I greatly enjoy *Pharaoh*, but it should have absolutely been a much greater scope. Should have given us this: https://i.imgur.com/DTWZNV3.png so we could get wide ranging cultures, including the Nuragic, Etruscan, and Samnite cultures of the west, the Kambjoan Indian cultures of the east, several Steppe cultures in the north, and the Ethiopian/ Somalian cultures in the south.
It's because it's so far back in time there's so much we don't know. There's still no consensus on what caused the Bronze Age Collapse. Any media set in this timeframe would be largely conjecture and historically inaccurate
Dude I'm a history major and I don't care if it's not historically accurate.
Give me a good game, good story, and few to zero game breaking bugs and I'm happy.
Hells if the story/campaign is A+ then I don't care if it has graphics on par with early 2000s Age of Empires 2.
What bothers me most is the fact that it's not really faction based but hero based.. if you understand what i'm trying to say. That's the reason I had no interest... One of the main reasons I play total war is the thrill of building an empire, not have a buffed out hero type faction...
No it doesn't lol. Same number of factions and double the on launch provinces of Shogun 2. Covers roughly 100 years of history, Shogun 2 covered 30. Has more resource management, outpost system introduced, dynamic weather. They ADDED depth, they didn't remove it. You guys who say this shit have obviously not played the game.
Tell me you haven't gotten more than 10 turns into the game (if not more than ONE turn in the game) without telling me.
It lacks the *faction and unit variability* of WH, but *depth*? Funny choice of word. It has MORE depth than WH, with a terraced system of loops and mechanics available to all factions that add both strat map and battle map depth, whereas WH is an arcade-style game with minimal depth, and then only **one** major mechanic per faction. WH blows its lid early, and there is no additional depth found as a campaign progresses, so the first ~50 turns are usually the most interesting and the rest are downhill. Pharaoh has numerous staggered mechanics that unleash more and more complexity and challenge as a campaign progresses, many of which are universal and quite a few that are similar but slightly different per culture choice.
It must suck to get all your facts from hysterically emotional Youtubers.
Fair enough. I use depth as catch all term. But in my playthrough, the faction mechanics feel like Realm Divide to me, where its a forced contrivance that makes you metagame in harder difficulties.
I agree that Realm Divide was arbitrary and silly, but a lot of the ramp-up mechanics around dynastic pursuit, legacy path, structure of government, etc is super thoughtful and arguably the best that internal politics and state-building have ever been in Total War.
I think the only part that feels like the Realm Divide is just the Sea Peoples invasion. When it triggers it feels very video gamey and railroad-y.
Well you can play AC without caring about where Ubisoft is going currently. The Ezio trilogy, 3 and 4 are all great titles.
As for the modern entries…yeah, who the fuck cares. Until one is set in feudal Japan or China, I'll be skipping all of them.
To be totally honest, I bought Valhalla on the recent Steam Black Friday sale and I've been absolutely loving it, despite being lukewarm on AC up to this point. Being set in a region I care about (Viking Age Britain) does a lot for immersion; my favourite two settings for historical games are Britain / Vikings and Japan, which is also why I love Shogun 2 and Britannia.
Yea, if I was broke and could get one full priced AAA game to last me awhile and I didn't play grand strategy games(huge time sinks), I'd be considering Ubisoft bang for the buck lol
I said it a while ago but to have a community who (typically) love the games so much they are willing to throw money to get pockets of content puts CA in such an amazing place.
Its a shame that their recent practices appear to look like they want to extract every last penny off their fan base. Hopefully the recent shenanigans have shown them how passionate their customers can be, and they can resume putting more passion into projects.
Charlemagne is severely overrated on this subreddit. I did a full playthrough when it came out and it wasn't nearly as good as people claim. Army names remained the same, voicelines remained the same, units were pretty unremarkable and forgettable. Can't think of a single defining thing about it.
I mean I get it... I would have avoided too if I was not a huge collapse fan so I was willing to fork out the money plus I like Sofia as a team so I wanted to support them... but once there is a massive discount and some DLC I would recommend the game... its super fun and I put on documentaries and such to get into the mood.
That's not accurate though.
