CA jumping the shark?

First warhammer, now this, like I said, TW and CA have completely jumped the shark: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015...tive-assembly/


Edit: moved into new thread

CA has 300+ employees, I doubt all of them are working on a single project.

Jumping the shark? What utter nonsense.

Everyone said the same things you are saying now with Alien: Isolation, and yet that turned out great. I say give them a chance. The studio is expanding, its natural for their games to expand as well. Claiming that they are jumping the shark because they are creating a fantasy TW game (not the same team as the historical version, by the way) and another completely unrelated game is probably the dumbest thing I have heard all week.

Interesting.

On the one hand I've long thought that many IPs have been ruined by the tiny scale Starcraft style RTS games that have been made for them & would have been much better in the Total War style 'thousands of units on-screen simultaneously' style.

Imagine a Strategic map where you move around Halo universe space fleets loaded with invasion armies between planets/systems/stations, going into a spaceised but Total War style Naval combat for space battles.
Surface actions could start with nice cinematic drop sequences/ship landing & have legitimate large force land battles. (would need quite a bit of work to have ground/air vehicles & infantry units properly disperse/take cover but I think can be done)

It could be really epic :yes:

On the other CA is clearly working to diversify from being only 'the Total War guys' & there is absolutely nothing in that trailer that indicates Total War type scale/gameplay :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

Jumping the shark? What utter nonsense.

Everyone said the same things you are saying now with Alien: Isolation, and yet that turned out great. I say give them a chance. The studio is expanding, its natural for their games to expand as well. Claiming that they are jumping the shark because they are creating a fantasy TW game (not the same team as the historical version, by the way) and another completely unrelated game is probably the dumbest thing I have heard all week.

---

I doubt that different teams are so strictly defined. A more flexible structure, with CA employees working on multiple projects simoultaneously, would seem more reasonable. I will be rreally surprised if the next historical TW game is published before 2018.

Anyway, the game is not called Total War: Halo, so I don't think there's any reason for frustration.

300 employees increasingly distracted by heading in multiple directions

and why, because their sugar daddy needs a new pair of shoes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/olliebar...a-big-mistake/

the lack of support or communication re Attila points to CA having basically "moved on" in the sense that Attila is no longer the focus, Warhammer (and now Halo) are. 300 employees is not a very large number to work on a "Tipple A" game, while there will be a core "Total War" team they'll need additional support from artists, level/city designers, coders and testers to actually make the game. Now we have a situation where CA is producing three RTS games, and if both Halo and Warhammer have been announced that means they've been sucking up resources for months if not a year or more - which may be why Attila gets little attention.

In answer to the OP - CA jumped the shark when they sold out to Sega. M2 was very poor quality at release, Empire had rubbish AI, Napoleon was a little better than Empire and then R2 was just a joke, so much so they had to remake the game almost from scratch after release.

So, to recap, since Sega acquired CA after Rome I, four out of six games have been sub-par at release (Attila and Shogun were the exceptions). CA has got away with this, to a point because of their long dev cycles - I read one review of Attila which praised the family tree and traits and compared it to Crusader Kings II because the reviewer didn't realise that the family tree came from Rome I (and worked better there than in Attila).

Diversification is a worry for another reason because as CA diversifies they are less focused on Total War, which dilutes the expertise in making Total War (which has been a problem over the last decade to begin with) as CA becomes less distinct and more just another RTS maker they become increasingly vulnerable to being shuttered and having their IPs split up and either sold off as surplus to Sega or diverted to other studios.

Now, that will happen, it's when not if, and if you don't believe me I suggest you look up Westwood Studios, or Ensemble, or Origin.

I have faith in CA. I'm hoping that this branching will bring fresh ideas on how to make Total War games better in the future. I'm kinda worried warhammer might do to tw what stronghold legends did to the stronghold series. I hope thats just silly jitters though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by easytarget

300 employees increasingly distracted by heading in multiple directions

and why, because their sugar daddy needs a new pair of shoes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/olliebar...a-big-mistake/

---

Dear Mr easytarget,

I'm having a hard time understanding your views when you express the view above in this thread but in another thread you say:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by easytarget

But honestly, who cares at this point, CA and the TW franchise in particular jumped the shark (much like this phrase itself) awhile ago in my opinion and I don't believe they honestly know themselves what to do with a franchise that has basically played itself out, witness the floundering exhibited by taking on a fantasy subject with Warhammer.

I mean seriously, how many times can you actually make the same game and expect people to buy it? Personally I could care less if CA ever made another TW title. There's so much else out to play from indies that at least try occasionally do something creative, so wtf would I just keep playing the same game?! Rhetorical question of course, I won't and I'm not.

---

Creative assembly can keep making Total War in a similar mold as before, it can drastically change the Total War concept or it can just make something totally different, that isn't even Total War. You seem to consider all three options wrong. What do you suggest?

Dear Mr Cazbol (love the formality here),

My point seems to me pretty straightforward. I consider the current CA distracted and I suggested the reasons why.

And the point of the jump shark reference is in response to the fact none of the options you outline actually are solutions, they are band-aides, the core disease is untreatable. You can't cure creative burn out, when you've said what you have to say as I believe CA has, you stop. Unless of course you're a business with 300 employees, in which case you keep going anyway. Happens all the time with game developers, TV shows, movie franchises (do I ever in my lifetime need another F'ing comic book movie?).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

the lack of support or communication re Attila points to CA having basically "moved on" in the sense that Attila is no longer the focus, Warhammer (and now Halo) are. 300 employees is not a very large number to work on a "Tipple A" game, while there will be a core "Total War" team they'll need additional support from artists, level/city designers, coders and testers to actually make the game. Now we have a situation where CA is producing three RTS games, and if both Halo and Warhammer have been announced that means they've been sucking up resources for months if not a year or more - which may be why Attila gets little attention.

In answer to the OP - CA jumped the shark when they sold out to Sega. M2 was very poor quality at release, Empire had rubbish AI, Napoleon was a little better than Empire and then R2 was just a joke, so much so they had to remake the game almost from scratch after release.

So, to recap, since Sega acquired CA after Rome I, four out of six games have been sub-par at release (Attila and Shogun were the exceptions). CA has got away with this, to a point because of their long dev cycles - I read one review of Attila which praised the family tree and traits and compared it to Crusader Kings II because the reviewer didn't realise that the family tree came from Rome I (and worked better there than in Attila).

Diversification is a worry for another reason because as CA diversifies they are less focused on Total War, which dilutes the expertise in making Total War (which has been a problem over the last decade to begin with) as CA becomes less distinct and more just another RTS maker they become increasingly vulnerable to being shuttered and having their IPs split up and either sold off as surplus to Sega or diverted to other studios.

Now, that will happen, it's when not if, and if you don't believe me I suggest you look up Westwood Studios, or Ensemble, or Origin.

---

For any developer success is security. Two of those you listed had a string of failures. Westwood in particular only had a decently commercial franchise in Command and conquer. And then the one CnC FPS they did fell flat. Origin systems same thing. The later Ultima games were terrible (and sold accordingly). Ensemble was the only one that was a victim of their corporate overlords whims. Alien Resurrection's success was CA getting much life pumped into them. Unless TW:Warhammer or Halo Wars 2 bomb. It'll be fine. A dev that only makes 1 game franchise is far more vulnerable than one that can make several types of games and make them well.