More like forever testers, with all the dlc policy of many developers/publishers they manage to break games for a time and making them less functional over time (whether you buy the dlcs or not). Videogames are jobs you pay to labour.
Yep. Though you can just not buy or download the dlc, no?
Depends on the game, even if you don't buy the dlc many developers keep releasing patches for all content so the only option in those cases is not updating your version of the game. For instance, a dlc that contains music or visual resources to personalise the experience can be turned off and only applies if bought, but when it comes to later gaming content from the core game you can't make a part of the map or enemies of the game disappear. Basically, many games are an early access on release without being called like that and as they release content that should be there they keep charging money if you want to use it but the game itself is modified, including crashes and all kind of errors that can pop from nowhere. Sometimes they even manage to stop the game from running at all.
Bethesda has been doing this for years - it's not new.
Well, your only chance to escape the testing fate is to buy a good first version of a game (that's already pretty rare) and not update if the developer start being greedy.
Not Bethesda, cause that would imply fixing bugs.Bethesda has been doing this for years - it's not new.
Not a big surprise, they still run things on Rome2 or older engine and everyone who actually worked on it originally is out of the house.
The saddest part was seeing they released the original Rome remastered but... with many more bugs. Yep, the forums where burning short after the release because nobody understands how big companies can mess up that much, in the era of remasters they just release broken games. I could never be more relieved to have the original games owned and played when I was younger.
Paradox doesn't design Strategy games, as a wise man said "Grand Strategy is for Strategy what Doom is for literature". Playable games in the past, then playable memes, now simply broken games. Well, it can still be worse, like EU5 being the new Imperator.
And the UI is a visual cancer.
I think the AI unfair play is not just bad design but the only way to make up with having the worst intelligence since the first games, they don't even know how to move troops now (or move through the map to do something other than running away). But yes, the major problem is when troops ignore your orders because it turns PVP into a nightmare, from ranged ones doing nothing to melee ones stopping somewhere before even reaching the destination point. Probably the auto-resolve button was the only solution they found so players keep buying their games.
Noo don't say that I can't tolerate playing anymore EU4 after 500 hourse man I just hate scrolling maps with the cursor, leave that shit behind in 2005 already. PDX dlc policy is actual bloodsucking but at least some DLC revolutionize the gameplay. TW:WH dlcs on the other hand...
Well I am less pessimistic. The way ahead would be shit for a while, but I remember thinking there would be no more good strategy games after Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri and C&C series but then Company of Heroes 1 came out, then after everyone was talking about how strategy games are dead but then VIC 2, CK 2 and EU 4 came out successively in the 2010s. Tempest Rising for example, is an interesting return to form. It shows interest is not dead, just the formula is really, really stale and major innovation in gameplay is severely needed.
It's quite ironical when Medieval 2 was the worst TW game I played from the old ones and at least some time ago there was a consensus about how it was the worst ever (I guess before they released the newest titles). I've played several TWs only because I was gifted them and Medieval 2 is one example, I'd never ever tossed a coin to get it. About upcoming titles? I only expect a reskin with the same old, non-functional engine that makes you want to either quit or smash the win button until the end.
THANK YOU! I guess the Medieval 2 time period sells because Christians can play crusades and Muslims can play jihads while respectively strutting their self righteous cock over to Jerusalem. Well after reading my own writings I guess I am the same because I think musket line formations and gunpowder artillery is peak warfare. Comparing tactical gameplay against other TW titles it's actually the least varied and an actual snoozefest haha.
I know... I know alright. I know I'll buy it after 20% discount in one year and brain-deadily press next turn until that win screen feeling empty, I know... but what choice do I have why do nobody clone the TW formula already, it's raking money for CA, that's all the motivation rival studios should need.
For years I've been saying that "I'd play for a full-price game on release if it were at least playable like that time in the past when you bought the game physical" because nowadays doing so is like buying crypto and expecting to make any profit. But yes, since nowadays nobody tries to compete with them and instead prefer to mod the existing game they can do as they please because they're going to sell well anyways. I'm still waiting for the year to come to prove I'm wrong and appears a game I want to buy.
I wanted to reply to this one as joke but it became a kinda honest review afterwards.
My only wish for future TW games are improved Strategy (not battle) aspect and AI use different formation other than long, staunch lines of spears and bows/guns. Yeah, the name's Total War, but it's not like the game is 100% skirmishes either.
Amplitude Studios have pretty good UI in their games.
