I think Apollo's point is that it feels pretty crappy to get all these things that we've had before marketed as "new" features and sold for $60
@booniebound7793
Жыл бұрын
Facts, could’ve been a big dlc for Rome 2
@TraxOferta
Жыл бұрын
Yeah that's precisely what I feel from him
@aranighosh3945
Жыл бұрын
This game is way too overpriced. Shouldn't be higher than 30 dollars..
@krevin543
Жыл бұрын
Agreed! The issue is this game’s price tag. It isn’t offering, in my opinion, $60 worth of value. Troy Total War, which is very similar, was **FREE** on Epic Games if you got it in the first few days of launch or something. This game’s scope feels much narrower then many other titles I have paid $60 for. Hopefully we see a steam sale or a price reduction soon because I would pay $30 for this title- maybe $40 because I am a Total War junkie
@PixelatedApollo1
Жыл бұрын
yes
@bluewizzard8843
Жыл бұрын
Well if the battles only take seven or eight minutes on average than apollo is completely right that formations and weather conditions are just senseless. They really aren't interesting in that case because the battle itself won't be interesting either. There is nothing to watch and enjoy.
@Steven-zp4hf
Жыл бұрын
exactly bro, the battle so quick in most total war game
@kapitankapital6580
Жыл бұрын
I think what's interesting going back to games like M2 and Rome is that the battles, once they start, are actually a fairly similar length to modern games. It's just that the maps are significantly bigger so there's much more manuevering before battle is joined.
@Eruner279
Жыл бұрын
how long do you want to watch 1 frontline to grind other 1 frontline? Curious question.
@StalkRay
Жыл бұрын
Yep what's the point of having those special conditions when battle can be over in 5 minutes or so
@Ether_9
Жыл бұрын
@@Eruner279 You obviously dont know the nuance of an actual classical battle. Frontline troop rotation, flanking, use of formations, all of these things make battles take longer but much more enjoyable. If you are just grinding your units into the enemy units then you play a very boring game lmao
@alexburke4569
Жыл бұрын
If the faction leaders are not killable and other characters don’t age then it’s not a historical game 🤷♂️
@silencio00
Жыл бұрын
Very true.
@notaname1750
Жыл бұрын
Imagine you are the enemy of Egypt, and you kill the Famous Ramesses III. Later down the line you see him again in another full stack and destroy him again but he keeps coming back... It will make 0 sense.
@nikolapetrovicpopovic2993
Жыл бұрын
@@notaname1750 Fair enough, but that also happened in Napoleon. I cant remember how many times I destroyed him with cannons only for him to appear again in X amount of turns.
@Reaper08
Жыл бұрын
@@nikolapetrovicpopovic2993 But that's because the game was centered around him specifically. The historical battles, campaign, tutorial, everything. Faction leaders being immortal and reviving doesn't/wouldn't make sense here.
@victorromano6707
Жыл бұрын
@@Reaper08duke of wellington and Gebhard Leberecht von Blücher was also unkilleable
@nathanhull8302
Жыл бұрын
Apollo isn’t complaining that they’re bringing back old features. He’s complaining that they’re basically trying and failing to appeal to fans of the old games by simply bringing back things that have already existed for years and act like it’s going to be a new and better game. Everyone’s just going to be sticking to the old total wars because pharaoh doesn’t offer anything better that makes it worth the money
@roguewasbanned4746
Жыл бұрын
Pharaoh is Troy mod with a $60 price
@awesomeHLD
Жыл бұрын
Total war is going to die especially with chat removed
@sr-71blackbird30
Жыл бұрын
11:10 people forget how in Rome 2 more than half of the city would be totally empty at any given time...
@1YCARADOFACAO
Жыл бұрын
Even in Med 2 where the sieges were big but not even as large as in Rome 2
@clontroper5
Жыл бұрын
Also historically during ancient times the battle would frequently only take place over a small section of the wall. For example the Roman siege of Jerusalem during the Jewish revolt the fighting basically happend at one point on the wall centered on the roman siege tower, and then moved inside and centered on a single breach in the inner wall
@ssteel
Жыл бұрын
I agree with the second guy about the faction color scheme. As a Shogun 2 player, color is the most important way to differentiate between other faction's units. You can tell whose unit belongs to which faction even with the UI turned off. People having the same color is not historically accurate but it's how it is in Shogun 2. Most of the things in that game aren't historically accurate, but was tweaked to make it better to play with. Shogun 2 had a lot of clever visual design that another KZitemr called Dishonorable_Daimyo talked about. It's what makes playing Shogun 2 so appealing. You don't need a lot of experience in the game to identify things. So, in my opinion, I agree with everything you said, but I agree with the second guy about uniform colors. It would make Pharaoh even better.
@pizzaman6784
Жыл бұрын
I agree, I think it really adds to replayability and pride in your “team” (faction), too.
@awkwardsaxon9418
Жыл бұрын
bring back the pink pajamas
@elih9700
Жыл бұрын
@@awkwardsaxon9418 Fez fan ;)
@Reaper08
Жыл бұрын
It's so easy to differentiate between other faction's units if you are actually paying attention. The DEI mod for Rome 2 doesn't have the faction colours and does absolutely fine without it. Problem is that battles are over ridiculously quickly and that makes it harder to discern two factions from each other.
@jakXDbaby
Жыл бұрын
Battle standards it was the coolest thing in 3k honestly
@mikeoakman6708
Жыл бұрын
nah for that price just mixing old mechanics and reskinning games without properly fixing old issues seems wrong
@danielc9967
Жыл бұрын
Back in the early 2000s we all dreamed of how total war would evolve in the future. How they would push the graphics, features and overall battle realism. I remember when I first saw Rome 2 gameplay as well as Empire , I was blown away. However CA has chosen to stagnate and regress, this isn't how a 2023 total war should look and play, its over 23 years later, we should be seeing the ultimate battle simulator on the market.
@trevorseidel4536
Жыл бұрын
Completely agree! That's where much of my frustration & critcism comes from.
@Taskicore
Жыл бұрын
I remember playing Empire at age 10 and thinking about what Total War games would be like in 2020. Low and behold they suck now.
@Fohox
Жыл бұрын
Agreed. I think some of the content creator's frustrations are warranted.
@mnm8818
Жыл бұрын
guess its the same battle and unit management since Shogun 1 TW. they need to change it to fit the theme. its like every yearly sports game title. sports rules havent changed. rant: medieval battles were much smaller in comparison to old ancient ones with mass ones, from what I know. but TW its practically the same factory produced click and collect troops
@Natsatable
Жыл бұрын
ok, are you programer in the games industies? To explain how we can get better mechanics, graphics and all that runing on our PC with thousand of units? I genualy want to know. I have seen some games with better graphics but with way less mechanics playing at the same time. Are you disapointed that humanity aren inovating fast enought or at he game developers? Cuz to me the game looks awesome, i cant make it better neighter in art nor in optimizing it to support more mechanics smoothly.
@flexzible3848
Жыл бұрын
My complains are honestly most towards the battle i think most of us can agree is that they seem to be getting a more and more arcady look, also this thing that started on attilla were you dont get banners but its you green versus enemy red and thats it just sucks so bad. And definitly small battle maps where it leaves little room for actual good battles and units moving is also quite limited and unrealistic.
@nathanhull8302
Жыл бұрын
Omg yes faction banners are such an important an immersive part of the game. You’d think it would be simple to include, showing just how lazy CA is now. I think they just want it to literally look like an arcade game of green vs red with no actual depth to it
@wolfensniper4012
Жыл бұрын
At least they had it in 3K but I don't know why they removed it anyways, especially that we actually have banners in Pharaoh cg trailer
@danielc9967
Жыл бұрын
In 2014 during the launch of Attila, if someone had told me 9 years later total war battles would look like this, I wouldn't have believed it. Its a massive regression, considering how advance gamin technology has come, in today's standards, this is no better than a mobile game, with mobile game graphics
@zacharyshoemaker835
Жыл бұрын
Hey now dont bad mouth Atilla that game was legit the last good one. Unit diversity, model diversity, an ending world. Like my god that game is the pinnacle of total war for me.
@Koelebig
Жыл бұрын
@@zacharyshoemaker835 but the floating icons instead of banners negate a lot of the immersion.
@RIP_Greedo
Жыл бұрын
0:05 You are a warrior in an ancient Egyptian army, marching through a sandstorm. In your left hand is a shield, in your right hand is sword. You want to block the sand from your face. Which hand do you hold up? Do you raise your shield to block the sand from your face, or do you almost stab yourself or your comrade and use your right hand to block none of the sand?
@realcheesy6384
Жыл бұрын
Shields are heavy. I doubt you'd be able to hold up a shield to cover your face against the wind for more than a minute..
@dfgfgh244
Жыл бұрын
Or you could just put away your sword maybe but nah, keep the sharp object in swinging range with limited vision
@CHR3S_1
Жыл бұрын
@@dfgfgh244 And how are you going to fight?
@dfgfgh244
Жыл бұрын
@@CHR3S_1 Still, having a sword within swinging range of friendlies while trying to cover your face from sand aint safe
@CHR3S_1
Жыл бұрын
@@dfgfgh244 Lowering your sword in a battle isn't safe either.
