HAH! Creative Assembly just doesn't give a fuck anymore.

[BarryMcCociner]

http://store.steampowered.com/app/343460/

Longbeards Culture Pack DLC announced for a game that has been out ONE WEEK.

The DLC contains three unique factions, The Langobards, The Alamans and The Burgundians.

They also have a unique "narrative-chain" in which you direct the choices of a hero as told in the style of a Germanic pagan saga, toward the end of the narrative the hero becomes a general in your armies with traits that reflect your choices.

This comes after the Viking Forefathers day one DLC, which held the factions, The Jutes, The Danes and the Geats.

Why, CA? You were doing so well, Attila didn't have the completely silly AI of Rome II, all these new UI tweaks were actually good, the starter factions were unique and interesting, it was looking like a major step up from Rome II.

This game didn't look like a soulless cash grab, why piss on that win streak with DLC so soon?

 

[Elfgore]

You know... I remember picking up the complete Medieval 2 collection for like thirty dollars about six months after Kingdoms came out. Kingdoms barely cost more than a single one of the campaign expansions in Rome 2... and adds way more content. Creative Assembly has just turned Total War into their cash-cow. It's a disgrace. I remember all of the free factions they promised for Rome 2, we got like two right? The rest were all over-priced DLC packs. Creative Assembly better not fuck up Warhammer with shitty DLC practices.

 

[Dr Ampersand]

It's hilarious at this point. I was holding out on Attila due to Rome 2's launch but was starting to re-consider due to all of the praise. Guess I'll now just wait a year or two now for Attila.

 

[Thorn14]

I blame Sega.

God awful publishers, and I say this as a Sega fan growing up.

 

[irishda]

Huh, I didn't know about this. That actually sounds incredibly interesting, and I just might buy it.

 

[WouldYouKindly]

I think Sega is squeezing one of their definite money makers for all it's worth. I can see why. Total War games are not massively popular. They do have an extremely devoted fanbase though, so you get this kind of thing happening.

Content getting carved off for the sake of DLC is almost always a publisher decision. CA wants to make a great game, and I'd say with Attila, they have.

I'd love to see CA get away from Sega and go to another publisher that actually respects the customer and strategy gaming. I wonder if they could ever escape to Paradox Interactive?

 

[BarryMcCociner]

I think Sega is squeezing one of their definite money makers for all it's worth. I can see why. Total War games are not massively popular. They do have an extremely devoted fanbase though, so you get this kind of thing happening.

Content getting carved off for the sake of DLC is almost always a publisher decision. CA wants to make a great game, and I'd say with Attila, they have.

I'd love to see CA get away from Sega and go to another publisher that actually respects the customer and strategy gaming. I wonder if they could ever escape to Paradox Interactive?

Oh there's no doubt Attila is a great game, major step up from Rome II which was disappointment of the year 2013 for me. AI Is still pretty clunky but at least it's not full lunatic. Plus the new combat waypoint system makes flanking maneuvers oh so satisfying. Plus, pikes aren't the overpowered shitbirds they were in previous games, having very little armor until the higher tiers, plus barbarians don't have high tier pikes. It's actually a very interesting decision.

I'll sing CA's praises for the base game, DLC practices are shoddy as the blue fuck though.

 

[Darks63]

The fact that this game was even made as a separate game instead of an expansion for Rome 2 should have been a warning sign for things like this really.

Its sad really I put at least 200 hours into Rome 1 and The barb Expansion, but with Rome 2 I just cant be assed to care. When I get Attila 2 or 3 years down the road I will likely put just about as much time in as I did Rome 2.

 

[subskipper]

I'm generally very, very picky about DLC and usually only get GOTY editions after the game has been out for a while in order to get the DLC. Attila will be different though. I got the Vikings DLC and will most probably get this one as well. The price point seems ok to me. That said, I certainly symsympathise with those that take issue with this practice.

 

[BarryMcCociner]

I'm generally very, very picky about DLC and usually only get GOTY editions after the game has been out for a while in order to get the DLC. Attila will be different though. I got the Vikings DLC and will most probably get this one as well. The price point seems ok to me. That said, I certainly symsympathise with those that take issue with this practice.

