Wow, so little activity

[easytarget]

Could be, my take is the basic game concept CA has been pedaling for 15 years is a bit played out. Anyone and everyone who ever had any interest in it has seen it and played it, over and over again. Fifteen years is a long life for making the same game repeatedly and getting people to buy it, so I'd say kudos to CA for such a long run (the only corollary I have any experience with is Combat Mission by Battlefront, they've been making the same game over pretty much the same timeframe and their hardcore fans keep buying it).

Hard for me not to assume branching out to Warhammer and making other genre games than historical TW are a reflection of CA acknowledging they better find either some new life in the same game concept or find entirely new things to make.

[Vuk]

Could be, my take is the basic game concept CA has been pedaling for 15 years is a bit played out. Anyone and everyone who ever had any interest in it has seen it and played it, over and over again. Fifteen years is a long life for making the same game repeatedly and getting people to buy it, so I'd say kudos to CA for such a long run (the only corollary I have any experience with is Combat Mission by Battlefront, they've been making the same game over pretty much the same timeframe and their hardcore fans keep buying it).

Hard for me not to assume branching out to Warhammer and making other genre games than historical TW are a reflection of CA acknowledging they better find either some new life in the same game concept or find entirely new things to make.

I disagree with you. They really changed their concept and started going REALLY casual. Rome did it a bit. Empire a bit more. Both of those also expanded the depth in many other areas though. Shogun II started the downward slide toward arcadism. It is that trend that is killing TW. I am not buying the new TW games. I would buy the sh*t out of one that was a return to their roots (I still play the old ones all the time), and I am not alone. There is a huge market for serious strategy games, but they are ignoring it.

[ReluctantSamurai]

I would say the fall off of MP support has much to do with the decline here. Yes, the Org was more about hard-core players rather than casual console cross-overs, but folks came here to get a game with other players. Now they go to Steam....

[Nelson]

Axalon, you sound like a player on sports team saying that his managers and coaches aren't doing what it takes to win while at the same time failing to note a single specific complaint or solution. We need ideas. Believe me when I say that the staff has exhaustively flogged this horse to death and beyond.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Its how these newer priorities were formed, the supposed grounds for it, the reasons for it - and the often strange and backwards logic behind it. Its the too many bad choices made, the too many poor practices used, the too many stupid doctrines and policies stubbornly enforced, the too many bad actions and destructive changes allowed.

Referring to Backroom antics, or something else? I would venture a guess that a large portion of the daily Org traffic is there

[Axalon]

Axalon, you sound like a player on sports team saying that his managers and coaches aren't doing what it takes to win while at the same time failing to note a single specific complaint or solution. We need ideas. Believe me when I say that the staff has exhaustively flogged this horse to death and beyond.

Alright, lets use the sports-analogy then… (Sorry for being lengthy, its a lot of details... )

True, I don’t think that management is doing what it takes to ”win”. Or even that it is (currently) willing too. Or have a clue about what it takes to “win”, or even how it is done. The most obvious signs that suggest this are the way how management just carries on as if it was raining, focusing on seemingly unimportant things, and insisting upon the same old, and failed game-plan, that we already know won’t work, and that will just damage the team/(site) even more. This for several consecutive years now… In fact, management offers us little or no alternative, support, facilities and dedicated areas for us to build and work on. Nah, all that goes (yet again) for the latest game only. Management cant afford us that, “too big index, totally can’t have that. That is way more important then provide grounds and reasons for people to come and visit this place” or to support the people that already do - something along those lines. Its utterly screwed up… And I already pointed that out several years ago, multiple times, to little effect…

I also think that management persists in thinking in terms of “Org-community” as one supposed homogenous “team”/group - its not. Or even views the TW-community as a homogenous group of people - its not. These notions are just inadequate, obsolete and lazy oversimplifications that we could do without. As it is, both are highly heterogeneous, and get increasingly so, for each and every new game-release and year. The very idea of a TW-community might have functioned - well enough - back in 2000-2005, but it does not in 2016. Same thing applies to the “Org-community”…

There are so many and different TW-games these days that they no longer can seriously serve as a common enough ground to build a sense of actual community around, its merely a poor and lazy catch-phrase to cover it all. That role has been effectively transferred to each individual game or activity (of choice). The games are different, and so are the people that play them. Some folks prefer TW-X while others are totally into TW-Y yet both are dubbed TW-games. Management has completely failed to consider, let alone act on this. And TW-X will always serve as a much stronger force of generating a sense community because it provides much more common ground between its players then the umbrella-concept of TW ever will.

