Lets show CA who all wants China: Total War!

[WarHawk]

I'd rather have a Napoleanonic, or WWI-WWII Total War

[Maeda Toshiie]

There are 2 suitable scenarios: 3 kingdoms and Spring/Autumn Warring States.

3 Kingdoms: The fall of (Eastern Han) dynasty. The country was initially split among numerous warlords following the failure of the central government to control the country. The warlords fought among themselves till 3 states emerged from the struggles. Cao Cao's son deposed the last Han Emperor (by then a mere puppet) and established Wei, while Lui Bei established the Shu Han and Sun Quan maintained independence (he never declared himself Emperor). These 3 lasted for quite some time before they were finally reunited by the Jin dynasty (which replaced Wei and fell later with invasion of barbarians). A 3 Kingdoms game can start off at 187 BC with the uprising of the yellow turbans. Additional starting times can be added. RTK series by Koei can be an example.

Warring States (do not mix up with Spring/Autumn period): 7 states fighting from 403 Bc to 221BC (proclamation of the Qin Emperor). Heck of a civil war period. Oh and dont forget that chariots, halberds and x-bows were in use then.

[The Sword of Cao Cao]

Yeah, this game starts at Warring States, but you can also start at the 3 Kingdoms era if you like. Either way a TW obviously cant depend on one country anymore. It's gunna have China, but all the other faction in the East too.

[WarHawk]

I don't think many people would buy a China TW. I know I wouldn't.

[Del Arroyo]

That's where you're wrong, Cao Cao. It could only involve China. None of the other Asian cultures were involved in these conflicts.

[discovery1]

I love this idea, but would the current technology really do it justice? After, how large were the armies during even the waring states period? Far larger than even those fielded by Rome at it's height I think. I rember reading about armies numbering in the hundreds of thousands, although it was on these very forums so I have no idea whether or not they are accurate. So I think that while it is a good idea, I think it is best to wait until we have the tech to field such grand armies.

[The Sword of Cao Cao]

No m8. I think the name of this game is misleading. It's not just supposed to be about China. It's the Far East in general. India was having some nice little wars at this time with some very interesting ways of warfare, there were the Steppe tribes, the wars between the 3 Korean states of Koguryo, Silla and Paekche, the barbarians in southeast Asia. It isnt supposed to be completely historical! This is TW, like the Egyptians never conquered France, but in Medieval Total War they can.

[WarHawk]

No one cares about China or India. You see, CA needs to sell the game. So they will pick something that is more recognizable.

Honestly, besides the few dorks that post here, who would actualy buy this game? Think about this from a marketing perspective. No one wants to be Chinese.

[The Sword of Cao Cao]

Umm.. dude have you looked at the market before making a post like that? Have you heard of say, SHOGUN TOTAL WAR? Or more accurately.. DYNASTY WARRIORS? There are over 20 games focusing on one period in Chinese history. And each one has sold very, very well in China, Japan and espeically the US. Shall I go through and list them? And tiher still making more of them! Plus, when people see the trailers, screenshots and everything else they'll want it. Use your head kid.

And this is a dorks game. Everyone who post in this thread is a dork, dork. :P

[WarHawk]

Umm.. dude have you looked at the market before making a post like that? Have you heard of say, SHOGUN TOTAL WAR? Or more accurately.. DYNASTY WARRIORS? There are over 20 games focusing on one period in Chinese history. And each one has sold very, very well in China, Japan and espeically the US. Shall I go through and list them? And tiher still making more of them! Plus, when people see the trailers, screenshots and everything else they'll want it. Use your head kid.

And this is a dorks game. Everyone who post in this thread is a dork, dork. :P

I have never even heard of this game "Dynasty Warriors". Shogun did so well because it was to do with Japan(ie Samuri, which are a part of pop culture) , not China. And games about China never do well.

Rome revolutionized RTS's, no way there going to make a sequel about China.

[Del Arroyo]

Cao Cao: During the Medieval Period, and for thousands of years beforehand, there was a great intensity of interaction between the various peoples who lived in Europe, Northern Africa, and Asia Minor.

The various peoples and cultures of Asia did not interact nearly so intensely or richly until the 20th century at the earliest.

Just because all Asians have slanty eyes does not mean that their collective history is symetrically equivalent to that of Western and Near-Eastern peoples.

