that.

So the modded 10 year old game is 7 times more popular as the brand new game. That says something doesn't it. What did the developer achieve during 10 years in terms of game quality? Apparently nothing. I wonder if modded GTA 4 will be 7 times more popular than GTA 6 when that releases

I would not be surprised if Medieval 2s playetbase is 50% the lord of the rings mod. Which would explain why its numbers are still so high. It also runs on older systems which id say alot of people have.

Also, you have to realize these are different time periods. There are days I get this craving for a good musket volley lol. Therefore, I go update my mods for napoleon or empire and have a good time. Pharaoh won't fill my desire for muskets. Each Toral War game is going to interest a different group of players more or less. Pharaoh being Bronze Age is naturally going to have a more limited playerbase.

[Vilela53]

Originally posted by Adventurous350:

Originally posted by norfsled:

So the modded 10 year old game is 7 times more popular as the brand new game. That says something doesn't it. What did the developer achieve during 10 years in terms of game quality? Apparently nothing. I wonder if modded GTA 4 will be 7 times more popular than GTA 6 when that releases

I would not be surprised if Medieval 2s playetbase is 50% the lord of the rings mod. Which would explain why its numbers are still so high. It also runs on older systems which id say alot of people have.

Also, you have to realize these are different time periods. There are days I get this craving for a good musket volley lol. Therefore, I go update my mods for napoleon or empire and have a good time. Pharaoh won't fill my desire for muskets. Each Toral War game is going to interest a different group of players more or less. Pharaoh being Bronze Age is naturally going to have a more limited playerbase.

I could agree with you, the community was really very angry and disappointed because we expected a sequel to Empire or Medieval 2 and this also contributed to the high rejection of total war Pharaoh.

But Pharaoh isn't a bronze age game, it's a game about Egypt in the Bronze Age and that's the problem!

Total War Pharaoh is for a bronze age game just like Wrath of Sparta Campaign Pack for Rome 2.

In my opinion TW Pharaoh could work as an Egypt-focused campaign DLC for another main game that portrayed the bronze age as a whole.

[Defmonkey]

Originally posted by Vilela53:

Originally posted by Defmonkey:

It might be still born for you if you were expecting 15 years of mod support. I never expected that in the first place and got 450 hours out it so i got my moneys worth from it.

I didn't see any complaints in the reviews or on the forum about the lack of mods in TWP, but rather the lack of official content!

But I hope you understand that this is not a personal criticism, I hope you have even more fun with TWP. But looking at the situation as a whole, I don't see a promising future for the game.

If 3K, which has respectable numbers, was abandoned a long time ago, I wouldn't expect much support for TW Pharaoh!

We will get the 4 DLCs i think, unless the situation is so dire they cut losses but i do think that would be shame and feel this is unlikely. Support beyond that... who knows.

I dont think Pharaoh and 3K are necessarily the same. It didnt stop them producing DLC before... Did Troy DLC make plenty? The game got plenty of income from its free release but did the DLC make any... they supported that for a while.

[Defmonkey]

Originally posted by Vilela53:

Originally posted by Adventurous350:

I would not be surprised if Medieval 2s playetbase is 50% the lord of the rings mod. Which would explain why its numbers are still so high. It also runs on older systems which id say alot of people have.

Also, you have to realize these are different time periods. There are days I get this craving for a good musket volley lol. Therefore, I go update my mods for napoleon or empire and have a good time. Pharaoh won't fill my desire for muskets. Each Toral War game is going to interest a different group of players more or less. Pharaoh being Bronze Age is naturally going to have a more limited playerbase.

I could agree with you, the community was really very angry and disappointed because we expected a sequel to Empire or Medieval 2 and this also contributed to the high rejection of total war Pharaoh.

But Pharaoh isn't a bronze age game, it's a game about Egypt in the Bronze Age and that's the problem!

Total War Pharaoh is for a bronze age game just like Wrath of Sparta Campaign Pack for Rome 2.

In my opinion TW Pharaoh could work as an Egypt-focused campaign DLC for another main game that portrayed the bronze age as a whole.

I know what you mean but i dont think it would work in Pharaohs case being centered around the bronze age collapse. If they had gone for a more broad strokes game then maybe.... i see flaws for both broad scope games and more focused campaigns and i think its good to have main games that cover both.

Dont get me wrong... i would also love to see a med 3, Empire 2 , Napoleon in a grander scale, Renaissance, American civil war... you name it i would love to see it

I dont want to see a watered down grand world campaign though covering too large a time scale

[Vilela53]

Originally posted by Defmonkey:

Originally posted by Vilela53:

I could agree with you, the community was really very angry and disappointed because we expected a sequel to Empire or Medieval 2 and this also contributed to the high rejection of total war Pharaoh.

But Pharaoh isn't a bronze age game, it's a game about Egypt in the Bronze Age and that's the problem!

Total War Pharaoh is for a bronze age game just like Wrath of Sparta Campaign Pack for Rome 2.

In my opinion TW Pharaoh could work as an Egypt-focused campaign DLC for another main game that portrayed the bronze age as a whole.