@Bearonasubmarine
Жыл бұрын
The problem is that it appears to be the EA/FIFA model of removing and adding certain ingredients from each iteration. Its the same game with a different dress on each time. The UI looks okay. Sure the campaign map looks nice. But the battles look worse than the modded versions of previous games that came out 12/15 years ago. Same clitchy combat animations and dumb A.I. Its basically another Saga, a DLC for Troy. You cant tell me that CA invested heavily in this or a full team of developers spent years making this. Its just not possible. It was made very quickly with a basic team on a low budget to maximise profits.
@nobelwarprize
Жыл бұрын
You are closest to the truth
@khal7702
Жыл бұрын
that's why I would buy it on sale, there are some interesting "new" features
@oole0111
Жыл бұрын
If they made this pharaoh a DLC for Troy, it would actually make Troy a very replayable game, it would be so cool.
@Natsatable
Жыл бұрын
I see you are in the game industry. Expert at that. What games have you shipped till now? If you create such games so quick, i would like to follow you!
@Bearonasubmarine
Жыл бұрын
@@Natsatabletheir recent games lacking innovation is a common sentiment shared by many fans who have invested many years supporting the company and many hours playing their older games. The fact that they are owned by Sega only contributes to their title of being a AAA company with a AAA marketing team so they can charge AAA prices. The actual development side is contentious. They're still receive startup funding from the UK government like a indie company. They still use all the same assets from their previous games and the same old engine to make "new" games. So yes, it's a money saver and time saver as they don't have to build from the ground up.
@Kolsedy
Жыл бұрын
I'm sorry Andy but I am with apollo on this one many are just old features and many new are pretty senseless.
@Lucifer_26
Жыл бұрын
I am afraid of a knee jerk reaction from the devs being 'well, if you don't like us bringing back the old features you said previously you wanted back, then we won't anymore'. Even though we DO want those features back. I get the frustration that they market it as something new and ask a ridiculous price for it, but I believe if people continue bashing on this, it sends the wrong message to the devs. That's why I agree with Andy on this one. It's a GOOD thing they are bringing those features back and try to improve on them, even if it turns out not everything will be good. I'm afraid of what we saw with ME Andromeda from Bioware and with Imperator: Rome from Paradox, where they pulled the plug completely after fixing the games and will probably not come back to those kind of games in a decade, because of the massive backlash they got from their community at the launch of games that after fixing turned out to be pretty decent. Not great, but decent enough that looking back, with that outrage from the community, they didn't shoot themselves in the foot, they blasted their whole leg off.
@MelkorGG
Жыл бұрын
Here's a KZitemr's opinion: Total War Pharaoh is a Scam. I'm even tempted to come back just to do a video on why people should not buy it.
@warrensnell4370
Жыл бұрын
Does have a bit of the call of duty style, serialized game feel. I definitely expect better than releasing the same AAA priced reskin of the same exact game, just with slightly better graphics every other year. Hard to say for certain if we’ve truly reached that level without being able to play it myself.
@khal7702
Жыл бұрын
i think we shouldn't buy it at that price point...once it's on sale $20-$30 or $40-$60 with dlc
@GermanOlle
Жыл бұрын
@@warrensnell4370 In that respect you are not entirely wrong. BUT: Almost every other year there was a new Total War title that was based on the predecessor. Barbarian Invasion was based on R1, Med2: Kingdoms was based on Med2, Napoleon on Empire, Fall of the Samurai on Shogun2, Attila on R2. All titles mentioned were standalone games (FotS is a welcome exception here! You could also start it directly in the main menu of Shogun2), but were also cheaper than the "main titles". TW: Pharaoh is a continuation of CA's way of working, but with an increased price (and felt like less content).
@warrensnell4370
Жыл бұрын
@@GermanOlle I can’t say I’m entirely with you on that. BI and Kingdoms were billeted as expansions, not entirely separate titles like Pharaoh is, and were priced (and bundled for sale with the base game) accordingly. Sure you needed to launch them separately, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t an expansion. Absolutely right about Napoleon though. Even if it did make necessary improvements on Empire, it really should have been an expansion.
@pawelsmok9905
Жыл бұрын
Please make a video about pharoh, we need people like you to point out to CA what's wrong!
@MrJabbothehut
Жыл бұрын
This game is doing exactly what Assassin's Creed Mirage is doing as well with their "back to the roots" bollocks and what Battlefield 2042 marketed before it failed spectacularly. All it has done is cut out a lot of the bullshit that classical Total War fans didn't like and bring back the game to an earlier gameplay loop and that's it. It's the laziest way of trying to win back the trust of your old school fanbase that made you who you are today. Sure there won't be heros but you're still going to have general restricted armies, province building system, THE FUCKING WARSCAPE MELEE COMBAT SHIT (I complain about this every video I get the chance to), a campaign that looks like a spreadsheet without the depth of Paradox games, and battles that look boring and devoid of life etc. What is similar across AC Mirage, Total War Pharaoh, and BF2042 is that none of the people in charge know what made the original games so great and what caused the golden age of their respective franchises. The corporate world is so devoid of creativity and life at the moment for reasons which span into real life culture and politics (which I do not want to get into here) which results in the ability to only copy surface elements without actually understanding the soul of what made the previous products so loved. This is why people are shitting on this game Andy. The excuse of "you havnt played it yet" held true 10 years ago but now people have more than enough experience uder their belts at being able to guess what's coming. This game is going to be completely forgettable.
@sorelvio79
Жыл бұрын
^ This!! It all comes down to the horrible engine they made for Empire, which was OK for 1v1 gun combat, but is horrendous for melee. The most fun feature in Med 2 and older games was the stagger mechanic where positioning of a unit actually had a huge impact; eg placing it on the flank where the general was and gang up on him to be attacked by multiple guys, so he can't retaliate. The units also had a feel to them because of different mass points. Cataphracts charges felt really impactful compared to militia. As is the case for other franchises, they will milk this engine as much as possible since people are still buying this arcade crap.
@Lucifer_26
Жыл бұрын
The golden age of Total War was definitely not until 2006 and stopped after Medieval 2. Yes, Rome and Medieval 2 were amazing games. With Empire and their new engine, things changed massively and definitely not always for the better. However to state Rome 2, Shogun 2, Attila, the Warhammers and the rest are bad games because of that engine, that's a bold statement. You really want to argue that blocks of pixels (the units) gliding (the animation is horrible compared to modern games) about on pixelated sheets (terrain that could never be round, one flat sheet at an angle to the next) and stopping completely, abruptly (from 40km/h to 0) after bumping into another block of pixels which happened in Rome, is better than how cavalry actually overwhelm and knock down infantry in their path, only coming to a grinding halt when encountering a strong formation or entity as they would in real life, like how it improved with each game build in the engine since Empire? Come on, that can't be true. Also, the stun lock you apparently love was frustrating and utter sh*t. Militia with 0,1 second higher hit rate can keep hitting and stunning fully armoured professional warriors? No, that's dumb as ...
@MrJabbothehut
Жыл бұрын
@@Lucifer_26 Just. No. I'm not even going to bother arguing against this. If you like warscape rome2 games onwards then thats fine and that's your preference. There's a reason, however why lots of the old TW fans prefer Shogun 2 and its predecessors (with medieval 2 being the best for simulating melee).
@Lucifer_26
Жыл бұрын
@@MrJabbothehut that's fine, just pointing out that if your issue is with the melee and think Shogun 2 is among the better ones, which I agree with, it's made in the same warscape engine.
@alcoolamus4208
Жыл бұрын
Idk how you can say so confidently Pharaoh and Troy don't look more similar than Rome and Medieval 2, I mean even the screenshots you use to prove your point show a vastly different UI. Yes the map and abilities are at the same spot but that's the case for a lot of TW games. At least the unit banners were not exactly the same like in Pharaoh and Troy. UI is really the point I'm the most disappointed in Pharaoh rn, it's just blatant laziness at this point
@aranighosh3945
Жыл бұрын
Even if Medieval 2 and Rome Are very similar, u have to remember Rome 1 was a great game... So medieval 2 being similar but slightly different is good news. But Troy was a bad game, so Pharaoh looking similar to Troy is not good news.
@1YCARADOFACAO
Жыл бұрын
@@aranighosh3945 Troy wasn't bad. It was disappointing though
@hex_1733
Жыл бұрын
@@1YCARADOFACAO I'm convinced none of these guys actually played Troy for more than 2 hours.
@alcoolamus4208
Жыл бұрын
@@hex_1733 I actually love Troy and am playing it right now, but as a semi-mythological experience (only played the Truth behind the myth mode). I don't want an historical game like this, and it's disappointing to see CA putting so few efforts to differentiate their games nowadays. This looks much more like a reskin than older titles did imo
@hex_1733
Жыл бұрын
@@alcoolamus4208 So you didn't play the historical game mode and didn't take advantage of what the modding community turned Troy into? Why? It improves on so many things campaign wise, I can easily call it the best TW campaign in recent years. Only Attila is better, but mostly due to the time period.
@TexanFlyingDino
Жыл бұрын
I just have a hard time listening to any comments in favor or against a game where the only footage or gameplay of said game is a alpha of it. It seems like a majority of the people complaining only do so, to gain viewers and stuff. They are just like the world nowadays, complain and complain and complain just because complaining draws more eyes than praising. Also didnt pixelated have like a massive falling out with CA recently where he just said he stop doing anything with the company or something like that or was that someone else.