The reality here is that we have micro-communities, clustered around a single game or activity (of choice) - and that we will continue get more and more of these, as more games are released. Its also possible that individual might select to be active in more then one micro-community at a time, but we can not, and should not force it. Regardless, management has failed to grasp any of this, and as result done nothing as to adjust this site to this reality. And I can guarantee that recognizing and adapting fully to the concept of micro-communities will somehow be required element in order to secure that “win” for this place. Most visitors come here for the games, specific games and/or activities. If this place can not attractively enough cater too and offer sexy enough stomping grounds for that, it will lose that visitor. ...As is exactly what has happened here. Over, and over, and over again… For years, this has been allowed to go on… Anyhow, enough of sports-mode…

We need ideas. Believe me when I say that the staff has exhaustively flogged this horse to death and beyond.

I do believe that you believe so… All the same, had that actually been true and you really had exhaustively worked each serious/viable idea and angle - we would not be here in the first place. We are here because staff/administration have NOT exhausted every possibility and idea, but persisted in using the same old losing formula and game-plan for several years. I am sorry to say it, but there it is…

Add to that, staff have had stubborn and stupid old practice of primarily relying on internal staff discussion for various important stuff in general for the site - hidden away - from the site-members which it typically concerns and who will be clearly and directly influenced by the results and actions of those closed discussions. It’s a bad habit and it has probably been allowed to happen far more then is good for this site. I am NOT saying that no attempts for public discussions and consultations has been attempted, but I am saying that it is clear that they have not be done to a sufficient degree, or honestly enough, or often enough, or given the the weight neccesary, as to achieve better results for this site in general. Its simple really… If you lack, ideas or perspectives you go external (to the members) and hear them out. Some damn ideas are sure to turn up. Some ideas are better then no ideas. The only problem here is that staff did not like the ideas that did came up, and so management ignored them (like the site index and so on)… And here we are…

- A

[Axalon]

Referring to Backroom antics, or something else? I would venture a guess that a large portion of the daily Org traffic is there

Something else… Like…

In reality we have 2 out of 7 sections on the index that between themselves somehow deals in some 10-11 TW-games (and some of that TW-marketing-ploy-stuff too. Hi Arena!), and 1 section that deals in hosted major mods/alterations, for ALL TW-games, and 1 section that deals in ALL abandoned previously hosted mods, this for ALL TW-games. At the same time, we have three full sections dedicated for stuff that is not TW-related, to deal with god knows what. 3 full sections on the index… All TW-games got 2… All TW-Mods/alterations this including all the abandoned ones, got 2… ALL side-stuff, off-topic, community-blabla, all non-TW things get 3! That is the reality here...

I have zero problems with all that off-topic, non-TW, community-stuff as such - we can totally keep that around (for all those who wants that). What I do have problems with, is how all that is being elevated to the supposed primary focus, purpose and attraction of this site. This while TW in general, and it the individual TW-games in particular, are being clearly demoted to a near side-show status. It is utterly screwed up, especially for a site that is supposed to be dealing in TW-games, and who built its name and brand by dealing in TW-games - not the latest TW-game, not some off-topic fleeting blabla. It WAS a fan-site for TW-enthusiasts in general and its micro-communities around each game in particular. That is what this place used to be about. That is what this site should still be about, and this site should provide the infrastructure and areas for it. Yet it don’t. As it used to do, in the past, on the index, and beyond. Screw that there are more TW-games released now, its no real excuse. The size of the index should not get to dictate who is to feel welcome here, or be an excuse as to dismantle the rational and natural coverage of TW-games - as has been essentially the case. Or dictate what we all are supposed to be interested in - let us decide that for ourselves. Let us tailor the index how we like and see fit, individually, do not try to force us to use it in your certain preferred damned way...