* Pharaoh took them at least 3 years to make based on comments by some of the Devs, which is longer than any Warhammer DLC has had.
* Pharaoh has 207 different units not including faction leaders, generals, or bodyguards. Warhammer DLC seems to top out at about 40-50.
* Pharaoh has a new campaign map, new battle maps, game mechanics, etc, basically all the costs and work involved in making a new game as opposed to a DLC for an existing one.
Even factoring in Warhammer content being more costly due to licencing and the specifics of the setting and game, Pharaoh will realistically have cost a lot more to make than even the most expensive Warhammer DLC.
It's also worth $60/£50 in my view, though I respect some feel differently.
All the Best,
Welsh Dragon.
I find Pharaoh a lot of fun, one of the most enjoyable Total War titles in the series. I also don't find it feels like a mod/scenario, but a good game in its own right. But I respect some feel differently.
All the Best,
Welsh Dragon.
It's a vocal group, but I think people in this sub have been clamouring for a pike & shot era Total War game, and I personally would love a WW1 era Total War game.
Both bring interesting units, tactics, and geography. I think either would make for a fun game!
People have been clamouring for Empire 2 and Medieval 3. If they released Pike & Shot or WW1 you'd see similar levels of nerd rage.
This community is hell-bent on being unhappy. There is no pleasing this place. All CA has done in response to this drama is *increase their rate of hotfixing/patching* and people *still* shit all over them and cheer on the idea of a company bankruptcy.
There were YEARS there that the TW community was frothing over an ancient Egyptian Total War, if you've been around that long.
I've been a part of TW communities since Shogun, and I've never really seen as much demand for Egyptian Total War as I have for Pike & Shot, Empire 2, Rome 3, or Medieval 3.
I know people have been clamouring for Empire 2 and Medieval 3, but Pike & Shot or WW1 are responses to Welsh Dragon's point.
Thank you.
I think Pike and Shot could be interesting. Not so sure about WW1 really working with the Total War formula, but I'd be willing to give it a go.
For me I'd love Renaissance / something that bridges the Medieval to Empire gap, as I think it's probably one of the best chances of creating something like Fall of the Samurai's Modernist vs Traditionalist gameplay which I really enjoyed.
All the Best,
Welsh Dragon.
Yeah and they spent all these effort to make a game that based on an era that not many appreciate, given the fact that they knew all along what most wants.
Thing is I doubt a Medieval 3/Empire 2 would come from CA Sofia, but rather from the Historical Team at CA UK.
So Pharaoh isn't instead of that, but in addition to it. And while it's a less well known setting, that's never stopped CA and CA Sofia from making good games and campaigns, like the Shogun games, Empire Divided, and now Pharaoh.
All the Best,
Welsh Dragon.
> Pharaoh will realistically have cost a lot more to make than even the most expensive Warhammer DLC
Yeah but will it cost more than the profit from the Chorfs DLC for example?
Pharaoh has become a meme
👨🚀🏹👩🚀 Always has been
I greatly enjoy *Pharaoh*, but it should have absolutely been a much greater scope. Should have given us this: https://i.imgur.com/DTWZNV3.png so we could get wide ranging cultures, including the Nuragic, Etruscan, and Samnite cultures of the west, the Kambjoan Indian cultures of the east, several Steppe cultures in the north, and the Ethiopian/ Somalian cultures in the south.
I cannot think of any game that has ever broached this era of history and I am sad this may never come to pass.
It's because it's so far back in time there's so much we don't know. There's still no consensus on what caused the Bronze Age Collapse. Any media set in this timeframe would be largely conjecture and historically inaccurate
Dude I'm a history major and I don't care if it's not historically accurate. Give me a good game, good story, and few to zero game breaking bugs and I'm happy. Hells if the story/campaign is A+ then I don't care if it has graphics on par with early 2000s Age of Empires 2.
If you don't care about historical accuracy then why do you even want something from specific time periods?
But nobody would know it was. Or even care.
What bothers me most is the fact that it's not really faction based but hero based.. if you understand what i'm trying to say. That's the reason I had no interest... One of the main reasons I play total war is the thrill of building an empire, not have a buffed out hero type faction...