@elang1702
Жыл бұрын
Nah, Apollo continued on making his copy pasted battle replay contents shortly after he said he'd stop playing total wars
@resileaf9501
Жыл бұрын
Apollo is just a grognard. Hates the game because he wants to hate the game and claims that everyone who likes the games are wrong.
@JustYourAverageGamer46
Жыл бұрын
When I first heard a new historical total war game some coming out I was very excited. But after seeing it, I feel very skeptical. This time period is not something I’ve really been fond of. And I am worried that is is going to be a watered down “historical” total war game. This may sound pessimistic but I personally feel that CA has kind of lost there way with historical games. And are really favoring the more fast paced arcade style total war games. I hope I’m wrong about this but from looking at game play I don’t really think this is going to scratch that historical total war itch. I guess I’ll just have to wait until reviews come out.
@firebird4491
Жыл бұрын
I agree. I’ve had a lot of fun with the more arcady nature of the warhammer titles but I’ve been craving for a new authentic and gritty historical experience and I’m afraid pharaoh simply isn’t that. Especially with the time period being so far back that it’s really stretching the “historical” part of the game.
@1YCARADOFACAO
Жыл бұрын
Despite agreeing that the battles are getting more gamey and less gritty as the titles come and go i honestly can't understand the problem with the time period? Historical titles aren't supposed to be in time periods in real history, accompanying real events and letting us play and live the war happening in there? So why the collapse of the bronze age, a period that wan't only extremely chaotic and full of wars but also REAL and DOCUMENTED not have a "historical feel"? I'm not accusing you specifically but many times this sort of comment feels like: "It's not Europe, so it's not historical" or sometimes "It's not that one game i liked so it's not historical" Again, not saying you come from this pov but i only want to understand what do you mean by it not "feeling historical"
@JustYourAverageGamer46
Жыл бұрын
@@1YCARADOFACAO I think you bring up some good points. I think the long and short of it is Tory took place during a historical time period and so did Three Kingdoms but both of those games felt very lack luster. Troy felt like it really could not decide if it wanted to be historical or fantasy. And Three kingdoms decide to go a more fantasy route with its hero’s. I guess we won’t really know how the game is until it’s released. I’ve always been more fond of longer battles I guess that’s just always felt more “historical” to me. Shogun 2 is a great example of a historical total war game that I felt they got it right with. The factions were very diverse and battles felt fluid and dynamic and the amount of different units was awesome. I guess I’m afraid that this games will have an uninspired campaign with boring combat and will be passed off as CA’s historical title and then we will have to wait 3 or more years for the next time they decide to make another historical game again.
@firebird4491
Жыл бұрын
@@1YCARADOFACAO While the period and location it takes place in is real the meat of the game will be largely fiction. While there is documentation from this period so little has actually survived to the present. While some things that will be in the game were real such as the existence of the sea peoples, much of it will be up to speculation (or artistic decision). So it’s hard for me to feel immersed in this time period because so much of the details will be completely fabricated. While I’m not writing off this game strictly because it isn’t set in europe I can understand why some would. Many total war fans know more about the European side of history and how much of its military history is iconic. People would naturally be more excited to use English longbows or Byzantine Greek fire ships rather than Egyptian light infantry, Egyptian heavy infantry, Egyptian chariots, and so on. Not to mention going back to the written record issue that much of the armor and military units are likely to be fictionalized as well.
@oole0111
Жыл бұрын
@@firebird4491 The time period don't help, Bronze age civilizations don't have 1% of the comprehension we have with classical, medieval, modern civilization.
@mareksatina
Жыл бұрын
Dear Andy. Apollo was not complaining about getting features back. But about celebrating it as if it was something new. Now since these features were requested by so many people to return, of course CA would make a big deal out of it... But the point is... are we supposed to celebrate them now for giving back something they took out at the first place... that is where the cynicism comes from and I believe it is justified. And the fact that the game looks cheap is not helping the cause at all.
@angelodiaco6424
Жыл бұрын
I feel like people are quick to criticize because it isn’t Medieval 3. People got their hopes up and now you’re seeing it in the criticisms.
@resileaf9501
Жыл бұрын
Yup, just people who have decided ahead of time that they hate the game, no matter what they've seen about it, and refuse to keep an open mind about it.
@spiffygonzales5160
Жыл бұрын
Nope. It's not because it's not medieval 3. It's because when you play medieval 2, then you play empire, then you play Rome 1 then you play Shogun 2, and then you see this game... you can already tell it's gonna be troy 2. Personally I wanted Empire 2. I still loved it when I heard it was gonna be bronze age. Then I saw the trailer. I saw the pharaoh with the same graphics as troy. So it's on the same engine. Then I saw two armies run balls first at each other with no formation or strategy. Then I saw the sieges and immediately knew that it's just Warhammer sieges but now 360 degrees. Then I saw the battles and saw it was the same arcade nonesene we've had for the last decade. Wanna know why people are upset? Go play one of the older total wars
@resileaf9501
Жыл бұрын
@@spiffygonzales5160 lol, this is nonsense. Of course it's on the same graphics engine, the game has been on the same graphics engine since Empire! And Empire 2 will also be on the same graphics engine! And lol at seeing an announcement trailer and thinking that's how battles are going to be played. And lol at saying 'arcadey nonsense' like that means anything.
@spiffygonzales5160
Жыл бұрын
@@resileaf9501 @Resileaf @Resileaf "Of course it has the same engine" That's an issue. CA can afford to make another one. It's been a literal decade. "Lol at seeing an announcement trailer and thinking that's how battles will be played" And then they released gameplay footage and, surprise surprise, I was right. "Lol at saying arcade strategy like that means anything" yea, it does. Like an arcade shooter is different than something Arma, arcade strategy is different than simulated strategy.
@resileaf9501
Жыл бұрын
@@spiffygonzales5160 "That's an issue. CA can afford to make another one. It's been a literal decade. " The graphics engine still works well. The game looks very pretty to me. Don't see why they should be changing it. "And then they released gameplay footage and, surprise surprise, I was right." It's not though? We've got this whole new stance system to make combat different. Or do you think frontline units shouldn't fight each other or something? "yea, it does. Like an arcade shooter is different than something Arma, arcade strategy is different than simulated strategy." And arcade strategy is itself a meaningless term. What does that imply? What is the difference between 'arcade' and 'simulated' strategy? And how is it any different from what Total War has always been?
@redwood404
Жыл бұрын
I think I’m going to approach this game as a “saga” release
@Chris-ey8zf
Жыл бұрын
Meaning, skip it entirely? Same. CA better start working on Empire 2 or Medieval 3 if they want my money ever again. They've gone overboard with the garbage DLC model that's probably the worst in the industry at this point and their awful historical releases.
@spiffygonzales5160
Жыл бұрын
@@Chris-ey8zf You know what's gonna happen? CA WILL start working on Empire 2 or medieval 3. ..and they're gonna make it just like this. This game is their new normal. Hell they're gonna sell Babylon as a dlc... in a friggin bronze age game -_- That's the CA we're dealing with now. Paid of KZitemrs, half the money that should have went to development going to trailers and hype, and then acting totally oblivious when people don't like it.
@Bakarost
Жыл бұрын
How many more games gotta come out till yall realize its a business when u buy the game its a success for CA. So why should they care if it sucks if its making money every new game. $$ = people love it. Want change then STOP BUYING CRAP GAMES
@ssteel
Жыл бұрын
They only thing they truly sense is money going up or down. Boycotting will always be the only real way to achieve proper change without the whole PR bs.
@danilkorovin6012
Жыл бұрын
true
@shetlandapache949
10 ай бұрын
The point is not that things coming back is bad, its that it is marketed as a groundbreaking development when they still dont have naval battles, family trees, character lifespans, dynamic battle maps based on campaign position are all things that were done 20 years ago are not groundbreaking and are absent
@kapitankapital6580
Жыл бұрын
The thing that really irks me about ShillTubers praising CA for "bringing back" features is that most of these were standard in every Total War game except the Warhammer games and Troy. Formations are something that have existed in every single historical Total War game at least since Rome 1, it is not something to praise them for. Yes, a lot of these features weren't in Warhammer, but that's because Warhammer made simplifications to campaign for the purpose of diversity, that is *not* the new standard for these games. Things like fire spreading was introduced in Atilla, and expanded in 3K, this is baseline stuff. It's not some long requested feature that has finally returned. This is a dishonest marketing trick being used to try to sell a shitty product, demand better.
@hex_1733
Жыл бұрын
A fighting retreat/advance is 100% a new feature that was asked for since the original RTW. In no Total War game can you rotate your frontline safely, which was literally the bread and butter of roman armies irl.
@lordgerog
Жыл бұрын
Another historical fan that doesn't read a shit.
@PoorManatee6197
Жыл бұрын
@@hex_1733 wow, 1 new thing.
@CALIMA2000
Жыл бұрын
Some of youtuber that dislike TW Pharoh is from the old historical TW community (Rome and Med2). Some of the "new" feature is not really a new feature. I also feel this TW Pharoh is just a reskin of Troy.