I was rather thinking about such stuff... And other things...

- A

[easytarget]

I disagree with you. They really changed their concept and started going REALLY casual. Rome did it a bit. Empire a bit more. Both of those also expanded the depth in many other areas though. Shogun II started the downward slide toward arcadism. It is that trend that is killing TW. I am not buying the new TW games. I would buy the sh*t out of one that was a return to their roots (I still play the old ones all the time), and I am not alone. There is a huge market for serious strategy games, but they are ignoring it.

Core game mechanic is the same. You're just making the typical TW fan "I've been playing them since Shogun released" argument about dumbing down for casuals we've all heard a thousand times. Me, I'll apply occam's razor and look for the simpler more obvious explanation, they've been doing the shame shit for 15 years.

And I find the suggestion laughable there is or ever has been a huge market for "serious strategy games".

[Vuk]

Core game mechanic is the same. You're just making the typical TW fan "I've been playing them since Shogun released" argument about dumbing down for casuals we've all heard a thousand times. Me, I'll apply occam's razor and look for the simpler more obvious explanation, they've been doing the shame shit for 15 years.

And I find the suggestion laughable there is or ever has been a huge market for "serious strategy games".

But you are wrong there easytarget in so many ways that I would think it would not need explanation. Apparently it does.
Let me start by saying that just because an argument has been made many times does not mean that argument is invalid. In fact, many of the best arguments in the world have been made millions of times by millions of people.
Second, how can you say that Total War is not shifting its focus from trying to be as realistic, serious of a simulation as possible to being more of a casual game?
The faction bonus, the character bonuses, the RPG element, the new fantasy setting, etc, etc, etc. At their core, current TW games barely resemble older TW games, and that is not a good thing.
And don't get me wrong, it is not that I do not like change. RTW was a massive improvement over previous titles (despite dumbing a few elements down); I said that then and I say that now.
Medieval II saw some improvements over RTW, so it was a tiny step forward.
Along comes Empire and it is a total disaster. My beefs with that game was that it was not complete, was bugged as hell, moved toward the DLC trap, and really suffered from being not modder friendly. I hated the game at the time. After literally years of being patched though, I consider the game it is in its current state to be a massive advancement. It still got us into the slippery slope of DLC, it was still not that modder friendly, and it still was dumbed down in a few areas, but for the most part it added depth and made the simulation more realistic and put more control into the hands of the players.
Then came Napoleon and laid the blueprint for the doom of CA games. They really messed up and hurt their reputation with Empire, but it turned out a solid game in the end. Napoleon on the other hand really made a push toward the casual crowd that the series has never recovered from. They added the stupid RPG stuff, the special abilities, took away control from the player, etc, etc.
Shogun II was more of the same. It took the casual push of Napoleon even farther and majorly dumbed down game mechanics to take an incredible amount of control out of the player's hands.
RTW II was the same type of half-baked release disaster as Empire, but instead of turn out to be a good game in the end like Empire did, it turned out to be more of a progression into the world of casual gaming garbage.
Don't get me started on the complete joke that is Total War Hammer, or Hammered Total War, or whatever the heck they are calling it.

The truth is that there is a big audience for realistic war simulations. The success of the Total War franchise is proof of that. Is it as big as the market for Pokemon Go or Angry Birds? No, but it is loyal and there is very little competition. Total War can own the market and be a huge success if they stick true to their real fanbase. Casual games don't want a casual game that is mixed with strategy, because it is not casual enough. Serious gamers don't want a strategy game that is mixed with casual gaming bull because it is too casual. CA is shooting itself in the foot with what it is doing, and the state of these forums is proof of that. I don't buy modern TW. I could see what RTWII was turning out to be just by the trailers. If CA was to put out a realistic true-to-their-roots strategy game with all the added depth that modern technology would make possible, me and so many like me would come flocking back to throw our money at them.
Unfortunately I think that they will not learn their lesson till they go out of business. They think that we serious gamers are a demographic that is dying off. They forget that most of us got interested in this stuff when we were kids, and there are always new kids getting interested in it. They can grow their fanbase only by playing to it, not shunning it.

