Page 2 of 2 First 12

I think it is because Total War is not primarily a "historical wargame". It is historically themed, like Civ and Age of Empires. And it does stick closer to history than those games. But historical accuracy is not that high on the list of priorities. If it is fun or merely adds to variety to give knights templars swords instead of lances, then they'll get swords instead of lances. If it is deemed characterful to have a Renaissance style pikemen in the Middle Ages, or anachronistic Egyptians in RTW etc, then they will be in.

You don't like it, I don't like - maybe most fans here don't like it. But among the wider consumer base, I suspect that CA are calculating that adding ahistorical spice will increase the game's sales and appeal. Or at least that deviating from historical accuracy will not lower sales significantly.

Personally, I am relaxed about it all. As a historical wargamer, I am just glad my interets can be piggy-backed onto the rather splendid TW engine. I can play and enjoy the vanilla games - in some ways (the campaign map, the different army styles) RTW actually felt more like a historical wargame than the earlier two games. And the fact that modders have started producing more historically accurate reworks like RTR and EB is an amazing and unexpected attraction to the series.

The realism mods have clearly shown that realistic units are every bit as interesting to look at as the TW units. That being said, I fail to understand why CA continues to make unrealistic units that are gonna irritate their most devoted fans. If CA wants to make fantasy units then they should do it as a "what if" mod (or a whole seperate game).

double post

Personally I think the wider variety of units in mods like EB and RTR makes them alot more interesting than RTW.

And I think that EB and RTR look like **** (litterally, all there models are a shade of brown). The whole realistic colour pallette means the factions look drab and boring and turn me right off. I can't stand to look at them. I like CA's bright colours.


@Duke John.

Consider this. The percentage of people who buy a game that post about it on a forum isn't that large. I guess 10% maybe at most 20%. Of those that post here how many favor a realism mod? 1 in 4? 1in 5? That 1/5 or 1/10 of all those who bought the game. That's not enough for CA to take your complaints seriously.

That may be so, but I don't really see where that excuses plain bad taste.

Hmmm, I am affronted. Kindly look this way... https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=65616

How much more shiny do ya want your bodyguards! Maybe you are entitled to your opinion (freedom of speech. BAH!), but you could have phrased that a tad nicer, these people have put hours into their "crap looking mods". Here comes my opinion; these models are beautiful, clearly it's not a case of " all there models are a shade of brown".

How shiny? Very. Now I looked through that post you linked to and any thing that wasn't obviously metal was a shade of brown. Or a shade or orange/red/yello/green so dull it might as well be brown. Way to prove my point for me, thanks.

I would'nt say that the RTR and EB units are **** a lot of people like them. But I too prefer the brighter colours of CA's originals, coz it's easier to discern between my units and the nme's when they are sluggin it out in a battle line.

The first mod I installed for RTW was some Roman skins, I zoomed in on the battle map to check them out, and thought they looked cool, then I zoomed back out to where I normally play battles, and I'm lookin at sprites. I hav'nt bothered with modded skins since.

-IceTorque

Oh boy - yesterday, a member has complained about my warning him/her for using a four vulgar letter word for excrement beginning with c. And today, I get this! Truly the gods seek to punish me.

OK, I know the word in question is relatively mild, but most people - including myself - still regard it as a swearword and I operate a strict no swearing policy in this forum. I am going to warn the first person to bring it up here and edit out the quotes/responses.

Young kids are attracted to bright colours. Just look at the boxes in a toystore, they attract the attention of kids. Likewise games marketed for a young public also have bright colours.

The older you are, the more you start appreciating the other colours, until you are too old and you start wearing all shades of grey

In such a sad world we need more brighter colours.
There´s no need to play a game that is like real life, because then one could just as well do the stuff in real life(think of GTA).

Like the French say: "les goûts et les couleurs ne se discutent pas"

Some like it this way others the other way, it's a fact of life. It's just no reason to call mods where people have put a lot of work in names. The models look brown or another dark colour just because the soldiers in real life probably wore such colours. If someone doesn't like them just don't use the mod.

Perhaps in a Teletubbie game, but in a game about killing thousands of men with some fans demanding more gore?

Sure, they use browns a lot, but I wasn't really disputing that (they are, after all, going for realism) . Feel free to enjoy lurid colours-and perhaps it was wrong of me in some way to disagree with you-but my intention was to point out it isn't particularly nice to call their mods ****, as I think was clear in my saying:

It's called karma, seems even the gods dislike pedantic behaviour.
Considering how common the word in question is used, maybe it's you who is out of step with the community, which could also be construed as goose-stepping.

-IceTorque

The gods may dislike moderators, it is true, or else why would they try us such? But this is not an example of karma it is an example of how one bad apple can spoil the bunch. If we allow vulgarity into the Org, it will just debase the whole currency. We will end up with, literally, a thread full of ****. I'm not sure anyone wants that.

Page 2 of 2 First 12