It would be utterly pointless to include anything outside of China in a Chinese Total War game, and equally pointless to include anything outside of India, modern-day Pak- and Afgan-istan in an Indian Total War game.

DA

[Samurai Waki]

If you say the 3 kingdoms era would not be a good TW game I'd say you probably don't know the first thing about the era. The Three Kingdoms era is one of the most historically romanticized periods on earth, The Tactics weren't dull or stupid, well no worse than Roman or Medieval Tactics and the history of this era is the cornerstone of the next rising super power: China. I want to see a game that sees battlefields from the rising mountains of Tibet and the Himalayas to the Arid Wastelands of Western China to the Rice Paddies of the east and southeast, and the humid jungles of Vietnam and Siam(Southeast Asia) It would be no easy task to master fighting in all of those areas(especially jungle). Not to mention, the story is much deeper and intricate than the Roman conquest period...there was more to it than all out conquest, and so world domination would be much more meaningful to you as the player. I think I would manage easily.

[The Sword of Cao Cao]

Your missing my point. They still had armies, and very interesting ones at that. TW is about rewriting military history.

And WarHawk, try looking at the console field for a minute. Especially since theres rumours that Rome is going console. There are quite a bit of these kinds of games, and I'll list them all.

Dynasty Warriors
Dynasty Warrior 2
Dynasty Warriors 3
Dynasty Warriors 3 Xtreme Legends
Dynasty Warriors 4
Dynasty Warriors 4 Xtreme Legends
Dynasty Warriors Empires (a much anticipated game in the PS2 department)
Samurai Warriors

Romance of the Three Kingdoms I
Romance of the Three Kingdoms II
Romance of the Three Kingdoms III
Romance of the Three Kingdoms IV
Romance of the Three Kingdoms V
Romance of the Three Kingdoms VI
Romance of the Three Kingdoms VII
Romance of the Three Kingdoms VIII
Romance of the Three Kingdoms IX
Romance of the Three Kingdoms X

Dynasty Tactics
Dynasty Tactics 2

Kessen I
Kessen II

Those games have been mega-popular in the US, Britain, and Japan and China. And thier still making more of them. Plus this is just one century of Chinese history they cover! Sadly they've yet to make a good RTS out of it, plus they ignore so much of Asian military history. Only TW can get it right, and I'm sure the huge batch of TW fans made by Medieval along with the new ones made by Rome, will remember what great games TW makes and try it. Not to mention with million men battles, flamethrowers, rocket arrows, ancient landmines, gas bombs, the huge citadels, the revisiting of Japan which brings with it the ever popular samurai, people will want the game. It's so blatantly obvious. Seriously m8, drop your bias, and learn a thing or too about ancient China and medieval Asia, then you'll want the game.

[Del Arroyo]

YOU drop your bias. I am only stating fact. Warrings States would be great, but there is no room for nations other than China.

Basically you are saying that Asian history is identical to European history except with slanty eyes. That is racism at its purest.

DA

[Samurai Waki]

Del Arroyo has a point, If the Three Kingdoms were to be made it would strictly have to be within China, to say that the Japan and China(and surrounding Regions) share a common history would be like saying the Incas and the British share a common history. The only way China and surrounding Regions could merged into one game would have to deal with European Imperialism, in which case Western and Eastern Civilization did COLLIDE and not in an entirely bad way, whatever the case...I just don't want see another TW game focus on Europe entirely.

[Maeda Toshiie]

Cao Cao: During the Medieval Period, and for thousands of years beforehand, there was a great intensity of interaction between the various peoples who lived in Europe, Northern Africa, and Asia Minor.

The various peoples and cultures of Asia did not interact nearly so intensely or richly until the 20th century at the earliest.

Just because all Asians have slanty eyes does not mean that their collective history is symetrically equivalent to that of Western and Near-Eastern peoples.

It would be utterly pointless to include anything outside of China in a Chinese Total War game, and equally pointless to include anything outside of India, modern-day Pak- and Afgan-istan in an Indian Total War game.

DA

Careful about the use of slanty eyes comment. I would bet a lot of chinese (including me) would not like to hear it. Know the history behind the term before using it.

Otherwise, your points are valid. The Warring States was a civil war that only involved a little of the tribes at the outskirts of the Chinese civilisation. For the 3 Kingdoms, trade connections with the Roman Empire established by Emperor Han Wu were broken by then. The Himalayas blocks much of contacts with India.