[ReluctantSamurai]

RTW was a massive improvement over previous titles

In some ways yes, in others no. Graphics made a big improvement with the new game engine, but game-play sucked (IMHO) because there was no corresponding increase in the quality of the AI which had great difficulty with the new 3-D map, and was too predictable with its' battlefield tactics.

...and really suffered from being not modder friendly

And this is where CA really blew it, IMHO. I can remember my experiences with NeverWinterNights. Bioware actually sponsored/encouraged contests for original mods based on their game, many of which were as good or better than the original. It's all those dozens and dozens of NWN mods that I still have that keep me playing the game several times per year.

Baldurs Gate is a similar story. The G3 Forum is still a viable and active community today because of all the extensive mods that continue to be done years after the original release.

It'd be interesting to see how much of the traffic here at the .org is in the modding forums

[easytarget]

Vuk,

You wrote a wall of text I certainly won't bother reading, suffice it to say you might want to wrap your brain around the concept of what an opinion is vs a fact, you have the two badly confused.

P.S. Feel free to write as many walls of text in the future as you like, got you on ignore now.

[Vuk]

lol, I think someone certainly doesn't understand the concepts of friendly discussion and opinion. :P

In some ways yes, in others no. Graphics made a big improvement with the new game engine, but game-play sucked (IMHO) because there was no corresponding increase in the quality of the AI which had great difficulty with the new 3-D map, and was too predictable with its' battlefield tactics.



And this is where CA really blew it, IMHO. I can remember my experiences with NeverWinterNights. Bioware actually sponsored/encouraged contests for original mods based on their game, many of which were as good or better than the original. It's all those dozens and dozens of NWN mods that I still have that keep me playing the game several times per year.

Baldurs Gate is a similar story. The G3 Forum is still a viable and active community today because of all the extensive mods that continue to be done years after the original release.

It'd be interesting to see how much of the traffic here at the .org is in the modding forums

I agree with you completely. For the most part RTW didn't take any steps backward, but many steps forward. That said however, I agree that some basic changes to the core AI should have been done then, at that vital stage before the engine got more and more complex, and changing it became harder and harder. Their AI does the exact same, stupid, unrealistic and confusing garbage in their new games that they have done since the beginning. They never took the time to go back and rework the basics, and it gets more impractical to do so with each release. That was definitely a missed opportunity in every game.
I also agree about the modding. I don't think I have actually played any TW game more than 2-300 hours, yet I have clocked thousands of hours on some of them because of the time I have been testing the mods I have worked on. When I have played them, it was usually one of my mods or one of someone else's. Mount and Blade is one of the only franchises out there that still gets how important modding support is. Most games I currently play are older games because of all the mods. I'd love to have new ones to play, but the industry ignores gamers like me. M&B Bannerlord will be on my Steam account the minute it is released, because they still give a darn. I really cannot think of any other modern games coming out that I am excited for.

Oh yea, Bethesda still has lots of modding support too...I forgot them. I don't particularly care for most of their games, but I still end up buying them for the mods. :P

[fallen851]

Total Warhammer is the best TW title in my opinion. The game is polished, runs well, looks great, add significantly strategy to battles and have very few bugs. That being said, it has some serious problems that keep it from being a great game, but it is still a very good one.

As easytarget mentioned though, other genres have improved by leaps and bounds though and that is dealing damage to the TW player base. You can only do the hammer and anvil in TW so many times against an incompetent AI before you get bored and want to play a multiplayer game that has some semblance of balance, which TW has never offered.

But this forum is dead because Rome 2 killed it. It was and is a terrible game.

[Montmorency]

(the only corollary I have any experience with is Combat Mission by Battlefront, they've been making the same game over pretty much the same timeframe and their hardcore fans keep buying it).

A bit unfair, as in that sense any 3D tactical simulator is the same game over and over.

I've only ever played the original (WW2) trio, but by all accounts their rebooted engine has plenty to recommend it. Fans keep buying because these are niche products anyway, as with most military tactical/strategic sims. That shouldn't be surprising. Battlefront, Shrapnel Games, HPS Sim, and Matrix Games/Slitherine (though they're the most mainstream) all do this, along with a few small super-obscure developers.