The Vikings DLC is in my opinion actually fairly weak, I just don't think there's enough emphasis in the game in general on sea warfare to make Vikings both interesting and accurate. That being said, at least the naval combat isn't completely fucking incomprehensible to me like Empire.

This DLC only looks decent because of the Narrative element they're pushing, might be interesting. If anything at least they spread out the roster.

 

[LetalisK]

I was considering getting back into Rome 2, but I might do this instead. Okay, I have someone questions. Is Attila better than Rome 2? And I mean Rome 2 now with all its expansions and patches, not the mess it first came out as. Second, is the campaign map in Attila as big as it is in Rome 2?

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

I'm just waiting until they release a gold edition, so I won't have to do any shitty DLC hunting. I really do miss the days of expansion packs, where they'd consolidate their effort on a big addition to the game and give it a single, big release, instead of breaking it all up into little bits and pieces and charging separately for it.

So yeah, just wait for the gold edition. Or GOFY edition or whatever they decide to call it.

EDIT: Wow, I only just learned that Attila is a standalone game. I thought it was an expansion to Rome II. Shows how in the loop I am.

 

[subskipper]

I was considering getting back into Rome 2, but I might do this instead. Okay, I have someone questions. Is Attila better than Rome 2? And I mean Rome 2 now with all its expansions and patches, not the mess it first came out as. Second, is the campaign map in Attila as big as it is in Rome 2?

I haven't put enough hours into the latest version of Rome 2 or Attila to give you a proper answer to this, but I can at least share some random thoughts on my experience so far. I can safely say that I'm having much more fun with Attila than I can remember having at any point with Rome 2. And I really enjoyed Rome 2 from released day. In total I think I put about 80 hours into Rome which isn't massive for a game like this, but considering my work-life schedule, that is quite impressive for me. A side effect of Attila coming out will probably be me logging even more hours in Rome 2 as well as playing the hell out of Attila. This probably isn't all that helpful to you in terms of getting this game, but if you're not in a massive hurry to play Attila, just follow your plan and get back to Rome 2 and wait for a GOTY edition or Steam sale for Attila. My personal opinion is that so far, Attila has been money well spend for me despite some perf issues and I can easily see myself sinking more than 80 hours into it.

 

[subskipper]

I'm generally very, very picky about DLC and usually only get GOTY editions after the game has been out for a while in order to get the DLC. Attila will be different though. I got the Vikings DLC and will most probably get this one as well. The price point seems ok to me. That said, I certainly symsympathise with those that take issue with this practice.

The Vikings DLC is in my opinion actually fairly weak, I just don't think there's enough emphasis in the game in general on sea warfare to make Vikings both interesting and accurate. That being said, at least the naval combat isn't completely fucking incomprehensible to me like Empire.

This DLC only looks decent because of the Narrative element they're pushing, might be interesting. If anything at least they spread out the roster.

That is a very relevant point in regards to the Viking DLC. As a Swede, I just love the opportunity to play as the Geats (Götar!) and plunder and pillage my way across Northern Europe and Britain.

 

[Trivun]

I'm just going to post this here, because it seems that nobody listens even now, ages after this image should have become common knowledge and understanding...

Spoiler

For my part, I haven't played Atilla yet, but I also haven't played through Rome 2. When I get a new PC, one that can run current-gen games without a problem, I'll definitely pick them both up, but for now this doesn't really bother me all that much...

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

I was considering getting back into Rome 2, but I might do this instead. Okay, I have someone questions. Is Attila better than Rome 2? And I mean Rome 2 now with all its expansions and patches, not the mess it first came out as. Second, is the campaign map in Attila as big as it is in Rome 2?

The answer to your second question is yes.

Is Attila better than Rome II? On a mechanical level, it certainly is. But Attila is a much harder game, there are lots of reports of veteran players abandoning Very Hard ("The only way to play Rome 2" if you believe them) and going so far as to play on normal difficulty, because the game is punishing. Both Romes suffer, the migratory people are hounded by the Huns, the Germanic peoples have some easy pickings in the Roman provinces but struggle to get their economy going... Only the Sassanids seem to be an easy start and that makes them feel more like playing Rome in Rome 2.

