Total War: Warhammer Delayed, Now Out May

Creative Assembly and Sega have announced a delay to Total War: Warhammer [official site]. It’s not a very long delay – from April 28th to May 24th – and the reasoning behind the extra development time makes sense. Mike Simpson, Total War Creative Director, says the studio doesn’t want to “rush” toward release:

“This could be the best Total War game we’ve ever made. We don’t want to rush it. It’s an enormous game and we also want to make absolutely sure reviewers have enough time to play it thoroughly before launch.”

Giving us reviewers time for a thorough analysis is hopefully a sign of confidence in the game’s intricacies. It’s not unheard of for strategy games to start well but to stumble as the end-game approaches, and Warhammer has the further complication of factions with wildly different goals and playstyles.

The game’s enormity is as much due to the variations between those factions as it is to do with scale. We’ve seen campaign details for the dwarves and their Book of Grudges, the Empire and the Greenskins. Vampire Lords still to come.

While it didn’t reach the glorious highs of Shogun 2, Total War: Attila was a solid recovery after the fumbling of what seemed like a sure thing with Rome II. Hopefully, this delay ensures there’ll be no need for a Total War: Warhammer Karl Franz Edition down the line, fixing launch issues in the way that Rome II’s Emperor edition did.

Creative Assembly have also released detailed minimum recommended and ultra specs, detailing not only what you’ll need to reach each threshold but what kind of framerate you can expect.

PC Minimum Specifications:

[Expected around 15-25 FPS on campaign map and in a 1v1, 20 units vs 20 units battle, default graphics preset set to “Low”]

Operating System: Windows 7 64Bit 

Processor: Intel® Core™ 2 Duo 3.0Ghz

RAM: 3GB*

Hard Drive: 35 GB

Video Card: (DirectX 11) AMD Radeon HD 5770 1024MB | NVIDIA GTS 450 1024MB | Intel HD4000 @720P

*PC integrated graphics chipsets require 4GB ram, e.g. Intel HD series

PC Recommended Specifications:

[Expected around 45-55 FPS on campaign map and in a 1v1, 20 units vs 20 units battle, default graphics preset set to “High”]

Operating System: Windows 7/8.1/10 64Bit

Processor: Intel® Core™ i5-4570 3.20GHz

RAM: 8 GB 

Hard Drive: 35 GB

Video Card: (DirectX 11) AMD Radeon R9 270X 2048MB | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 2048MB @1080P

PC 60fps+ Specifications:

[Expected 60 FPS+ on campaign map and in a 1v1, 20 units vs 20 units battle, default graphics preset set to “Ultra”]

Operating System: Windows 7/8.1/10 64Bit

Processor: Intel® Core™ i7-4790K 4.0 GHz

RAM: 8 GB 

Hard Drive: 35 GB

Video Card: (DirectX 11) AMD Fury X or Nvidia GTX 980 @1080P

I land somewhere between Recommended and 60fps+. A silver medal. Polished.

From this site

19 Comments

  1. Dunderbar says:

    After my exams are over – my degree is saved!

    • DwarfJuggler says:

      T-T Screw your degree.. though admittedly I’d rather the game be done and polished before release. But I was excited for April, now it’s a dull month that predates a better one :(.

  2. mrpage says:

    You don’t mean “enormity”.

  3. DarkLiberator says:

    I will admit, I like how their system specs actually detail which settings and framerate it will be.

    • Person of Interest says:

      Agreed! The detailed specs are appreciated–and unprecedented, as far as I’m aware.

    • Napalm Sushi says:

      It’s honestly got me a bit anxious; I’ve gotten by very well now for an awfully long time without a hardware upgrade, but this threatens to be the first game to require me to grudgingly shuffle in with a ticket to a medium detail seat.

  4. mashkeyboardgetusername says:

    After malarkey like Rome 2 at launch, I think that if CA feel the game needs a bit more time then that’s probably for the best.

    • DarkFenix says:

      My money says it’ll still suck until ~12 months after release.

      • mashkeyboardgetusername says:

        I dunno, as Adam says Attila was a damn fine game, (personally I prefer it to Shogun 2, although it’s the more varied map that won it the tiebreaker,) and was very solid at launch. In any event, sounds like they’re going to give reviewers lots of time with the game so we should know if there are major issues.

        • Hmm-Hmm. says:

          Attila was also not a brand new game, but rather built upon Rome 2. If Total Warhammer is like that, sure, one might expect it to be relatively stable, but if it’s its own thing then who knows?

          • Beanbee says:

            Well they’re all kind of built on eachother? They probably haven’t rebuilt the engine too much since they changed pathing. I would not be super surprised if there is code from even the first game lurking somewhere

  5. jiffster says:

    I’d much rather wait and have a functional game at launch. Took rome 2 nearly a year.

  6. Serenegoose says:

    As this is the one solitary game on my horizon, there was a very loud and anguished wail at chateau goose just now.

    • Beanbee says:

      duck, duck, duck

      No love for HoI4? That seems like a really fresh take in some ways on Grand Strategy.

      • Serenegoose says:

        I’m interested, but realistic. I’ve tried to get into HoI3 a few times, and each time I make such a tiny little step forward in comprehending it before some new confusion fatigues me. (I actually broke the biggest hurdle last time, in figuring out how the whole order of battle system works). But yeah, HoI4 ends up being a game I can get into, that’ll be great, but it’s not quite on the ‘games I really want’ list just yet.

  7. Boozebeard says:

    I just played through a Shogun 2 campaign (with darthmod) and admittedly am only in the early stages of an Attila one (I’ve played them both in the past though) and I gotta say I think Attila is markedly better. Compared to Rome 2 Shogun 2’s streamlined, stripped back design seemed brilliant but compared to Attila it’s just boring. While a lot of Rome 2’s additions felt cumbersome and unnecessary, Attila feels expansive and immersive. The diversity of factions, unit and geography as well as the family & political system are really making Attila a much more interesting, dynamic experience where Shogun began to feel shallow and systematic.

    • xyzzy frobozz says:

      So I take it you’re not playing as the WRE then?

      ;-)

  8. kud13 says:

    Total Warhammer could be avery interesting experiment with adding story to the TW formula. Or the AI could cripple the game.

    I’m eager for it, because I love the universe. But i’m totally intending to wait it out until the rest of the factions are available and then buy it as a complete package.

    Did CA make any announcements on just how they are planning to do expansions?

    my guess would be they’ll do the 3 elven nations + Brettonia in one go, and the southern continent, with Lizardmen, Skaven (Chaos Dwarves?) as another. I think they may do smaller factions as pure DLC later on.

  9. Czrly says:

    April 28th to May 24th sounds like one hell of a loading screen… but probably about average for a Total War game, these days.