[Del Arroyo]

Fine: "epicanthal folds".

EDIT: Which, by the way, are evident to some degree in many AmerIndian groups. I said "slanty eyes" to add ridicule factor: I was trying to highlight the absurdity of the fact that this is the only definable thing shared by all the peoples which pan-Asianists want to lump together.

[ToranagaSama]

What *I* want is a return to the original Shogun: Total War, barring that yes a visit to one of the Chinese eras would be MOST welcome. Thankfully, I believe we have exhausted Europe for the time being!!!! India would also be very interesting.

[WarHawk]

Your missing my point. They still had armies, and very interesting ones at that. TW is about rewriting military history.

And WarHawk, try looking at the console field for a minute. Especially since theres rumours that Rome is going console. There are quite a bit of these kinds of games, and I'll list them all.

Dynasty Warriors
Dynasty Warrior 2
Dynasty Warriors 3
Dynasty Warriors 3 Xtreme Legends
Dynasty Warriors 4
Dynasty Warriors 4 Xtreme Legends
Dynasty Warriors Empires (a much anticipated game in the PS2 department)
Samurai Warriors

Romance of the Three Kingdoms I
Romance of the Three Kingdoms II
Romance of the Three Kingdoms III
Romance of the Three Kingdoms IV
Romance of the Three Kingdoms V
Romance of the Three Kingdoms VI
Romance of the Three Kingdoms VII
Romance of the Three Kingdoms VIII
Romance of the Three Kingdoms IX
Romance of the Three Kingdoms X

Dynasty Tactics
Dynasty Tactics 2

Kessen I
Kessen II

Those games have been mega-popular in the US, Britain, and Japan and China. And thier still making more of them. Plus this is just one century of Chinese history they cover! Sadly they've yet to make a good RTS out of it, plus they ignore so much of Asian military history. Only TW can get it right, and I'm sure the huge batch of TW fans made by Medieval along with the new ones made by Rome, will remember what great games TW makes and try it. Not to mention with million men battles, flamethrowers, rocket arrows, ancient landmines, gas bombs, the huge citadels, the revisiting of Japan which brings with it the ever popular samurai, people will want the game. It's so blatantly obvious. Seriously m8, drop your bias, and learn a thing or too about ancient China and medieval Asia, then you'll want the game.

I'm fairly knowledgable about gaming, but untill this thread, I had not heard of these "Dynasty Warriors". They must not be that popular.

I (like most people) are biased towards eurpean history, and find it much more interesting. While a China TW is quite viable as a game, i'm not certain many people would be that interested in it. But I am certain that would not be the choice for the next Total War game.

We already had asians in shogun, be content with that.

[Del Arroyo]

I knew about Dynasty Warriors...

[WarHawk]

I knew about Dynasty Warriors...

I guess you're part of the minority that do.

[WarHawk]

After Rome I think CA is going to start down a more mainstream road, the next Total War will probably be around 1700's-1900's With maybe the American and French Revolutions, Napoleanonic Wars, Franco-Prussian War etc.

[Lemur]

As a certified Roman history FREAK, I'd be perfectly happy if they stuck with the current time period forever. Just give us variations on Rome, you know, an early Imperial game, then a late Imperial game, and then do a little Homeric wars just for variety, and by then the technology will have improved enough to revisit republican Rome. And then start the cycle over. Yeah, baby, you know how I like it.

I know it's not going to happen, but still I can dream. Nothing but Rome from now on ...

[Samurai Waki]

where else would it be? I am all for the idea of Imperialism, the Napoleon era while interesting does not fill the void for the mainstream Total War gamer who wants something less specific. CA doesn't design games to be historically accurate in every aspect, they set the scene...but ultimately its the gamer who decides history, I.E. the Scipii did not conquer the Julii or the Brutii and yet somehow I managed to do that, and conquer all of the other factions(almost...still a bit of trouble with the Parthians.) Thats what makes the game interesting and replayable. However, if the game is set anytime after 1500 Europe will ultimately be involved. I know that not all historians think that European nations are the most interesting, in fact when it all comes down to it, I think re-doing another Europe and mediterranean focused game will become drab and dull. While I realise that western civilization is responsible for a lot of significant events(in western eyes), we cannot rule that other civilizations are unimportant or haven't done anything worthy of note, because they certainly have contributed to modern events. So whatever CA decides I'll probably be contented, but I don't want to see a game purely about just European or Mediterranean empires...I want to see the British and the Chinese duke it out for the Opium trade

[panchoamd]

I agree what a China:TW must be interesting, but I agree to the idea of a
Imperial: TW.
1- The massive campaigns.
2- The variety of Factions.
3- The variety of Units.
4- The huge campaign map.