@hex_1733
Жыл бұрын
Med 2 is a reskin of Rome 1, Napoleon is a reskin of Empire TW, Shogun 2 is built on the same engine, Rome 2 as well, Attila is a reskin of Rome 2, Thrones of Britannia is a reskin of Attila. Where do you draw the line?
@CALIMA2000
Жыл бұрын
@@hex_1733 Med 2 is a huge graphic upgrade from Rome 1. Yes, Napoleon should be a DLC for Empire. Shogun 2 is literally a huge improvement from Shogun 1 with different gameplay and a huge graphic improvement from the previous title. Rome 2 is set in Rome 1 time but with upgraded graphics and different mechanics compared to Rome 1. And Yes Attila should be a DLC for Rome 2. Saying Med 2, Shogun 2, and Rome 2 is a reskin is a very dumb thing to say.
@oole0111
Жыл бұрын
@@CALIMA2000 Attila is so superior to Rome 2 that it couldn't ever be a DLC, Rome 2 is 1000% better for multiplayer tho.
@hex_1733
Жыл бұрын
@@CALIMA2000 Why are you talking about graphics? If Pharaoh was a "huge graphic upgrade" over Troy, you would be fine with the rest of the problems? Besides, as Andy said, graphics evolved way faster back then. Why not talk about the mechanics themselves? Med 2 is literally Rome 1 but with some changed/added features. Shogun 2 being an improvement over Shogun 1 is a no brainer and I never compared those 2 games, idk what you're talking about. But Shogun 2 is based on Napoleon's engine (which is based on Empire's engine). Why are you comparing Rome 1 and Rome 2, again like Shogun 1 and 2. I never compared those 2 games but you are. Rome 2 is a graphical improvement over Rome 1, but Rome 1 is the superior game. Med 2, Shogun 2 and Rome 2 ARE reskins of the PREVIOUS games behind them. Shogun 2 is NOT a reskin of Shogun 1, but IT IS BASED ON Napoleon. Your whole comment is stupidity, trying to imitate what older TW players are complaining about, but without actually having any idea or experience with the older titles lmao.
@hex_1733
Жыл бұрын
@@oole0111 The Empire Divided DLC ports over most of Attila's features like squalor, religion, banditry etc.
@emrecanarduc4378
Жыл бұрын
APOLLO IS RIGHT
@kingmarre9130
Жыл бұрын
No
@BiRaitBec
Жыл бұрын
they have been suggesting medieval 3 and empire total war all over the place, they ended three kingdoms support earlier than intended to work also on this major title. They give warhammer on gamepass and this not. People asked for totally different things for when they would have been back to historical games, instead they decided to copy paste troy and bringing back the old mechanics with the constant buffs of the recent titles. There's no counter balance in this game, everything is just a buff to get you stronger, the more you go on in the campaign the easier it gets. It's an historical game, you pay for instant building, the enemies retiring from battles in the campaign they leave far away for some reason again, chariots are the only horse mechanic they managed to work on even if the planned more horses, in the cg trailer they show plenty of armies battling, and then in battle they even seem fewer units than three kingdoms. The added formation CA devs praise is a retiring with guard.... They removed the civil aspect of the game with family tree, which was fun to use as a mean to keep relationships, trading materials is cluncky as f. In campaign map every settlement seems a perfect square, there's no monuments, there's no sense of big city and the fog being like a wall in the entire bondaries seems like a battle royal closing area effect. I mean, i understand praising something about it, but the negatives in the delivering of a quality game is not there anymore, they do not support games anymore. Even Rome 2 at start was trash, then they supported it for years and years to finally become decent enough. They do not support and their quality at start needs years more of development unlucky. This coming back to historical should have been a celebrating moment of CA advances in engines, community feedback and also much more budget due to great profiting from warhammer serie, and we have to get an egyptian only title nobody really asked for and that is of the poorest quality, i wouldn't be surprised if even troy is much better than this after all. Of course we will see on release, but they showed the gameplay already, we are not fools or kids that have to try something as a must, we can understand the mechanics shown and after loads of experience we already see the mistakes made and the underwhelming design choices. I mean, even if i would replay to a T what they have been shown i would get bored as hell, and they decided to present that as a major selling point, it sucks.
@CALIMA2000
Жыл бұрын
I hate that "new" Total War battle only last 5 minutes. I want 30+ minutes battle back in Total War games. I just want Old TW gameplay with new graphic.
@lordgerog
Жыл бұрын
30+ minutes battles? this only happens in naval battles and battles with many stacks or siege battles (cuz the ia was too stupid that only attack in 3-4 places). Only napoleon and thrones have field battles that takes longer time, for example, in shogun 2 your units die so quicly that the battle ended in 5 minutes or less, so don't say bullshit.
@CALIMA2000
Жыл бұрын
@@lordgerogYeah fine maybe not all the battle in old total war is 30+ minutes battle. But they are slower compared to this Pharaoh battle.
@resileaf9501
Жыл бұрын
Outside of Medieval 2, no Total War battle took more than ten minutes unless you purposefully dragged things out. In Rome 1, battles could end within *seconds* of the frontline engagement starting.
@ddjay1363
Жыл бұрын
I remember the debacle of Rome 2's release. The 'pre-alpha footage' they released that wasn't in the game, the alleged 'stills' that CA claimed were from the game that actually weren't etc. CA got caught lying a few times before release and just after as well. Rome 2 was an unfinished, mess of a game and CA suffered from a well-deserved backlash, which they tried to downplay, lie about and went around trying to get several KZitem channels shut down that were highly critical of the game and CA. Based on that, some of us old gamers (who have had computers and consoles since at least the mid 80's ) remembering Shogun and the first Rome are always cautious about new Total War releases. We wait for a new TW game to be out for a few months, see how it is received and looks, drop in price via a Steam sale before we part with any cash and give it to CA. ;-) Does this mean Pharoh will be an overpriced, unfinished mess? No, not really we can just reserve judgement until we have played at least 30 to 100 turns of a few factions to see how it is. It could be fantastic and we'll be hopefully nicely surprised so I'll rememain cautiously optimistic. :-)
@aidanmcnary-hickey6778
Жыл бұрын
This is just a Troy reskin dude, CA has been shoveling shit into its fan base for a while now and just demanding more and more money, warhammer bros really have ruined this franchise
@kingmarre9130
Жыл бұрын
Wrong
@resileaf9501
Жыл бұрын
"It's a Troy reskin" is meaningless. They re-use Rome 2 skeletons because there's no point in creating brand-new skeletons when you have a perfectly good one already existing.
@maunz5791
Жыл бұрын
I'm still pissed they changed the gun sounds in Napoleon to those of Shogun 2. To Pharao: I totally agree to the criticism of having badly distinguishable units. Banners or standards or at least colorful painted shields (what would be historically accurate) would make it look much better. But I really hope they stick with the big cities, they offer so much more tactical depth and variety!
@Orendiz
Жыл бұрын
Apollo isnt complaning about old features coming back, he's complaning about CA marketing old features as if they are new, and the community's reaction to it as if its something new too. Idk how it managed to go compleately over ur head...
@TheMissing8
Жыл бұрын
You have played Pharaoh, though. It's Total war Troy. You're lying to Yourself if you don't think it is. And a side note, I think people would be a lot more forgiving if this game was just marketed for what it is, a SAGA game and not upcharged as a full Total war game.
@lordgerog
Жыл бұрын
If you play napoleon, you can say that its Empire?
@resileaf9501
Жыл бұрын
"It's a Troy reskin" is meaningless. They re-use Rome 2 skeletons because there's no point in creating brand-new skeletons when you have a perfectly good one already existing.
@TheMissing8
Жыл бұрын
@@resileaf9501 Not sure what the point you're trying to make is. Rome 2 is even older than Troy. Are you saying you're excited to pay a premium for a 10 year old game engine?
@resileaf9501
Жыл бұрын
@@TheMissing8 Your mistake is thinking that the engine is not constantly updated as time passes. Not that you care, you probably think that the Warscape engine (which is actually a graphical rendering engine) is what you need to blame for everything.
@giorgiannicartamancini3917
Жыл бұрын
My big problem with this game is that the core of the combat is obviously the same from Troy and I didn't like Troy's combat. The campaign is also very similar and I find Troy's campaign a test of patience. Also, why are people saying that there are no heroes? I saw immortal leaders running around with an upgradable bodyguard (like in Troy), always being committed to battle because there's no real threat to loosing them and they are the strongest unit in the game. As always there's some cool ideas but if the battles don't work properly it all goes to waste. It's like if a new Doom had incredible map design but terrible shooting
@philnerius7645
Жыл бұрын
Absolutely nothing wrong with a TW title that just brings back the most demanded mechanics. Especially after over a decade without some of them. That said: faction specific color schemes, distinct unit banners, a wider scope (geographically and chronologically) and family trees replacing immortal 'Lords' would have been even better. The game still feels like a step in the right direction, though.