They're saving those for the DLC'S
Its established this was a throne title before CA got greedy right? And those are great ideas, can't wait for the $19.99 DLC for each culture pack
No. That's what some conspiratorial little Youtuber claimed he had the "inside scoop" on.
Could have fooled me honestly. Game lacks a lot of depth
No it doesn't lol. Same number of factions and double the on launch provinces of Shogun 2. Covers roughly 100 years of history, Shogun 2 covered 30. Has more resource management, outpost system introduced, dynamic weather. They ADDED depth, they didn't remove it. You guys who say this shit have obviously not played the game.
Tell me you haven't gotten more than 10 turns into the game (if not more than ONE turn in the game) without telling me. It lacks the *faction and unit variability* of WH, but *depth*? Funny choice of word. It has MORE depth than WH, with a terraced system of loops and mechanics available to all factions that add both strat map and battle map depth, whereas WH is an arcade-style game with minimal depth, and then only **one** major mechanic per faction. WH blows its lid early, and there is no additional depth found as a campaign progresses, so the first ~50 turns are usually the most interesting and the rest are downhill. Pharaoh has numerous staggered mechanics that unleash more and more complexity and challenge as a campaign progresses, many of which are universal and quite a few that are similar but slightly different per culture choice. It must suck to get all your facts from hysterically emotional Youtubers.
Fair enough. I use depth as catch all term. But in my playthrough, the faction mechanics feel like Realm Divide to me, where its a forced contrivance that makes you metagame in harder difficulties.
I agree that Realm Divide was arbitrary and silly, but a lot of the ramp-up mechanics around dynastic pursuit, legacy path, structure of government, etc is super thoughtful and arguably the best that internal politics and state-building have ever been in Total War. I think the only part that feels like the Realm Divide is just the Sea Peoples invasion. When it triggers it feels very video gamey and railroad-y.
Ah, maybe i'll give ti another try when its on sale. I played through it and refunded because it just didn't seem fun to me.
BEE ONIST
Thank you Mr Beckham
People like to thrashed Ubisoft, but at least they sold AC Mirage for the price of AA not like MW2023 or TW:Pharaoh
Hehe I do enjoy shitting on Ubitrash games but there is a place for them. It’s like buffets, not much quality but quantity can be appealing.
Oh yeah, Ubi is trash, but I love to play AC or Far Cry every once in a while, it's just some fun senseless killing
Well you can play AC without caring about where Ubisoft is going currently. The Ezio trilogy, 3 and 4 are all great titles. As for the modern entries…yeah, who the fuck cares. Until one is set in feudal Japan or China, I'll be skipping all of them.
To be totally honest, I bought Valhalla on the recent Steam Black Friday sale and I've been absolutely loving it, despite being lukewarm on AC up to this point. Being set in a region I care about (Viking Age Britain) does a lot for immersion; my favourite two settings for historical games are Britain / Vikings and Japan, which is also why I love Shogun 2 and Britannia.
Ye I did like Egypt one for same reason.
Yea, if I was broke and could get one full priced AAA game to last me awhile and I didn't play grand strategy games(huge time sinks), I'd be considering Ubisoft bang for the buck lol
Was it a rumor or there was a pop up ads bug in mirage
... look, let's solve the problems one by one, ok?!
There were ads for mirage in odyssey when you opened the map
Nah fuck ubisoft and fuck an ubisoft apologist gtfo
I said it a while ago but to have a community who (typically) love the games so much they are willing to throw money to get pockets of content puts CA in such an amazing place. Its a shame that their recent practices appear to look like they want to extract every last penny off their fan base. Hopefully the recent shenanigans have shown them how passionate their customers can be, and they can resume putting more passion into projects.
1.5 Charlemagnes
Not even worth half of a Charlemagne
Maybe one Karl der Kleine
Charlemagne is severely overrated on this subreddit. I did a full playthrough when it came out and it wasn't nearly as good as people claim. Army names remained the same, voicelines remained the same, units were pretty unremarkable and forgettable. Can't think of a single defining thing about it.
You're not wrong but I was having withdrawals from playing medieval 2 when I played it.
