I'm not getting TW: Warhammer and here's why

[Nefaro]

Are there witch hunter units in this game?

Yes.   They are one of the Hero types you can hire, as the human Empire faction. 

Therefore, one of the single-man heroes that you can use as both an Agent and as an army unit.  With the RPG-like levelling, skill specs, and weapon/equipment customization. 


Each faction has 4 (iirc?) Hero types they can recruit, once the proper buildings & research is unlocked.   Often includes a Wizard type, Priest/Shaman, Assassin, and Warrior.   Different skill trees, spells, etc for each by type and faction.

[Gusington]

That's very cool.

[Boggit]

If your plan is to pickup a game on release, then pre ordering does make sense since usually you get get a pre order discount and sometimes extras such as beta access or dlc.

This is the issue, though.  Why would anyone plan to buy a game at release, before anyone knows whether it's any good or riddled with bugs?  Waiting for initial reviews/patches seems to be the wise choice here, surely?

After pre-ordering Rome 2:TW, that is now my take.

I'll say Rome 2 isn't a bad game at all now, but it has been through a world of pain from release to its current status.

[FlickJax]

If your plan is to pickup a game on release, then pre ordering does make sense since usually you get get a pre order discount and sometimes extras such as beta access or dlc.

This is the issue, though.  Why would anyone plan to buy a game at release, before anyone knows whether it's any good or riddled with bugs?  Waiting for initial reviews/patches seems to be the wise choice here, surely?

After pre-ordering Rome 2:TW, that is now my take.

I'll say Rome 2 isn't a bad game at all now, but it has been through a world of pain from release to its current status.

Never had a problem with Rome 2, actually i did have a problem getting it to run first time but after that no problems...

[Boggit]

If your plan is to pickup a game on release, then pre ordering does make sense since usually you get get a pre order discount and sometimes extras such as beta access or dlc.

This is the issue, though.  Why would anyone plan to buy a game at release, before anyone knows whether it's any good or riddled with bugs?  Waiting for initial reviews/patches seems to be the wise choice here, surely?

After pre-ordering Rome 2:TW, that is now my take.

I'll say Rome 2 isn't a bad game at all now, but it has been through a world of pain from release to its current status.

Never had a problem with Rome 2, actually i did have a problem getting it to run first time but after that no problems...

All I can say is you're fortunate. Did you actually get it on release though, as I did?

Like so many players I was really hyped about release and so much was promised. This interview gives you a sense of what we were looking forward to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NltYhi58tQ so a lot of people thought they were in for a real treat.

Yet I found it was a nightmare release from day 1 to the extent that I found it totally unplayable until quite a few updates in resolved the worst of the bugs. To be fair they've put most of it right, but IIRC it took about 15 patches post release. On release, it had some excellent reviews from some quarters (yes, they know who they are C:-) :-X - and I feel they relied more on a demo, or trailers rather than actually playing the real game). I know from a journalist who was present at the SEGA press conference for the official release in Rome, Italy that even they saw only a little bit of the game (despite the fact they were in Rome for 3 days) and in my friend's opinion it was unfinished/seriously flawed at the time. There were a lot of bouncy, upbeat articles in the press shortly after that... go figure.

Entertaining though it was, the Angry Joe review captured the frustrated feeling of many TW Fanboys like myself who had been expecting a massive improvement over the original Rome Total War. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_QK-lcW8a8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdpIENG0Y2k Based on the initial release and the marketing of the game, I think both CA and SEGA misled the TW community as to what was actually being delivered, and damaged their brand image in consequence for quite a long time.

As far as I'm concerned SEGA/Creative Assembly eventually did do the right thing by the TW community by putting substantial effort into fixes for the game. A lot of people, including myself, thought it was released far too early and really needed work on it. The substantial size, number, and regularity of post release updates for Rome 2 is ample evidence for that view.

That is why I said what I did in my previous post. I'm still glad that you had no problems though. O0

[FlickJax]

Yes did get from release and yes I must have been lucky.