@giorgiannicartamancini3917
Жыл бұрын
I think it's fair to be disappointed in the fact that their pitch for making you spend 60$ it's "new" features from 20y ago
@johnsamuel1999
Жыл бұрын
Faction specific colors for ALL units and banners for ALL units is not very realistic
@greg5435
Жыл бұрын
@@johnsamuel1999 That's true, but I think it is a valid point. If anything it could be a toggle box in the settings and it would just change the colors on the factions units and a "less-historical" warning next to it, throw it under accessibility for people who can't keep track of 4000 half naked people fighting.
@johnsamuel1999
Жыл бұрын
@@greg5435 true
@resileaf9501
Жыл бұрын
I much prefer using real characters from history for Total War. Makes it feel much more involved when you have someone real present. The best battles in Shogun 2 are those that involve historical Daimyos and generals fighting each other on the battlefield, which you'll only see once in a campaign because the losing army will always lose its general.
@fearan9406
Жыл бұрын
Napoleon Darthmod Bran mac Born super slaughter 40 units I have thousands of hours in TW series and this is by far the best experience
@firebird4491
Жыл бұрын
How solid is the ai with Napoleon darthmod? I could never get too deep into Napoleon campaigns because the ai was too stupid. I never ran the risk of being defeated in a battle unless I was seriously outnumbered by higher quality units.
@fearan9406
Жыл бұрын
@@firebird4491 ya darthmod by itself no good you need a bran mac submod see total war centre, im doing a super slaughter i think right now there are like 10 variartions but me and all the ai are pumping out armies theres full stacks everywhere and they do attack more, also he redid the unit stats so morale is higher and units dont route so easily, the french fight to the last man almost, its so good. arty also actually kills not just morale impacting, i wish i knew about it 300 hours ago ffs lol
@yoRimazing
Жыл бұрын
darthmod + bran mac born + 40 units = cherries on top
@spiffygonzales5160
Жыл бұрын
@@firebird4491 Darth mod fixes the a.i up nicely. Empire had pretty bad A.I, but Dartmod makes them decent
@Ltgaigley
Жыл бұрын
I feel Volound will just hate on your views and good faith towards the game. Some people just only see Total War thru rose tinted glasses and call them the best and anything new is trash. You bring much needed optimisim in this community, even if it might turn out misplaced. Love your videos, as always!
@Reaper08
Жыл бұрын
You sound like a corporate bootlicker. When rehashed shit is the only thing you've been getting for years you have every right to be cynical. Volound literally points out there are good things in the newer titles but it's all buried underneath layers of unfinished and poorly thought through trash. Try again.
@AlejandroNievas1
Жыл бұрын
this is goign to be a game that is interesting to play ONE campaing , then will be archived , same as Troy, the battles are too much arcade , ultra fast, arrows are like homing missiles with ultra accuracy and shooting in impossibles angles, the units dotn feel like have mass, like for example in Attila , even the cheaper spearman , can hold a street, just by blocking it, here they get desintegrated in 3 seconds , (like warhammer) the problem is not the historical period , the porblem is how the game is desing , and TW is getting more casual , fast paced, with every entry, if this same mechanis will be in the Medieval III still would be very bland , and total flop. they have to come back to Strategy, not become like ageofempires, cartoon style
@Chris-ey8zf
Жыл бұрын
At least Troy was free on Epic for most people. You got to try it and see it sucked, then deleted to save SSD space for a better game. I couldn't imagine paying $60 + who knows how much in DLC for this game. People will pirate it and still delete it after 20 minutes. Meanwhile, games like Empire and Medieval 2 are still selling better on Steam than any of the recent historical titles CA put out, yet they won't make Empire 2 or Medieval 3.
@AlejandroNievas1
Жыл бұрын
@@Chris-ey8zf exactly , i mean, if this game came from a different studio, i would not consider it bad game , but coming from CA? i mean , Rome 2 still is a much better game than this, and is many years apart, even thrones of Britannia , could be more engaging than this aracadey new style they trying to impose on us,
@mariosgaroufalis4639
Жыл бұрын
Yeah no 60 price tag for a troy mod with basically nothing new or simply bringing back features with the same boring province system no building variety why should we not be angry about this . They ruined troy and now the entire bronze age with their little rpg mobile design
@Brutik5
Жыл бұрын
I watched almost all of these +Volund reaction, even though I am not hyped for Pharoah I want to give it a chance. Your sum up of thoughts is great and are similar to me. I wanted to write up reddit post, I made one sentence and I was like.. too much thinking and making it coherent... nah, I can't be bothered. :P I wish they used hybrid HP system of 3K so entities actually die when they are hit by arrow fire.
@brothir
5 ай бұрын
So how did it go?
@philnerius7645
Жыл бұрын
The last guy is just wrong. Troy/Pharao sieges are a step in the right direction. Sieges in TW:WH are abysmal.
@AlejandroNievas1
Жыл бұрын
well "steps in the right direction" ,, more like come back to already used features, i don't see how this siegue is better in anyway, to rome 2 or attile , or even medieval 2 siegues with the multilayered fortresses, .. that is more than 15 yers ago...
@greg5435
Жыл бұрын
@@AlejandroNievas1 Sure it's an old feature, and I'm definitely glad to see it back. I can see how it couldn't work in a WH setting with all the wild and crazy units that can just fly over walls as needed. I think my biggest complaint with full city sieges coming back is that everyone who grew up on the historical games was expecting TW to get big on historical and bring together massive armies by now. Troop numbers in the 10s of thousands instead of 2-4k. For me, my most memorable battle was holding out a siege from Oda in Shogun 2 where they threw 3 full army stacks at me to my one as Chesokabe. I believe at the end of the battle their casualties were almost 4000 with around 6000 fielded. And I scum save replayed it and only beat them with 2 mostly dead units left. And I thought, this was only a fort battle, imagine what this would have been like in a full blown city with massive numbers from all sides and defending the walls from massive armies. It's great that the feature is back, but I think it only makes sense if we had more numbers on the battle field, like many people expected looking at the limitations of the technology back then and how computers would advance over time.
@HistoricalWeapons
Жыл бұрын
CA needs an optional realistic mode UI. No banners, no buttons just the real world. No unit cards. No visible health bars. No floating buttons. Just pure real life
@alexeivasiliev7766
Жыл бұрын
Well, banners that only soldiers hold...)
@Lucifer_26
Жыл бұрын
Isn't that just photo mode which at least some of the modern games have?
@noahmarosok8168
Жыл бұрын
It is going to take some time for CA to return to its roots... I think they ruined their vision by pursuing arcade-like fantasy titles like Warhammer. They were chasing the money at the time and seems more apparent now with faction packs etc
@heroofthepeoplesrepublicof1170
Жыл бұрын
100 percent. I'll never prepurchse a total war every again. CA could have spent all the time since Rome 2 in 2013 to now to develop the perfect Total War game. Indtead they chose to make half measure games that have been forgotten.
@andreigoncalves4698
Жыл бұрын
Haters gonna hate no matter what. Troy was a solid game and Pharao is taking many steps in the right direction.
@juretic6038
Жыл бұрын
We get it, you are easily satisfied and compliant. The fact that they are bringing back the bare minimum features necessary for a historical title which are also the features that we had 20 years ago with Rome I is no reason for celebration. I agree that PA is very pessimistic, but it is completely reasonable and justified after 10 years of historical titles being dragged through shit.
@troublej1035
Жыл бұрын
The 2nd guy is spot on with the colour scheme. Old games you could see say red and instatly know its the british
@user-sp6wm5cb1d
Жыл бұрын
I see what you mean but it's not that simple. Let's use your red and British example in Napoleon. So red are the British the ottoman the Swiss (Thier own army) and the Swiss legions (part of the French army) + the citizen mob units spwaned by almost every nation. It's not only red white can be the French grenadiers the dutch army the Hungarian units the German city states units+ the Spanish grenadiers so no I don't think they can or should differentiate factions only on the colour
@spiffygonzales5160
Жыл бұрын
@@user-sp6wm5cb1d OP is still right though. I could tell jaegers in green from regular Russian troops. These dudes didn't wear those big fancy outfits because they were cozy in 90° heat.
@Reaper08
Жыл бұрын
@@user-sp6wm5cb1d Warfare in the game is mostly centered around line infantry engaging in prolonged firefights and not melee combat though. You'd have to go out of your way to lost track of your own units.
@user-sp6wm5cb1d
Жыл бұрын
@@spiffygonzales5160 but can you tell jagers from British rifles who are also in green and are also skirmish inf. And they wore those outfits with such bright and visible colour so that their generals could see what was happening in the battle and where everyone was. But imagine the shtshow that would have been if everyone was the same colour. That's why mostly everyone had distinguished colours but it's not like there are too many options so some of them had to have the same one
@user-sp6wm5cb1d
Жыл бұрын
@@Reaper08 In a 1v1 yea sure but a MP game with more then 4 people with 3-5 different factions seeing the French being red for example can really confuse you. I had times where I was wondering what faction am I playing against with when I see red infantry and blue skirmishers
@animegaming4057
Жыл бұрын
I’ll post here what I posted on Apollo’s channel: I love warhammer and it’s mechanics, I think the things that exist is perfect for that series of games. It’s fantasy, don’t mind quick unrealistic battles. But I did not want those mechanics to seep into the historical games. If anything, they need to add in the options menu, a players customization experience. Have a slide bar that dictates the moral of units like on one end, it’s default, the other side is never break. Another slider that dictates health of units much like the size of units so the player can choose to have the longer battles. Things do need to improve, and everything I’ve seen seems to be a nice step forward from the 10 steps back they already took. CA needs to let us customize a lot more and let us have the campaigns we want. Warhammer and historical needs to be separate and very different.