I know what you mean but i dont think it would work in Pharaohs case being centered around the bronze age collapse. If they had gone for a more broad strokes game then maybe.... i see flaws for both broad scope games and more focused campaigns and i think its good to have main games that cover both.

Dont get me wrong... i would also love to see a med 3, Empire 2 , Napoleon in a grander scale, Renaissance, American civil war... you name it i would love to see it

I dont want to see a watered down grand world campaign though covering too large a time scale

One of Pharaoh's problems is precisely the fact that it does not convince the player base around this campaign centered on Egypt and the collapse of the bronze age.

Attila also portrays the end of the Roman Empire, antiquity and the beginning of the medieval period and although the focus is on the fall of Rome, TWA portrays a much wider variety of cultures!

And another important issue is that CA has never expanded a main campaign map. Campaign DLCs are created focused on pre-existing regions on the main campaign map, meaning it will not be possible to expand much beyond what has already been released.

I also don't see any problems with a focused tw, as long as it is honest and has a compatible price! The scope of TW Pharaoh is that of a saga title and from the beginning it should be treated as such.

[Defmonkey]

Originally posted by Vilela53:

Originally posted by Defmonkey:

I know what you mean but i dont think it would work in Pharaohs case being centered around the bronze age collapse. If they had gone for a more broad strokes game then maybe.... i see flaws for both broad scope games and more focused campaigns and i think its good to have main games that cover both.

Dont get me wrong... i would also love to see a med 3, Empire 2 , Napoleon in a grander scale, Renaissance, American civil war... you name it i would love to see it

I dont want to see a watered down grand world campaign though covering too large a time scale

One of Pharaoh's problems is precisely the fact that it does not convince the player base around this campaign centered on Egypt and the collapse of the bronze age.

Attila also portrays the end of the Roman Empire, antiquity and the beginning of the medieval period and although the focus is on the fall of Rome, TWA portrays a much wider variety of cultures!

And another important issue is that CA has never expanded a main campaign map. Campaign DLCs are created focused on pre-existing regions on the main campaign map, meaning it will not be possible to expand much beyond what has already been released.

I also don't see any problems with a focused tw, as long as it is honest and has a compatible price! The scope of TW Pharaoh is that of a saga title and from the beginning it should be treated as such.

Well i guess alot of that is due to its time period and the events it is portraying... but again this is subjective i do understand that it isnt going to gel with everyone. Could CA done more to convince the player base... i dont know, i think they were pretty open about the game prior to its release on all the playable factions and characters, the scope and region and the mechanics involved. They had lets plays, interviews, first look videos, early access trial that you could refund... i dont know what more could they have done?

i think it hasnt helped with very bad publicity before and the release of other major releases at the same time as well so lots of things that were not in good state when it released...

Ive never bought into the idea of Saga, it has absolutely no meaning. None of the saga titles share things in common and other main TW games could also be classified as a saga if its localisation on a conflict or area of a map is being used as a definition. Pharaoh has more mechanics than medieval 2 for sure... is it enough for a present day expectation i dont know, maybe that could be argued for considering its price.

Also.... are you sure you are correct on no map expansions.... Their has been several... Warhammer franchise has had many. Shogun 2 had one too....

[Myrden]

SAga is a more focused scope, like ToB, S2, Napoleon, Troy, Pharaoh. Good for a few campaigns not no real staying power in my eyes.

I wonder though if the sales would have been better if they had named it Total War Bronze Age. Probably, but that would just mean more rage as folks discovered it was a bronze age game focused on Egypt.

What was wrong with a Mediterranean Map? What was wrong with a European one? After Empire and I'm continually annoyed that they don't do world wide maps for each of their main titles tbfh.

[Defmonkey]

Originally posted by Myrden:

SAga is a more focused scope, like ToB, S2, Napoleon, Troy, Pharaoh. Good for a few campaigns not no real staying power in my eyes.

I wonder though if the sales would have been better if they had named it Total War Bronze Age. Probably, but that would just mean more rage as folks discovered it was a bronze age game focused on Egypt.

What was wrong with a Mediterranean Map? What was wrong with a European one? After Empire and I'm continually annoyed that they don't do world wide maps for each of their main titles tbfh.

Hello Mr Myrden. Yeah Saga... Shogun 1 was the original game... so do we devalue that one? I think there has to be a mixture. Having the same Mediterranean map to fight over time and time again would get old pretty fast.

Having a centralized focus for a game is not a bad thing either. Open ended sandbox can be fun for a bit but if its the only thing then these games will become tired.

I wouldnt mind a world wide map at some point too... but i am cautious of the game losing its focus here too if time span is too long and the game loses its focus and becomes too watered down.... i strongly dislike civilisations franchise for this reason... seeing india with nukes with another main civilisation running around in sandals....

[Myrden]

Originally posted by Defmonkey:

Originally posted by Myrden:

SAga is a more focused scope, like ToB, S2, Napoleon, Troy, Pharaoh. Good for a few campaigns not no real staying power in my eyes.

I wonder though if the sales would have been better if they had named it Total War Bronze Age. Probably, but that would just mean more rage as folks discovered it was a bronze age game focused on Egypt.