I have bought all Total War games on release apart from Atilla which i did hold back on for a bit.

[Grim.Reaper]

I just must be totally lucky....most games that get released including total war I am never good enough to notice all the issues that get reported.  If it wasn't for forums, I likely wouldn't even know about 99% of the issues and would still happily be enjoying my games.  People always say the games had less issues in the 80s and 90s but I still think they had just as many problems but there was no social media to highlight them all, plus we were more accepting because of not as many options.

[mikeck]

I think there were a lot of people that had great difficulty running Rome 2. Lots of crashes and bugs and such. Others, such as me, just didn't experience any crashes or performance problems. Guys like angry joe were pointing out problems with Rome2 that existed in almost all TW games such as AI tactics with troops running around everywhere. It happens and happened with Rome 1. Many more complaints were about  design mechanics.

I remember post after post and angry Joe reviews complaining about the new province mechanic and the way buildings worked and such. This wasn't a bug it was the design decision that people disliked. I happen to like it and I hope people have seen it for what it is in the new releases which is a cyst them that is better than the individual city system.

Basically Rome 2 at release had bugs and a lot of them; However,  it was not nearly as bad as angry Joe and many others made it out to be.  there seemed to be a mix of bugs and design decisions that they simply didn't care for that caused the hate.  What was funny to me was seen people talk about the original Rome as if it was the best game TW game ever. When that game came out people were screaming and yelling for years about how horrible it was. It was the red-headed step-child of the total war series until empire came out. Now all of a sudden, it's the benchmark for all total war games as if it came out in perfect condition.

I only bring it up because every time a total working comes out there or similar complaints about how the AIA eggs and things like that. By now everyone should have a pretty good grasp as to what total war offers you and what it doesn't.  I only bring it up because every time a total working comes out there or similar complaints about how the AI but hates and things like that. By now everyone should have a pretty good grasp as to what total war offers you and what it doesn't.  I think we have a right to expect SHOGUN 2 style AI..which is to say competent tactical and strategic moves. You aren't going to get "scored more you aren't going to get "scourge of war"

Back on point, I have played a lot of time with Warhammer and I find the AI both tactical and strategic to be on par with shogun 2.  There are people particularly on steam who are complaining about the game but these are the complaints that are inherent with any total war release. At this point you know what you're getting.

Warhammer and Shogun 2 are the two, at release, that are polished and good....and Warhammer is very good.

[Boggit]

@ Mikeck
+1. You make some excellent points.

I put up Angry Joe as an example of reaction as he is pretty explicit in highlighting what a lot of people felt about the Rome 2 release, even if he is overly dramatic. That includes some of the patently silly AI, which after Shogun2 you wouldn't have thought would be an issue, on the basis that if its not broke you don't fix it. I don't think the AJ reviews hold much credibility for the current state of the games, and the fact that you compare Warhammer favourably with Shogun 2 is a very positive statement about CA learning from their experiences. I don't have a problem with people critically discussing the design mechanics, as the PR behind the release made some pretty ambitious claims, that the initial release fell far short of. That said, I reiterate that the present version of the game is a very different animal to that which was released.

I'm looking forward to getting Warhammer TW. From what I'm hearing of it, it is a blast. O0

[Nefaro]

Rome 2 was released with obvious bugs.  Not just AI issues and game design problems.

I literally saw mounted units and ships moving into & through land/hills.  Clipping right through them and, if you were lucky, coming out somewhere else where you could actually click on them.

There were other issues, but you get the point.  As has been said, the 17 big updates CA put out eventually turned it into a great game.  That it took so many updates to fix all the bugs is enough indication the game was pushed out too early.  It's probably my most played TW game since getting them on Steam, after it got fixed, so no complaints in the long run.

TW:Warhammer, on the other hand, has had a relatively bug-free release.  I just hope they continue to fill it out, which is probably nothing to worry about since CA supposedly broke some of their own sales records with it.  I'm sure that is due to the good condition it was in, on release.