@animegaming4057
Жыл бұрын
Just to give a different take than most as I’m a fan of pretty much all the total wars.
@FLEMNMable
Жыл бұрын
Frankly it’s just nice to hear someone trying to be positive in total war KZitem land. Dunno what it is about these games but the fan base is always so aggressively negative.
@Lucifer_26
Жыл бұрын
Agreed!!
@emanuelalfred1565
Жыл бұрын
I’d say forums too. The crazy part about it is-the complaints oddly make me want to play the game more.. 😂
@elang1702
Жыл бұрын
You won't see the same amount of negativity over the Warhammer side of this community, they're actually matured.
@Chris-ey8zf
Жыл бұрын
Toxic Positivity at this point. There is nothing positive to say about this and everyone knows it. Pretending otherwise is toxic.
@Chris-ey8zf
Жыл бұрын
@@elang1702 Matured into paying $1500 between the 3 games and 500 DLCs just to get the real experience of the game with a full map and all factions.
@PELLASGOS
Жыл бұрын
Obviously you are too young and too hyped with what they presented you and it seems you enjoy being a content creator for this company. Thats good for you...but keep in mind that not everyone shares your hype. People like me and Apollo, who have played thousands of thousands of hours since 2000 and we have seen the evolution of this company since the start, we can assure you ...that this game they presented you is just a replica of troy and not a good game. This game not only will not make sales but mark my words... noone will bother with it after 2 weeks....not a month....2 weeks !!! Everything that apollo mentioned to his video are 100% accurate...to the point , if i were him i would add many more but in the end of the day who cares ...!!! For Last , if you have created the video to create a drama i dont believe you will find any success with apollo. You need to understand that what they are selling you now its not even close on what they used to sell in the past and its not an improvement. At least back in the days ca titles were revolutionary titles for their times. Its not the case anymore...and the value of what they are selling you now...is at least outrageous!!!
@kingmarre9130
Жыл бұрын
Lol this dumbest thing i have read. Not everyone shares Apollos dumb take.
@wesleys4507
Жыл бұрын
I agree with PA, he's a hardcore fan of the old historical TW games. Back when they actually put love in their TW games. Lets be honest, from the gameplay that we got to see, it doesn't look good. CA keeps recycling their old games. This looks the same as Troy..which was an awful game. The combat animations aren't there either!! they are hitting nothing most of the time. Shogun 2 nailed that feature. Long story short, the new team that made Troy doesn't seem to be capable in creating a historical title.
@lordgerog
Жыл бұрын
Its fun that you mention shogun 2, beacuse many peoples says that the battle ended to quicly, when in shogun 2 all the battles ended in minutes.
@emanuelalfred1565
Жыл бұрын
@@lordgerogyup. I’ve experienced fast battles in Rome 1 too.
@3musketerantidbd174
Жыл бұрын
Total war fans try not to blame on TW Troy on everything (very impossible)
@mr.octopi7969
Жыл бұрын
Its because many people, including myself, did not like troy and when they see something look almost identical to it they get scared that it could just be a troy 2. I am somewhat hopeful that Pharaoh will be different but CA does have a tendency to disappoint.
@Pepper462
Жыл бұрын
This game is literally a troy asset flip r u that tone deaf or just missing chromosomes? 😂😂😂
@russell6075
Жыл бұрын
If you have played troy you have played pharaoh. Simple as
@jakXDbaby
Жыл бұрын
I love the positivity of this channel it’s a huge refreshment to KZitem in general even the criticism on your videos are always from a positive place
@Pigraider268
Жыл бұрын
I absolutely agree there is so much criticism for no reason. Why it looks like it's trying to bring together the best elements of Troy and Attila (and Warhammer a bit) probably as some sort of test before Medieval III
@Lefrog420Blazin
Жыл бұрын
Total war is a sick franchise that is dying
@maximusd26
Жыл бұрын
no way you're coping enough t be excited for this soulless reskin after 10 years of disastrous launches and not listening. what would it take to make you mad at this point ? CA would need to burn your house ?
@alexeivasiliev7766
Жыл бұрын
and have sex with wife on a back of housband, and still it will be praises for CA :D
@inakidb
Жыл бұрын
My only criticism of the game is the fortified walls style (Roma or medieval) at the bronze age the has more simple and small walls, and was not common to see. also has almost a lack of siege towers, at least, in the way it shows in this game.
@emanuelalfred1565
Жыл бұрын
In the interview they held, they specially state doing this was for gameplay reasons. Still valid criticism though.
@j.s.t.6515
Жыл бұрын
It's funny how in a vacuum, all your points seems fair and balance. But them, I look at any video of this game I can't seen anything remotely promising about it 😂
@LcUlric
Жыл бұрын
Apollo feels like a bad example, he seems to have shifted into the mindset that CA sucks, Total War Sucks, and become almost an embodiment of what's become wrong with the Historical Total War fandom.
@elang1702
Жыл бұрын
You are completely right. As much as I hate Volound, he's a good player to be around. He constantly jabs CA with comprehensive criticism and actual arguments unlike Apollo who just throws words in the sky just to whine.
@DarkStar14n
Жыл бұрын
9:40 the problem here is with historical accuracy. All 3 games listed did include actual flag bearers or the units themselves were expected to carry a flag or standard. In ancient Egypt and the time period this takes place in, at most you would have like a single guy carrying the general's symbol on a pole sat next to the general.... that's unless I am miss interpreting the general's personal fan bearer. The basic infantry which is what is shown most in the footage is quite literally peasantry either hired or forced to fight. Their uniforms are a clean cloth and headwear. While the black clothed archers would be an actual professional military units. Which is why they have the distinctive cloth, to separate themselves from others. We have in colour examples of what Egyptian soldiers looked like. Sadly they are all generic. At best you can change the RGB settings on the cloth :( Which could be done, applying dye to cloth was done A LOT. The past was quite a bit more colourful then usually represented.
@AndysTake
Жыл бұрын
This is a great comment! Yeah, perhaps more dye could be applied to give the factions more colour variety, kind of take some inspiration from Rome 1/Medieval 2 here, where at least for the latter, most of what made western factions look dissimilar was a simple colour scheme.
@DarkStar14n
Жыл бұрын
@@AndysTake I wanted to add that what we have mostly seen right now is starting light units mostly from the Egyptian sub-factions fighting each other. In the "Total War: PHARAOH - First Look" at 36:27 you they show more advanced light(?) units. (Still cloth mostly). But they have differently coloured bands all along their uniforms and headwear differentiating them from the enemy. It seems that as soon as they place any sort of clothing or armour on the chests of units they seem to add a bunch of colour and thus distinction. So I am hoping it's mostly starting unit with few differentiating cloth colours cause it's in Alpha. Tho I won't blink if they really release it like this.
@MatthewOlney
Жыл бұрын
My biggest issue is the time period. Bronze Age is boring in warfare terms. No cavalry, no advanced tactics, boring weaponry.
@skylerslack12
Жыл бұрын
Exactly the opposite for me. I find bronze age extremely fascinating and being able to recreate the bronze age collapse in this game is gonna be awesome
@KashTube-n8y
Жыл бұрын
@@skylerslack12 The thing that people aren't even sure about? The time when we have almost no knowledge about? And how many times are you even going to play the game then, once or twice?
@skylerslack12
Жыл бұрын
@@KashTube-n8y opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one!
@1YCARADOFACAO
Жыл бұрын
@@KashTube-n8y We have plenty of knowledge about the bronze age collapse, how people wear and what type of warfare was used. A lot was explored about this time period so i can't see your point being even valid
@johnsamuel1999
Жыл бұрын
I love the bronze age collapse time period, glad they made this game
@OneEyedDemon260
Жыл бұрын
to be honest iv never had a positive mind set about total war youtubers there's only a few of them I can enjoy watching
@RexOedipus.
Жыл бұрын
tbf how many times can you hear new game bad til you get sick of it?
@danielomar9712
Жыл бұрын
@@RexOedipus.Maybe CA should stop pissing on their consumers lmao
@Lucifer_26
Жыл бұрын
@@danielomar9712 consumers which a lot of mob stomp everything devs worked years for into the ground, verbally abuse them constantly on the internet and even some that send death threats to devs? Yeah, they should love those instead.
@IceniTotalWar
Жыл бұрын
@@danielomar9712 Nah not going to happen.
@emanuelalfred1565
Жыл бұрын
I feel the same damn way.
@cookiemonster895
Жыл бұрын
I hate the arcade felling of recent titles' battles. The technology advanced so much and yet the armies remain so small in unit size or numbers of units per army.
@resileaf9501
Жыл бұрын
20 units is as much as as a human can realistically control without being overwhelmed by information overload. And it wouldn't fundamentally change how battles go. You would still have a frontline, ranged units behind them and flankers around. It would just look bigger and be more confusing. As far as unit size goes, there will undoubtedly be an extreme size option, like 3K does, but that's not the one they're going to use in ads because that's not what most people will be able to use.