Other thing: Im american, but i have Almohad blood in my body, like the
major part of the people of my country.
(the mexicans descent from aztecs, the peruans from incans, and the argentinians.... from the boats!!!)
I love a Imperial: TW with the American conquest, the french-indian war,
and the independence of the american countries, like my own, Argentina.
(San Martin is a Master)
Plus, the Napoleon's Campaigns, and dont forget the renaissance!!!!
With the venecians, Hanseatic league, the wars between england and
Netherlands. The Armada Invencible of the spanish... and a looooonnnggg
etc.



CHEERS!!!

[DisruptorX]

I'm fairly knowledgable about gaming, but untill this thread, I had not heard of these "Dynasty Warriors". They must not be that popular.

That makes you ignorant. Just because you, the minority, have never heard of it does not make it unpopular. You are the strange one for not having heard of it. The Dynasty Warriors series has sold very well, so well that Koei has released 4 games, and then another 3 or 4 "xtreme" versions of the last 2 as well. If you haven't played them, that's your loss, not ours. While you are at home playing the Sims, or whatever "accessable" games you like, many other people were enjoying Dynasty Warriors, and having fun.

Your assertion that "it won't sell well", concerning say, a 3 kingdoms or otherwise Chinese TW, is offensive to me. Good games sell well, gamers don't want the same old crap, we want innovation. Attitudes like yours are what is wrong with the gaming industry. Seriously, do you only buy games by EA? Sounds like you aren't really interested in what is good, only what you see as popular. Well suprise, the most popular games are the ones that market to non-gamers, the bigger demographic. These games are laughed at by serious gamers.

[Samurai Waki]

...I just want to play whats fun! I don't really care about the genre(or company) at all wether it be an EA release or Activision if its something thats interesting I'll sure as hell play and not feel any bias towards one side or the other.

[Thrudvang]

I've always wanted an Ancient:Total War about the early civilizations and wars between them (sumerians, babylonians, persians, akkadians, phoenicians, egyptians, and so on).

[DisruptorX]

I've always wanted an Ancient:Total War about the early civilizations and wars between them (sumerians, babylonians, persians, akkadians, phoenicians, egyptians, and so on).

Hittites! and Assyrians too! Come to think of it, that would be pretty darn cool... and since we don't know all that much about the warriors of the period besides very broad generalizations, CA could take all the creative liberities they wanted (well, to a point... no lammasu riders )

[The Sword of Cao Cao]

YOU drop your bias. I am only stating fact. Warrings States would be great, but there is no room for nations other than China.

Basically you are saying that Asian history is identical to European history except with slanty eyes. That is racism at its purest.

DA

Buddy, cool it here. I wasnt even talking to you when I said "Drop your bias m8." I was talking to the all-knowledgeable-guru of gaming WarHawk, He obviously has a bias considering he wont even entertain the idea of anything Asian. And I obviously have no bias towards anyone, considering I'm trying to get all of the Far East in there. For the umpteenth time, I'am not saying Asian history is identical to European. Far from it, but they did have quite an impressive military in the different Asian nations. The idea is what if China did decide to go conquer India, or vice versa. What if the ancient Japanese invasion of Korea was successful? This is Total War, not Total Historical Accuracy. It was Asia's choice not to interact with each other. You as the gamer are simply given an era in history, an assortment of different factions each with thier own units, and a bigass campaign map. Besides did the Middle East interact with Europe as much as they do in MTW? Hardly when it comes to empire building!

And I detest that comment about racism. Nothing I have said has been racist. Indeed quite the opposite. I've been trying to get CA to include the rest of Asia, because of my immense fondness of Asian mlitary history. Dont call me a racist again.

And to whoever mentioned the idea about ancient middle east , (i.e. Assyria, Babylon, Hittites, Israel, Egypt) I could definitely live with that, if China either follows before or after that game. Lol, which is why I want that kind of game for the Rome expansion!