Certainly, assuming their current engine keeps steady this thing -

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Combat Mission: Black Sea was released on 04 Nov 2014. Battlefront's first modern-day Combat Mission title since Shock Force, Black Sea focuses on a hypothetical war between NATO and Russia over Ukraine in the year 2017. Keeping true to the nature of modern conflict, several new features have been introduced, including electronic warfare, unmanned aerial vehicles, and laser-guided weapons.

could be the only playable product today for post-Cold War European battle.

[easytarget]

A bit unfair, as in that sense any 3D tactical simulator is the same game over and over.

I've only ever played the original (WW2) trio, but by all accounts their rebooted engine has plenty to recommend it. Fans keep buying because these are niche products anyway, as with most military tactical/strategic sims. That shouldn't be surprising. Battlefront, Shrapnel Games, HPS Sim, and Matrix Games/Slitherine (though they're the most mainstream) all do this, along with a few small super-obscure developers.

Certainly, assuming their current engine keeps steady this thing -



could be the only playable product today for post-Cold War European battle.

Not sure how that changes my point, both series have been making basically the same game over about the same period. As for their rebooted engine, meh, I own and play all of them, it's ok. There's free demos of all of them, so not like you can't see for yourselves.

What is well and truly amusing though about Battlefront is their game forum (to return back to the topic of the thread), it suffers from one of the worst cases of Stockholm syndrome I've ever witnessed, it is really and truly a sight to behold. To use the term fanboi to describe their customer base doesn't come close to doing justice to the incest at work between developer and consumer there. I'd take the dead of this place over that any-day.

[Montmorency]

Not sure how that changes my point, both series have been making basically the same game over about the same period.

Certainly the point doesn't hold for market saturation in the latter case, is what I said. Unless you're making some deeper argument regarding design and aesthetic?

[easytarget]

Certainly the point doesn't hold for market saturation in the latter case, is what I said. Unless you're making some deeper argument regarding design and aesthetic?

Nah, there's no hidden meaning here, I'm really just saying both companies have made a living off of making the same game for 15 years. I guess I should be congratulating them.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Casual games don't want a casual game that is mixed with strategy, because it is not casual enough. Serious gamers don't want a strategy game that is mixed with casual gaming bull because it is too casual. CA is shooting itself in the foot with what it is doing, and the state of these forums is proof of that

Probably true enough, but I would guess their marketing gurus have statistics at the ready to show who is likely to buy their games. I'm not sure though, that you can draw the conclusion that interest in this forum has suffered as a result of CA's marketing strategy.

I still contend that weak multi-player support, and downgrading the ability to mod their games in a significant way in favor of DLC lies at the root. Back in the day of S1/M1, there was a huge following at the .org of folks that craved the challenges of multi-player. Playing other humans is always more challenging/fun than playing vs the AI. Spending hours and hours slogging through a campaign wasn't necessary...you fought a single battle, whether 1vs1, 2vs2, etc., and you moved on to another battle.

Through my own personal experiences, and what I've seen from other game developers, being able to significantly modify a game keeps interest fresh, and modders happy. Some of my favorite NWN games were done by modders (some of which were extensive 4 or 5 part series). Bioware actually encouraged modding by hosting competitions The venerable Baldurs Gate still has a significant following (as evidenced by the activity at the G3 Forum) more than 15 years after its' initial release because of the extensive mods and character development.

Just my 2cents....

[Nelson]

Back in the day of S1/M1, there was a huge following at the .org of folks that craved the challenges of multi-player.

I must disagree. There has never been a huge MP following for any Total War game. Never. I've been here since the first acorn fell, and this story of a Golden Age of Total War multiplayer nirvana is a myth. There were a couple of dozen (at best) very vocal MP players on this site who generated enough smoke to simulate a mighty conflagration from what amounted to a little campfire.

Perhaps MP was more popular relatively speaking in at some point in the past, but it was a sideshow, and a wee tiny one at that.