@javierdiez2742
Жыл бұрын
Thank for this review! I'm fascinated about the bronze age time period, but I was a little bit discouraged by the critiques. I found myself agreeing with a lot of your points, and I think I'll keep looking through your lens to measure Pharaoh. Btw, I also think that WTW has also spoiled us for choice in having single entities or heavy hitters like monsters and wizards that can move fast, tank damage and put out a lot of DPS, specially to punish blobs. Am I the only one who feels frustrated by not being able to punish blobs in the same way in historical games?
@AndysTake
Жыл бұрын
Thank you for saying that! I think the main to punish blobs in historical titles are indeed to use cavalry, so hopefully chariots might be a good way to do that in pharaoh?
@emanuelalfred1565
Жыл бұрын
@@AndysTake I think we might be able to punish blobs with fire arrows. We will have to be cautious of friendly fire though.
@Lord_Raymund
Жыл бұрын
Smart donkey = dumb warhammer donkey
@BepeTheToad
Жыл бұрын
In my opinion shogun 2 sets a perfect precedent for historical titles, the flavour, maps, and campaign. Everything is there and the game is great.
@Chris-ey8zf
Жыл бұрын
If they had made Shogun 2 in 2023, it would have 100 DLCs, one for each lord and army. You buy the base game for $70 and get to play only the bottom half of Japan and 1 faction. Blood is also a $20 dlc.
@Reaper08
Жыл бұрын
Lol. No cities and tiny ass castles. I love Shogun 2 too but the actual battle maps and campaign map are bare bones. Not everything is there.
@herculesc130.
Жыл бұрын
@@Reaper08i can see an argument for battle maps being bare bones, although i’m not sure what you’re expecting, but the campaign map is pretty flushed out.
@LowryYT
Жыл бұрын
I cant believe donkey would make that point about sieges. The ai cant handle walls anyways, so the cities must be with pvp battles in mind
@khanofsteppe1667
Жыл бұрын
Thanks for making this video. One of these days I’d like to make a video that touches on the groundhog-esque nature of Total War fans letting nostalgia ruin newer titles for them while simultaneously crying out for something new. Just for reference, Shogun 1 and Med 1 fans use to call RTW and M2TW the end of the franchise. It’s hilarious to look back on, yet it keeps happening with each successive iteration of the franchise. I hope that when I finally do get around to it that I can make this video with the same measured tone that you are able to display in your productions. Until then, I’m just glad you’re doing what you do Andy 🙏
@CarterElkins
Жыл бұрын
It's a valid point. I started Total War with Empire in 2009, and I still remember the outcry about that game, same story with Napoleon, Rome 2, and Attila. With the possible exception of Rome 2, those other games are now treated like the holy grail. I hear almost as many people wishing for Empire 2 as Medieval 3.
@oole0111
Жыл бұрын
@@CarterElkins Empire isn't regarded as a perfect game, the concept and scale were innovative, but the game is a flaw, we want a Empire 2 because CA have the capability to make a great game with Empire great concept, and also modern hardware can run a game like that.
@danielc9967
Жыл бұрын
Shogun 1 nd RTW fans, never said anything of the sort. RTW and M2TW were massive hits, a huge leap in technology , from sprites to 3D. Anyone who complained was just sick somewhere . If anyone had told me, a decade and a half later, after Shogun 2, Napoleon, Attila, total war games would look like the current Pharaoh I would have laughed them out. Its a massive shame, that with today's tech advancement in cpu and graphics cards, CA is still putting out what are essentially mobile game level graphics and features. Look at what just one developer did with manor lords battles . At this point realistic battles, photorealistic unit models and environments, unit cohesion , advanced or dynamic match combat (Bannerlord) should be the least we get.
@CarterElkins
Жыл бұрын
@@oole0111 That may be your opinion, but I’ve been in many conversations with others who do view Empire as a perfect (or near-perfect) game. In its final game state, I certainly think it is one of their better games. My point is unchanged. It’s about the hypocrisy of the fans. Tons of people are out there decrying CA, and then wondering why they don’t make Empire 2 or Medieval 3, as if those games would somehow turn out better than what CA is giving us now.
@Reaper08
Жыл бұрын
@@CarterElkins Empire: The AI is the worst in the entire series, the pathfinding is crap, the muskets sound like toy guns, the drum sound used for marching troops is awful, the diplomacy is worse than Rome 2's, royal families are bare bones, there's no unique events, combat is a joke, the music is boring, settlement management is a joke, the list goes on and on. But Empire fanboys will defend everything listed here because "muh scale".
@warrensnell4370
Жыл бұрын
Donkey is off his rocker about wanting the crappy original WH sieges, but I definitely am in PA’s and Zerkovich’s camps on their issues. Though, it wouldn’t be fair to say Pharaoh isn’t at least a step in the right direction (historical-ish game, real generals, some good systems added back, a little bit of battle innovation for weather, some on-map structures outside of the whole minor/major settlement dynamic), but I can’t say that’s really enough to excite me. Probably a combo of not being quite as interested in Bronze Age, not liking Troy’s approach to unit rosters(Atilla’s was nice), and getting sick of the small, locked-in feel of the major/minor settlement provincial system,. I miss the sandbox feel of the settlements and map for Rome, Shogun 2, and medieval 2. Even 3K did that reasonably well with the minor settlements being purely resource extraction operations and monasteries. Oh well. We shall see.
@warrensnell4370
Жыл бұрын
Oh yeah, and as someone else pointed out, I don’t like the rpg approach. I want family trees and aging and heirs and what-have-you.
@MrSmartDonkeyLP
Жыл бұрын
Just copy-pasting the comment I posted on this video as a reply here because it applies, I want to clear up my point of view, because obviously this video doesn't share everything I said. To clear up my POV, I am not a huge fan of Warhammer sieges either (I'm not a huge fan of sieges anyway, I've always found them the least fun battles to play, but that's somewhat besides the point), but the massive cities like these are just such wasted potential. They're made for like 4-8 full stacks defending and a similar amount attacking. There's capture points that'll never even come into play with the way it is now, they're amazing to look at, but gameplay wise I'm worried they'll be the same every single time, similar to how sieges in 3K were, where only a tiny portion of the wall is used and the rest of the city is just abandoned, it's neither realistic nor fun from a gameplay perspective. So what I meant was that if I had those choose between two evils, I'd take the Warhammer evil, where at least the entire wall of a siege is used and the battles are concentrated rather than small pockets of men every 2 kilometers. I'd probably sooner than that choose Shogun 2's smaller siege maps though, they're less appealing visually, but as far as siege battles go they are much more interesting and fun.
@MarkMark-kj9xp
Жыл бұрын
Most people dont even care if the game is actually historically accurate, they just want a fun game thats grounded and more realistic than fantasy. Medieval Two was historically themed sure but there is so much that it got wrong on a historical level, the reason it has endured is because of how it plays, and because while maybe not the most historically accurate, its definately historically based. The only people who want historical accuracy are nerds like myself who download and play mods like Tsardoms or SSHIP.
@brandonzzz9924
Жыл бұрын
For the siege ai critique; historical sieges rarely assaulted the walls spread out over large areas. From a tactical viewpoint, the defenders have the advantage of moving between different sections of the walls quicker than the attackers and a spread assault plays into the enemies' hands. Most sieges were wars of attrition, and the assaults were generally concentrations of force by the attackers. Once the attackers secured a foothold on the walls, it would usually cause defenders to retreat to tighter defensive formations or surrender. Attackers generally had far more troops and a breach typically meant the siege was won for the attackers. During the Medieval ages, castles became intricate and impregnable fortresses with multiple walls or palisades and many other defenses. In the Bronze age, walls weren't very effective because it was so easy to starve a city, and effective walls were not nearly as common as later eras. I would love to see a bronze age Total War radically change sieges to reflect the nature of warfare at the time. Minor settlements like Empire with a focus on raiding, pillaging, and levy systems would be really cool.
@WuCSquad
Жыл бұрын
This video can be summarized as "Leave Creative Assembly alone!"
@kingmarre9130
Жыл бұрын
No
@WuCSquad
Жыл бұрын
@@kingmarre9130 Great argument, very in depth!
@kingmarre9130
Жыл бұрын
@@WuCSquad Like yours
@earendilthemariner4691
Жыл бұрын
If you don't share any optimism or hope for this game, fine. That's your opinion. But, I have a problem with the people who are downright insulting others who do, including myself. I started this franchise all the way back at Rome 1, have played every game since, and Pharaoh honestly reminds me more of Rome 2 (which I love) than Troy. So please, just stop, it's unnecessary and gains you absolutely nothing, so why bother?
@hex_1733
Жыл бұрын
I'm surprised you're getting so many dislikes even though your takes have been pretty reasonable and respectful. I agree with this vid!
@MrUniquesI
Жыл бұрын
Don’t like the cartoony look, was buzzing when I first heard pharaoh but not to excited now the gameplay has been released but we will see how it goes
@1YCARADOFACAO
Жыл бұрын
Cartoony?
