Closest competitor to TW?

[Ysthrall]

Some opinions have been floated that CA/Sega has been able to pursue its business models (DLC) and prices (substantial) due to a lack of competition. This is entirely possible: monopolies have little to measure themselves against. Given the recent thread on "Favourite Games", and the lack of current DLC to discuss, I was wondering about this.

The Total War series is an interesting hybrid of a turn-based 4X campaign game (Explore, Expand, Exploit and Exterminate.... it took me ages to understand that) and a battlefield commander RTS. As usual for a hybrid, it's not as good at either if these as those games which may specialise in one or the other.

Now I realise (especially when those gaming lists were posted) that I lack the breadth of gaming experience of some here. So I'm asking you lot:

What would you consider the closest competitor to Total War games, in terms of genre, gameplay and scope? And why?

(Not necessarily historical or fantasy, I'm sure there's a few good modern or sci-fi versions)

[Welsh Dragon]

Imperial Glory tried to be Total War back in the day. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Glory)

It actually predates Empire/Napoleon by a number of years. I played it, but just couldn't get on with it.

Star Wars: Empire at War also comes to mind, with it's combination of a Galactic Map where you control an (The) Empire, Rebel Alliance or (in the expansion) Zann Consortium. Not quite the same, but similar idea.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars:_Empire_at_War)

Then there's games like Universe at War: Earth Assault, Emperor: Battle for Dune etc where the campaign gameplay is fairly limited, and mainly serves as a way to link together the battles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe_at_War:_Earth_Assault
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor:_Battle_for_Dune

In general, I don't think there's any game that's quite the same as Total War. Some have tried, but only Total War has lasted.

If CA has a monopoly on this type of game, I'd say it's because it's so hard to get it right, and it's expensive to do (which may go some way to explaining why they use a DLC model and the overall price can be "substantial" compared to some games.)

All the Best,

Welsh Dragon.

[The Mailman Thinks I Am Gay]

I would say Paradox. The problem is thier games aren't really like TW, since they are usually Grand Strategy type games. Which you could compare to TW grand campaign, and it better but that is because that what where the game is play from (Unlike TW where there two: IN game battle and map).

[Sargeist]

In terms of how battles are played, no other game (that I know of at least) compares to total war.

Plenty of other strategy games about conquering the world though, but TW is the only series I'm aware of that let's you command thousands of soldiers in real time.

[TVMAN]

There really isn't a direct competitor to the TW series that I can think of. Most other games of this type are either smaller in scale (Age of Empires) or larger in scale (The Paradox Grand Strategy games). Civ comes close, but the combat system in that series can turn a lot of people off.

[Welsh Dragon]

Another factor that sets Total War apart from many games is the historical/real world nature of Total War, even this one.

Most 4X are played on maps with a certain amount of randomness, in the layout of the map and/or the placement of the factions. Many also allow you to build settlements.

Where as with Total War, where the factions are, what (and how much) territory is occupied by those factions, what the map looks like, even where the players units start and what they are is all set at the start. Unless you are using mods, you won't find the Dwarves starting in Chaos Wastes, or Rome starting in India etc.

All the Best,

Welsh Dragon.

[TheAlmightyProo]

Good question and opener for a thread.

Personally, I think that across the series, the TW games have done a great job as a hybrid of 4X and battlefield commander but then, as you rightly put it, direct competition to TW has been lacking.
There's been a wealth of games, a number of which I've played, have but haven't yet played or simply were good enough for my wishlist that stand out for me (even if, in the case of those not yet played by me, the mere hope they're as good as TW) all of which use and/or improve on some of the TW series mechanics in some way...

Among which are: Endless Legend/Space, Homeworld, Ultimate General: Gettysburg, Oriental Empires, Stellaris and the CoH/DoW games (all of which I own) and the Hegemony games, Distant Worlds and Warring States (which I don't) though all range in differences from TW to a lesser or greater extent and I'm sure there's a ton of games I don't even know of.

In fact the only ones I can think of offhand that are as close to TW as possible afaik are Imperial Glory from about 10-12 years ago and Kingdom Wars: Battles and both of those are much like older TW titles.

Overall, and given that I used to have it, I'd say Imperial Glory is or was the closest... Napoleonic warfare (including naval battles) before NTW was around, with the campaign map of STW or MTW... you could've been forgiven for thinking it actually was a TW game back then even though it had some faults.

[Welsh Dragon]

Originally posted by TheAlmightyProo:

Overall, and given that I used to have it, I'd say Imperial Glory is or was the closest... Napoleonic warfare (including naval battles) before NTW was around, with the campaign map of STW or MTW... you could've been forgiven for thinking it actually was a TW game back then even though it had some faults.

My main memory of Imperial Glory was my line infantry getting slaughtered by peasants every time... I was a less patient person back then, so think I eventually just gave up.

All the Best,

Welsh Dragon.

[Vacca]

Paradox, from my experience. Either CK or EU. Extremely better management of... well, everything you could possibly think of, but no real time battles. Shame. They would create the best Total War game ever, if only they'd combine features.

[Ysthrall]

And thank you Vacca, for inspiring this thread :)

I'm assuming CK and EU are Crusader Kings and Europa Universalis, by context and prior comparisms?

[Welsh Dragon]

Originally posted by Vacca:

Paradox, from my experience. Either CK or EU. Extremely better management of... well, everything you could possibly think of, but no real time battles. Shame. They would create the best Total War game ever, if only they'd combine features.

Only thing with trying to combine a Paradox level of complexity campaign with Real Time battles is that the campaigns would take even longer!

Don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed the Paradox games I've played, I just think that a balance needs to be struck when you are doing a hybrid like Total War. There is something to be said for a slightly simpler campaign when you also have the real time battles to play.

All the Best,

Welsh Dragon.

[Vacca]

Originally posted by Ysthrall:

And thank you Vacca, for inspiring this thread :)

I'm assuming CK and EU are Crusader Kings and Europa Universalis, by context and prior comparisms?

Yes. Closest thing I have ever played - there's probably more similar games, though.

Originally posted by Welsh Dragon:

Originally posted by Vacca:

Paradox, from my experience. Either CK or EU. Extremely better management of... well, everything you could possibly think of, but no real time battles. Shame. They would create the best Total War game ever, if only they'd combine features.

Only thing with trying to combine a Paradox level of complexity campaign with Real Time battles is that the campaigns would take even longer!

Don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed the Paradox games I've played, I just think that a balance needs to be struck when you are doing a hybrid like Total War. There is something to be said for a slightly simpler campaign when you also have the real time battles to play.

All the Best,

Welsh Dragon.

Oh ya, right. Welp, a man can dream to make games excessively complicated.

[chef]

Il go with mount and blade. Still very different. But you get the overall campaign not turn based but real time and the battle map but instead of being some guy in the sky your actually the general and can control your troop movements and actions through commands.

At the end of the day theres no real equal.

[Amigo]

There have been a few attempts here and there. But there weren't very successfull.

Thing is TW has been around for quite some time. They've developed technolgies, they know how to do things. The game itself became much more complex compared to the first titles in the series.

So it would be quite a difficult task for an indie developer to create something close enough to a TW game in terms of scale and complexity. And it seems like big developers/publishers are not interested in creating TW kind of games. Probably because it does not appear profitable for them to get into.

It's a shame.

[linas.warrior]

The Battle for Middle-Earth II had War of the Ring mode, where you could conquer all Middle-Earth. It was similar to Total War, I spent tons of hours on that mode.

[PrivateXTC]

Super Mario 'cause you conquer the world and stomp enemies easily.