Total War Pharaoh Steam reviews put Creative Assembly’s strategy sim at ‘mixed,’ while the TW Pharaoh player count falls below Total War Rome 2 from 2013.
You say this, but companies do love to pretend that employees are numbers and are replaceable but then key devs/designers/product people start leaving and you end up with a real brain drain for all the deeply entrenched institutional knowledge that projects rely upon. They are literally going to need to relearn how to make a good Total War.
Attila came out in 2015 and it’s a very solid game, although quite unforgiving. The Medieval Kingdoms mod for that game is probably as close as we’ll get to a proper medieval 3
Apples to oranges comparison. CA builds a lot of games under the Total War banner. Some are very big, very expensive projects (like Rome 2), others are really just a way of testing tech and training devs (like Odysseus). Pharaoh, as I understand it, falls very much into the latter category.
While the sales numbers look bad on the surface, for what it probably cost to make, I suspect CA is prefectly happy. Remember they literally gave Odysseus away for free. That’s just how their release cadence works.
First of all, it’s called “A Total War Saga: Troy”, not Odysseus.
More importantly, the “Saga” part of the title is what CA uses to designate the smaller, more experimental projects that you’re mentioning, which they explicitly did not use with Pharaoh.
Tired of these half baked shithouse total war games like pharaoh, troy and britannia. It must be so hard to develop a sequel to medieval, Rome or any of the other successful franchises that people actually want to play
I’d actually have really liked a Bronze Age Collapse game.
For all I know, it’s this one, HOWEVER, my unplayed library is too big as is, but what definitely wouldn’t have made the cut is another Roman strategy game.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
No humor/memes etc…
No affiliate links
No advertising.
No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
No self promotion.
No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
No politics.
Comments.
No personal attacks.
Obey instance rules.
No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc…)
Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
CA will do literally anything to avoid making Medieval 3.
They spent so much time on Warhammer they forgot how to make a solid historical game
You say this, but companies do love to pretend that employees are numbers and are replaceable but then key devs/designers/product people start leaving and you end up with a real brain drain for all the deeply entrenched institutional knowledge that projects rely upon. They are literally going to need to relearn how to make a good Total War.
Oh yeah, I agree. Even if we do get Medieval 3 I don’t trust nu-CA to get it right
Let’s go, sale, let’s go
Maybe they should stop beating the dead horse and come up with something new
This is the first time I’ve even heard of it, and I play strategy games mainly, so there’s its first problem.
Yeh, I didn’t even know it had released
Same, I was about to say that I don’t even remember any TW games coming out in the last 10 years.
Attila came out in 2015 and it’s a very solid game, although quite unforgiving. The Medieval Kingdoms mod for that game is probably as close as we’ll get to a proper medieval 3
You can’t have missed Warhammer? That’s got to have been over the internet enough?
Apples to oranges comparison. CA builds a lot of games under the Total War banner. Some are very big, very expensive projects (like Rome 2), others are really just a way of testing tech and training devs (like Odysseus). Pharaoh, as I understand it, falls very much into the latter category.
While the sales numbers look bad on the surface, for what it probably cost to make, I suspect CA is prefectly happy. Remember they literally gave Odysseus away for free. That’s just how their release cadence works.
First of all, it’s called “A Total War Saga: Troy”, not Odysseus.
More importantly, the “Saga” part of the title is what CA uses to designate the smaller, more experimental projects that you’re mentioning, which they explicitly did not use with Pharaoh.
Sometimes uses. They wrote the rules, they can apply them however they like.
I think this one is being looked at differently because after hyenas people are wondering if the studio is dead or not
That thumbnail reminds me of the Californians.
Stuuarrt? Wu…wuduhhyoouudooneree?
Tired of these half baked shithouse total war games like pharaoh, troy and britannia. It must be so hard to develop a sequel to medieval, Rome or any of the other successful franchises that people actually want to play
Are least Britannia was honest about being a saga game, Pharaoh is pretending that it is a mainline release.
I’d actually have really liked a Bronze Age Collapse game.
For all I know, it’s this one, HOWEVER, my unplayed library is too big as is, but what definitely wouldn’t have made the cut is another Roman strategy game.