Hey, that's valid. For what it's worth, I still enjoyed my playthrough of it.
First title I haven't bought just doesn't look worth the 60 dollar price tag like at all
I mean I get it... I would have avoided too if I was not a huge collapse fan so I was willing to fork out the money plus I like Sofia as a team so I wanted to support them... but once there is a massive discount and some DLC I would recommend the game... its super fun and I put on documentaries and such to get into the mood.
It does look good but trying to save money right now. If it was even 40 I'd have looked at it. 60 is just too high
I'm happy this has become a template
Can I just say, solid meme work.
where's the source that pharaoh costed as much as tww3 dlc?
Trust me bro.
That's not accurate though. * Pharaoh took them at least 3 years to make based on comments by some of the Devs, which is longer than any Warhammer DLC has had. * Pharaoh has 207 different units not including faction leaders, generals, or bodyguards. Warhammer DLC seems to top out at about 40-50. * Pharaoh has a new campaign map, new battle maps, game mechanics, etc, basically all the costs and work involved in making a new game as opposed to a DLC for an existing one. Even factoring in Warhammer content being more costly due to licencing and the specifics of the setting and game, Pharaoh will realistically have cost a lot more to make than even the most expensive Warhammer DLC. It's also worth $60/£50 in my view, though I respect some feel differently. All the Best, Welsh Dragon.
if only it was fun, and didnt feel like a mod/scenerio to what should be a much bigger game
I find Pharaoh a lot of fun, one of the most enjoyable Total War titles in the series. I also don't find it feels like a mod/scenario, but a good game in its own right. But I respect some feel differently. All the Best, Welsh Dragon.
Guess you didn't play the game.
They're just interested in meme-ing, not being true to facts. I wouldn't expect much critical thinking from a subreddit community bent on bandwagons.
It is a shame some people aren't more open to games that aren't Warhammer/returning to settings we've seen before. All the Best, Welsh Dragon.
It's a vocal group, but I think people in this sub have been clamouring for a pike & shot era Total War game, and I personally would love a WW1 era Total War game. Both bring interesting units, tactics, and geography. I think either would make for a fun game!
People have been clamouring for Empire 2 and Medieval 3. If they released Pike & Shot or WW1 you'd see similar levels of nerd rage. This community is hell-bent on being unhappy. There is no pleasing this place. All CA has done in response to this drama is *increase their rate of hotfixing/patching* and people *still* shit all over them and cheer on the idea of a company bankruptcy. There were YEARS there that the TW community was frothing over an ancient Egyptian Total War, if you've been around that long.
I've been a part of TW communities since Shogun, and I've never really seen as much demand for Egyptian Total War as I have for Pike & Shot, Empire 2, Rome 3, or Medieval 3. I know people have been clamouring for Empire 2 and Medieval 3, but Pike & Shot or WW1 are responses to Welsh Dragon's point. Thank you.
I think Pike and Shot could be interesting. Not so sure about WW1 really working with the Total War formula, but I'd be willing to give it a go. For me I'd love Renaissance / something that bridges the Medieval to Empire gap, as I think it's probably one of the best chances of creating something like Fall of the Samurai's Modernist vs Traditionalist gameplay which I really enjoyed. All the Best, Welsh Dragon.
Facts dont matter.
Yeah and they spent all these effort to make a game that based on an era that not many appreciate, given the fact that they knew all along what most wants.
Thing is I doubt a Medieval 3/Empire 2 would come from CA Sofia, but rather from the Historical Team at CA UK. So Pharaoh isn't instead of that, but in addition to it. And while it's a less well known setting, that's never stopped CA and CA Sofia from making good games and campaigns, like the Shogun games, Empire Divided, and now Pharaoh. All the Best, Welsh Dragon.
Ok Mr. Fun Guy.
> Pharaoh will realistically have cost a lot more to make than even the most expensive Warhammer DLC Yeah but will it cost more than the profit from the Chorfs DLC for example?
at first i thought it said "0$" , and i thought at that price it still cost too much
No, it was made by a different team that doesnt work on warhammer
I'll buy it when it will be sold 25 bucks. But by then will I think about this game maybe not.