Talk:Total War (video game series)

Spartan: Total Warrior?

Why is Spartan: Total Warrior on here? It has almost nothing to do with Total War apart from having the same makers. the gameplay is totally different. If we do leave it on, then why not include Viking: Battle for Asgard? It is the same but just doesn't have "Total" in the name...? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shogunapple (talk • contribs) 14:01, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I think it should be included, but under a heading of Spin offs along with Viking: Battle for Asgard, It should nothowever be under the main Total War Games. Rifleman jay (talk) 16:19, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Expansion Packs

There should be links for the expansion packs, they are different from the original games.

Note

Game titles are italised. Skinnyweed 01:44, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

The list of games and the cover images

Something funky is happening with the way the images are really long. I've tried adding lots of br tags so that they don't overlap, but I'm not sure how this will look in other browsers. What should probably really happen is that each game should be in it's own table.

I think what you need is Template:Clr which I have added to the article. Let me know if it doesn't display like it should. Eluchil404 16:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Still looks pretty funky... whatever you've done hasn't fixed it yet...

Weird. It suddenly worked. Maybe my cache was still displaying the old version or something. Well done Eluchil404.

External link to Total War Center

I would like to re-add a link to Total War Center. One existed but was removed by User:Wafulz with the explanation "Removing link per WP:EL". While you could perhaps argue about whether major fansites should be linked from Wikipedia articles (it seems to me to be helpful), it seems kind of absurd to include totalwar.org but not the significantly larger twcenter.net (Alexa stats). Either both should be removed or both in, it seems to me.

Note that I won't re-add them without a neutral third-party approving, because I'm an administrator at TWC (as well as a reasonably long-time Wikipedia editor). —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 04:01, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the other link per the guideline. I probably didn't see it the first time around. --Wafulz 04:10, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, okay. WP:EL is kind of vague on the issue as I read it — "Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews" should presumably include game guides, lists of cheat codes, modification directories, and other things that fan sites will have — and WP:NOT mentions in an offhand way that "On articles about topics with many fansites, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate, marking the link as such." Looking at Wikipedia talk:External links#Fansitesthere seems to be an ongoing discussion on this. I guess I'll discuss further there. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 18:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand, why haven't both fansites been removed or added? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.127.255.33 (talk • contribs) 05:46, 1 May 2007

The second link has been removed. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 18:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

May be a new fan-site total war wikipage is needed. Since, i was looking for fan site links, and i was looking for main mods of mtw2 and their official web/forum sites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.97.224.11 (talk) 09:37, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Medieval2 cover.jpg

Image:Medieval2 cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I have added a breif rationale. Others may want to check that it is accurat and quailfies under WP:FU. Eluchil404 23:01, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Campagin map

Hey, Most of the total war series is missing 1 important picture. The picture is campagin map. Iam been looking for this sort of picture to be added in all total war series. Iam having no luck in finding that sort of pictures. Can anyone help?.--SkyWalker (talk) 08:33, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah me too what gives with that? Although the battles may be gamouras and exiting, personally I prefer the campagin part of the game. I can say the latest game (empire) will include the the tradional europe/north africa jobby along with armericas and india. But that does'nt beat an actul picture :/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.221.227.2 (talk) 23:56, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Shogun Single Player?

I just changed 'multiplayer world' to 'single player game' in the Shogun description as that made more sense. At the moment it implies that there was a multiplayer campaign with conversion to Christianity etc when in fact like the rest of the series (so far) multiplayer is restricted to one off battles. If I've misinterpreted the intention of this sentence, then change it back, but I think it is more correct now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.122.2.67 (talk) 11:42, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Spartan?

Why Spartan: Total Warrior is not mentioned in the article? It's a spinoff. --Mika1h (talk) 22:13, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Name changes

Shogun 2: Total War is now called Total War: Shogun 2, I added a reference and changed all necessary information (I think I don't edit often). Someone should probably change the sentence to the Total War: Shogun 2 sub-section that I added referencing the change. Once again not a very good editor.

Mac

Dose anyone know for sure if any or all of the games (except for Rome) will ever be put up for the Mac? Probably this question would be better somewhere else, but no one even mentions the Mac at all, let alone for an expansion. Yenrx (talk) 03:10, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

With the exception of Rome: Total War it is highly unlikely. The profit from games sold for apple computers is usually less than the cost of porting the game to said operating system. You'll only see a game be ported (let alone initially made for apple computers) if it has a major mainstream audience, specifically with people aged 18 to 26. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.95.10.25 (talk) 03:47, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Delete Spartan Total Warrior

It's not in any way related the total war series. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.52.218.31 (talk) 21:24, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Medieval: Total War Compatibility

As far as I know, the M:TW video card issue is now resolved. At least, M:TW works just fine on my PC(460 GTX card), but I'm not sure if people are still having issues with this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.0.253.76 (talk) 16:41, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Specific mods in the lead section

The mention of specific mods like EB and Third Age in the lead section seems out of place to me and smacks of advertisement. Wouldn't it be better to simply say the series has spawned a major modding scene and leave it at that?122.62.64.224 (talk) 16:15, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I have to agree with this. The mods mentioned are a relatively minor part of the franchise as a whole and only one seems notable enough to have its own wiki article. They should really be removed (or at least all that don't have their own article).173.56.79.75 (talk)

Why not modern day armies?

Why dont they make a game with Modern day armies? U.S, China, Russia, Germany, France, Canada, Britain. etc etc. IT would be perfect im not sure why they haven't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.24.105.154 (talk) 09:17, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

That has nothing to do with the page Whytho00 (talk) 20:04, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

"Outdated" template no longer applies

I'm assuming it was placed there due to the absence of Total War: Three Kingdoms and Total War: Thrones of Britannia, both of which are now present. I'll go ahead and remove it. The Verified Cactus 100% 22:53, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Three Kingdoms Total War Link

The link to main article just redirects back to the same section of this page. If there isn't one the link should probably be removed. FusionTorch (talk) 09:21, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Chronological order or by game engine?

Should the games be ordered chronologicaly as it always has been or should they be ordered by game engine version? Thrones of Britannia caused this problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShaDoW 03 (talk • contribs) 14:37, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 10 December 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: there is no consensus to move the disambiguation page, which leaves that title blocked. Therefore, moving the series to Total War (video game series) at this time, per the discussion below. A new move request may be initiated at any time. Dekimasuよ! 11:48, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

---

• Total War (series) → Total War
• Total War → Total War (disambiguation)

– Despite the recent move of the disambiguation page, I now realize that there is a good case for the Total War series being the primary topic for the capitalized version. The other media called "Total War" are relatively minor by comparison. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 10:21, 10 December 2019 (UTC) —Relisting. Cúchullain ^t/c 19:37, 18 December 2019 (UTC)—Relisting. Dekimasuよ! 04:34, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose, but move Total War (series) → Total War (video game series) instead - I don't see a strong PRIMARYTOPIC case being made for this, especially in the long-term, so I see no reason to stop disambiguating all. Moving to (video game series) adds clarity as (series) is not enough detail given that there is at least two other types of series mentioned on the disambig page. -- Netoholic @ 18:54, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Netoholic's alternative proposal. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:44, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
• Support Clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, gets almost 100x times more views than the disambig itself per [1]. M.A.R.S. Patrol Total War is also just a partial title match. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 21:55, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
• Support. Series gets more views than Total war even. Hyperbolick (talk) 13:58, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose and move Total War (series) → Total War (video game series) per Netoholic and IJBall  — Amakuru (talk) 18:09, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.