Reviews for Total War: Attila and not Attila Total War

[Crandar]

The first reviews for the upcoming game have been released.

The Sycophant:



It's the magazine that considered the broken beta of the 3rd of September as an amazing innovation of the video-gaming industry.


The Honest, but too Neutral:



Nice chap, not like some shills of CA roaming the Youtube.



Also, dedicated to whoever still has some hope on PC Gamer's sincerity:

Attila carries its theme well, and introduces new game mechanics that improve the core of Rome II.

PC Mouthpiece's score for Attila: 83

PC Mouthpiece's score for Rome II: 85

The beauty of randomness.


Oh, let's not forget IGN, of course:

Total War: Attila is an adept refinement of Rome 2, with a great, harrowing campaign that sets it apart.

IGN's score for Attila: 8,1

IGN's score for Rome II: 8,8

Surrealism in journalism. Magic I say, old beans!


Some notes for personal use:


http://diplome-etranger.paris-sorbon.../welcome.faces

[Hooahguy]

Of course one cant rely on PC gamer or IGN, but what do you mean by "honest but too neutral"?

Personally Im waiting for DarrenTotalWar's review and regardless I wont be playing any serious campaigns in Attila until a few more months when I wrap up my Marcomanni AAR.

[Crandar]

Of course one cant rely on PC gamer or IGN, but what do you mean by "honest but too neutral"?

Personally Im waiting for DarrenTotalWar's review and regardless I wont be playing any serious campaigns in Attila until a few more months when I wrap up my Marcomanni AAR.

Not very excited either, as I have stopped buying TW games since ETW, but I must say I always enjoy that period, just before the extreme optimism is followed by... frustration.

Didn't mean anything specific, as I didn't even watch it.

Also, for now, GameSpot, the third joke of video-gaming journalism has released the lowest score for Attila, 7/10.
http://www.gamespot.com/reviews/tota.../1900-6416029/

[Neric]

The first reviews leave me with the impression, that its a solid TW-game, but no new milestone which would really set it apart. I'm not suggesting, that this would make it a bad game, but I need a good cause to play it now instead of Rome 2, e.g. what really sets it apart in form of game mechanics. I'm looking forward to the first reviews from players, who are more into the game mechanics and so are able to make out the more subtle changes and evaluate the open things, like hordes, for example.

[Hooahguy]

So DarrenTotalWar was hired by CA as a community video maker or something along those lines. Bummer, I was looking forward to his review of Attila, as I think he gives the best and most honest reviews of TW games and DLC.

Pity.

Congrats to him though, I know he was trying to apply for a CA job for a while now.

[Crandar]

Three Moves Ahead makes the best reviews, in my opinion

So DarrenTotalWar was hired by CA as a community video maker or something along those lines. Bummer, I was looking forward to his review of Attila, as I think he gives the best and most honest reviews of TW games and DLC.

Pity.

Congrats to him though, I know he was trying to apply for a CA job for a while now.

I also expected it, Lionheart implied that he Darren would probably be hired by CA, when he (Lionheart) was not invited in the summit, after his mistake, a year ago.