What was wrong with a Mediterranean Map? What was wrong with a European one? After Empire and I'm continually annoyed that they don't do world wide maps for each of their main titles tbfh.

Hello Mr Myrden. Yeah Saga... Shogun 1 was the original game... so do we devalue that one? I think there has to be a mixture. Having the same Mediterranean map to fight over time and time again would get old pretty fast.

Having a centralized focus for a game is not a bad thing either. Open ended sandbox can be fun for a bit but if its the only thing then these games will become tired.

I wouldnt mind a world wide map at some point too... but i am cautious of the game losing its focus here too if time span is too long and the game loses its focus and becomes too watered down.... i strongly dislike civilisations franchise for this reason... seeing india with nukes with another main civilisation running around in sandals....

Hello, Mr Defmonkey. it would appear you prefer the Saga titles. I do not use the title Saga to demean them, I use them in the sense that CA first used them. They are what they are. Fun (and by no means a bad thing), but not as good as the broader scope TW's in my opinion. Those are the title I lust after.

Seems I'm not alone.

[Defmonkey]

Originally posted by Myrden:

Originally posted by Defmonkey:

Hello Mr Myrden. Yeah Saga... Shogun 1 was the original game... so do we devalue that one? I think there has to be a mixture. Having the same Mediterranean map to fight over time and time again would get old pretty fast.

Having a centralized focus for a game is not a bad thing either. Open ended sandbox can be fun for a bit but if its the only thing then these games will become tired.

I wouldnt mind a world wide map at some point too... but i am cautious of the game losing its focus here too if time span is too long and the game loses its focus and becomes too watered down.... i strongly dislike civilisations franchise for this reason... seeing india with nukes with another main civilisation running around in sandals....

Hello, Mr Defmonkey. it would appear you prefer the Saga titles. I do not use the title Saga to demean them, I use them in the sense that CA first used them. They are what they are. Fun (and by no means a bad thing), but not as good as the broader scope TW's in my opinion. Those are the title I lust after.

Seems I'm not alone.

Yeah sure i get that. Your not alone, neither am I. Lol. There is big support for focused titles too. Be it Napoleon, Shogun or otherwise...

I like the bigger scope titles too but they gotta do it right. In empire i hated that there was so few settlements per region... Spain was 1 city... France 2, Great Britain and Ireland... 3.... Way too small in my opinion.

[Adventurous350]

Defmonkey, that is the issue I have with the bigger titles as well. What they have done with the outposts may help to solve this in the future if they enhance the way they work. Maybe the outposts become actual small towns for example, similar to how the fort outpost works. The fort outpost somewhat acts as its own settlement.

[Defmonkey]

Originally posted by Adventurous350:

Defmonkey, that is the issue I have with the bigger titles as well. What they have done with the outposts may help to solve this in the future if they enhance the way they work. Maybe the outposts become actual small towns for example, similar to how the fort outpost works. The fort outpost somewhat acts as its own settlement.

Agreed, i really like the focused aspects. If they made a total war that could layer itself from a capital, provincial and local level that scales into each other properly it would be very cool to see... the problem with this is that there only so much a player is going to maintain interest in managing this and it varies from player to player.... some have zero tolerance for it and want to get straight to battles... others want to tinker till their heart is content.

We don't have an auto manage feature these days... but the old school ones in place in older TW games really were not that great... i used to spend a lot of time correcting the build priorities or just manage them all myself. Even in Pharaoh if you get a proper boner for conquest and take a lot of settlements in one go you have a lot to manage that can really make turns long.

The outpost system is very interesting... i wasn't impressed when they initially announced it but ive grown to like it a lot since while they aren't place-able anywhere, they are multipurpose and can serve several functions and not just plus 1 armour like the earlier games. The fact you can move armies around faster as they resupply at these outpost is a very interesting idea.

[Adventurous350]

Agreed! That is the tricky part about Total War. The balance. They can't go too deep into campaign or battle mechanics because it will really limit the interested playerbase. DEI for example is awesome to me, but alot of players don't enjoy the more realistic style of it.

[Myrden]

Originally posted by Defmonkey:

Yeah sure i get that. Your not alone, neither am I. Lol. There is big support for focused titles

There's of course a wide array of reasons why Pharaoh has such low numbers. Personally I'm putting it on the Saga-esque flavour of the Title as the main reason for this.

What would you say the main reason for the low numbers would be?

[Defmonkey]

Originally posted by Myrden:

Originally posted by Defmonkey:

Yeah sure i get that. Your not alone, neither am I. Lol. There is big support for focused titles

There's of course a wide array of reasons why Pharaoh has such low numbers. Personally I'm putting it on the Saga-esque flavour of the Title as the main reason for this.

What would you say the main reason for the low numbers would be?

Well i would say there are are quite a few...

Pricing
Theme and time period
Nagative perceptions in similarities with Troy
Another bronze age title coming out after Troy
Bad PR relation gaffs by CA... especially with the Warhammer DLC release pricing/value ratio
Bad PR relations with a senior CA director and their response to the above
Bad publicity from bitter youtube influencers
Big title releases at this games release...

Some there i think...