If you like the idea of playing a game in which you constantly feel that you are fighting an uphill struggle and like Total War games in general, then Attila is a great game. If you prefer the more traditional "Start from scratch and paint the map in your chosen color"-style of play form previous Total Wars, Attila might not be your cup of tea.

 

[Iwata]

I waited a year before getting both Shogun 2 and Rome 2, as I knew for a fact that there would be a GotY edition with all DLC included later on. I was surprised when stuff kept coming out for Rome 2 even after that, but anyway... I have learned not to buy TW games at launch, or even for up to year after launch. It's just the way the series works now.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

The answer to your second question is yes.

Is Attila better than Rome II? On a mechanical level, it certainly is. But Attila is a much harder game, there are lots of reports of veteran players abandoning Very Hard ("The only way to play Rome 2" if you believe them) and going so far as to play on normal difficulty, because the game is punishing. Both Romes suffer, the migratory people are hounded by the Huns, the Germanic peoples have some easy pickings in the Roman provinces but struggle to get their economy going... Only the Sassanids seem to be an easy start and that makes them feel more like playing Rome in Rome 2.

If you like the idea of playing a game in which you constantly feel that you are fighting an uphill struggle and like Total War games in general, then Attila is a great game. If you prefer the more traditional "Start from scratch and paint the map in your chosen color"-style of play form previous Total Wars, Attila might not be your cup of tea.

The pleasure I got from Total War seemed to stem largely from Medieval 2's RPG like elements with characters and family trees...the sometimes random, sometimes inherited traits would drive the character of a campaign. That element was progressively streamlined out in later games, and I found myself playing very pretty and utterly disinteresting RTS skirmish battles.

Has Attila done anything to put this element back in? Or is it just a less janky Rome 2?

 

[subskipper]

The answer to your second question is yes.

Is Attila better than Rome II? On a mechanical level, it certainly is. But Attila is a much harder game, there are lots of reports of veteran players abandoning Very Hard ("The only way to play Rome 2" if you believe them) and going so far as to play on normal difficulty, because the game is punishing. Both Romes suffer, the migratory people are hounded by the Huns, the Germanic peoples have some easy pickings in the Roman provinces but struggle to get their economy going... Only the Sassanids seem to be an easy start and that makes them feel more like playing Rome in Rome 2.

If you like the idea of playing a game in which you constantly feel that you are fighting an uphill struggle and like Total War games in general, then Attila is a great game. If you prefer the more traditional "Start from scratch and paint the map in your chosen color"-style of play form previous Total Wars, Attila might not be your cup of tea.

The pleasure I got from Total War seemed to stem largely from Medieval 2's RPG like elements with characters and family trees...the sometimes random, sometimes inherited traits would drive the character of a campaign. That element was progressively streamlined out in later games, and I found myself playing very pretty and utterly disinteresting RTS skirmish battles.

Has Attila done anything to put this element back in? Or is it just a less janky Rome 2?

Haven't explored fully, but there is a family tree and they gain traits and can, from what I understand, equip certain objects or apparel for various bonuses. Someone will obviously correct me if I'm wrong on the latter thing. I had completely missed this until I saw it in a let's play last night. I have yet to fiddle about with it, but in general I like the family tree and what it brings. Trying to marry off a daughter or have your son marry into a powerful faction is kind of fun.

 

[Demagogue]

It's hilarious at this point. I was holding out on Attila due to Rome 2's launch but was starting to re-consider due to all of the praise. Guess I'll now just wait a year or two now for Attila.

Oh hey, that's the same boat I am in... Rome 2 annoyed me so much, to the point that I still haven't finished my first campaign as the Spartans. (Conquering 140 territories takes a while when you don't make military alliances, heh) I stopped playing after I successfully held a city against a full army and half a fleet with about 4-5 cards of archers and two town militia cards.

Edit: (so that I don't double post)

I'm just going to post this here, because it seems that nobody listens even now, ages after this image should have become common knowledge and understanding...

Spoiler

For my part, I haven't played Atilla yet, but I also haven't played through Rome 2. When I get a new PC, one that can run current-gen games without a problem, I'll definitely pick them both up, but for now this doesn't really bother me all that much...

Yes, as much as Day 1 DLC and DLC in general seems bad to general consumers I would much rather the method they have now, then the constant news articles of "_____ lays off 100+ people" every month as companies recycle staff.