@MrUniquesI
Жыл бұрын
@@1YCARADOFACAO Maybe not cartoony but compared it to Attila it has a weird look not a big fan of it
@carroboi2981
Жыл бұрын
I'm so tired of the utter cynicism of this community. I'm convinced that even if CA would release a Medieval 3 with all new features with a perfect release, a revolutionary engine, and all the possible nuances and tactics you could hope for, they'd still whine and cry and complain. Seriously, it feels like any time the community gets anything they throw a huge temper tantrum. It happened with 3Kingdoms, it happened with Troy, it happens over and over again. Not to mention that the response with 3kingdoms was ridden with racism to such a degree it was disgusting. Apparently just being set in China was enough for some people to call it the worst game ever made.
@donaldcrawfordiii554
Жыл бұрын
You never have to worry about any of that happening!LMAO
@josephkush1032
Жыл бұрын
Can't we have purely historical title without legendary lords
@jasonsearle7832
Жыл бұрын
Most of the youtubers agree that it looks a lot like Troy. Which means CA have recycled assets of a saga game and then selling it for the cost of a full game. It's also coming from a small studio that doesn't get the funds to develop more than a saga And CA track record isn't good at the moment. They have given no evidence that they have changed
@kingmarre9130
Жыл бұрын
So like most total wars before
@MikeHawksBig69
Жыл бұрын
i think apollo's point is that these features should have never been taken out in the first place.
@scottbrinkman9776
Жыл бұрын
I'm confused on the hero thing, you could just play historical mode and have generals like older games.... with no heroes...
@thanhhagia7900
Жыл бұрын
Pharoah? what a disappointment
@ignacio1171
9 ай бұрын
Wellp, this video aged terribly lol
@AndysTake
9 ай бұрын
Oh yes
@rustyshackleford2841
Жыл бұрын
Apollo’s rant makes sense to me. Your counter arguments seem weak imho. No, CA doesn’t get my money for half arsed efforts. There’s no time for creativity, it has been shortened to a year worth of development. Apollo is right, the weather thing sounds like a gimmick, we’ll see.. In honesty, if you have played Troy, you have played this game, in a sense. October will confirm Apollo.
@kingmarre9130
Жыл бұрын
lol no
@rustyshackleford2841
Жыл бұрын
@@kingmarre9130 lol yea
@vetabeta9890
Жыл бұрын
im new to total war, i got into it last month and have played 3 of the games so far. I don't understand why so many ppl are complaining in this fandom, I watched videos on the history of total war and reviews for all of them and from what i've played (two historicals and one fantasy, WH3) I loved both. I don't understand why ppl seem to be so strictly "historical" or fantasy? i love both, and I love games where I previously had no interest in the verse/time period, I loved WH3 and rome 2 despite preferring asian history and having no prior knowledge on warhammer. I'm really excited for TW pharaoh i just don't understand why everyone is so...negative, is it just a nostalgia thing or are they that desperate for a medieval
@AndysTake
Жыл бұрын
I get you, man. But this is a series people have been diehard fans of for 20 years, expecting an evolution of what they grew up with, not necessarily divergent branches of games with less/different types of depth and changes than they wanted. Sometimes the hate is warranted, sometimes not. It's complicated. But I'm glad you're enjoying the games! Cheers!
@bnjmndrf1055
Жыл бұрын
It is 2023 people love to complain too much
@qtipmotha
Жыл бұрын
Idk. I just feel like no one asked for this game.
@ClittyAFacelessGod
10 ай бұрын
You know, You do some really great coverage of Warhammer, and its easy to see how much you care for the franchise, but what really bothers me here, is You went after these 2 guys whose points, while valid, are easy for you to dismiss, but you wouldnt dare argue against someone like Volound.
@leftifornian2066
10 ай бұрын
He just a CA simp who wants to make partner with them
@leobezard5998
Жыл бұрын
Apollo complaints about returning features is because they were removed and now return as if they were a revolution of some sort
@IceniTotalWar
Жыл бұрын
+1 Absolutely , CA have for years said when they make games there's a Revolution then an Evolution. Well in TW Pharaoh i neither see a revolution/evolution.
@kurtpino2567
Жыл бұрын
I agree Apollo is SO SALTY on the game that is still subject to change. BUT I get his frustration
@vaporalight3670
Жыл бұрын
What do you think of Volound's opinion of Pharaoh? Do you think he's right or wrong about Pharaoh?
@BittermanAndy
Жыл бұрын
Oh, wow, is Volound still going? Does he still get into raging flame wars with literally every single who person who comments anything less than gushingly worshipful of him on his videos?
@Reaper08
Жыл бұрын
@@BittermanAndy Yes. Honestly, he has good points but he's such a pretentious prick that immediately resorts to personal attacks when you disagree with him. Makes sense he's a Christopher Hitchens fan.
@vaporalight3670
Жыл бұрын
@@BittermanAndy yup, he still is. He still doesn't respect anyone who likes the Total War: Warhammer games. That said he does make many good points about Total War games post Rome 2.
@BittermanAndy
Жыл бұрын
@@vaporalight3670 amazing. Never seen someone so argumentative and toxic. And needlessly so, because as you say, he makes good points! But just dare to say "great video, 9 good points but I disagreed with this 1" and he goes off like you insulted his mother. I had to block him in the end, never seen such a touchy, anger-filled person.
@resileaf9501
Жыл бұрын
Volund is just spiteful. I don't see any reason to give him attention.
@dwonatampatricio4250
11 ай бұрын
The thing is, the "features" that we have back then is the MINIMUM that we should have, but they are showing in the game as it is a NEW FEATURE but not, thats why Apollo is complaining, and thats why most of the player base is complaining. Apart from that, why a unit that has no brasplate has 30 armor, like, WHAAAAAAAAAT..... i want the good old games... but at this rate, im not even wanting a medieval 3 or empire 3, because it is going to break my spirit....
@TheNerubi0690
Жыл бұрын
To be honest, I enjoy total war and have been playing it since Shogun 1! I'm not sure why so many content creators are so against it; it's becoming borderline annoying; so much so that I've stopped watching many of them. They comment on the videos just to say anything, not because they have anything to say... Is it comparable to Troy? Yes it is, in many ways it is modeled on the bronze age (and its collapse). So, are we going to despise a game simply because it is similar? Not to mention that the game is still in pre-alpha stages, so a lot might happen between now and then. They demonstrated new concepts that would undoubtedly be beneficial in future historical total war games, but if content creators are going to hate on every single aspect, to say the least, many of the features will be absent from the next total war game. At this stage, I've seen so much hate without any strong basis, that I'm just going to wait and I'll be the judge of what it is.
@bahamut149
Жыл бұрын
i doubt that you been playing since Shogun1 because many features CA introduced here are not new. Tall grass, weather affects battle are there since Rome 1 and medival1.
@adrianD4
9 ай бұрын
i get your point but the other CC are right, pharoh is just a shitty copy paste of troy which in truth should've actually been a DLC for troy
@rianrodrigues8195
Жыл бұрын
I feel like this is 50% whining cuz you didn't get to preview, 50% arguing for clout.
@cyberpunk59
Жыл бұрын
People were complaining about how the units looked like in Rome, and now they complain about the opposite.
@useyourmind1900
Жыл бұрын
New Total War games are soulless, arcade like, has less player freedom, buggy, unbalanced and lazily made games. They haven’t added and fixed features should have already done and they even dismantled more cuz of laziness and to get favor of market. They get rid of naval battles cuz of it. They’re steadily braking their old titles cuz of it. For example dismantling chat systems and top of it removed mod manager from shogun 2. If they’re getting one step forward and two steps back. They treat features we already had like new. I think they also becoming more and incapable of making games. Creative, innovative, capable and bold CA once we know gone long ago and looks like won’t comeback. I’m not saying their games bad which no would’ve played them. Apollo and ones who thinks similar like like him mostly point criteria’s like I count up here. And I want to add they make games similar each other for 10 years. But I think I will give a chance to Pharoh.
@GermanOlle
Жыл бұрын
I wonder where Volound is? XD
@1YCARADOFACAO
Жыл бұрын
Probably being pedantic in his little bubble
@kingmarre9130
Жыл бұрын
With his dumb fans
@emanuelalfred1565
Жыл бұрын
Don’t worry. He is out there preaching his gospel to devote cult members. He’s spoken about this game on KZitem and Reddit.
@resileaf9501
Жыл бұрын
Volund is just spiteful. I don't see any reason to give him attention.
@alexeyman7301
Жыл бұрын
What i want is a game that grand strategies like Victoria 3 and RTSs like Total War
@emanuelalfred1565
Жыл бұрын
@AndysTake thank you for this video. I agree with you. I’m sure you’ll probably get some hate for this video but stay true to who you are and what you believe in. I look forward to seeing more content from you.
@juleschienchowchine6048
Жыл бұрын
i agree, but a empire 2 or a medieval 3 would be way better, ( but my fear about medieval 3 is that it would not be as good as attila mod 1212ad )
@whybother7632
Жыл бұрын
yeah alot of people think that thats why we need an empire 2
@RexOedipus.
Жыл бұрын
If you don't have faith in them for this why the fuck would you have faith in them with a bigger game?
@juleschienchowchine6048
Жыл бұрын
@@RexOedipus. you didn't undurstood, i have faith in them but i don't get why are they doing this... i am just worried that the game, in addition to not be what we asked, be a disaster
Пікірлер: 780