Do you....

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

Like the fact they made a remake of STW instead of RTW?

[Gregoshi]

Absolutely. I think it will do TW good to take a step back complexity-wise (one culture, more limited unit roster, etc) to fine-tune the series. With TWS2, looks like we are getting the MP support long asked for (and promised). For the RTW supporters who are disappointed, just think how much better TWR2 will be with the tighter focus of TWS2 allowing for much needed improvements to the games, but always lost in the bigger! better! rat race that the series had turned into.

[pevergreen]

I just really like Romans, so I'm sad.

However, having never played STW, Samurai should be fun.

[Barkhorn1x]

Yes, CA made the right call.

[Phog_of_War]

Yes I think CA did the right thing. I am all for boiling it down again to basics and taking the K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple, Stupid) approach.

[Gregoshi]

K.I.S.S. :yes:

[pevergreen]

K.I.S.S. :yes:

I'll kiss you in a minute...

wait...

[Double A]

R2TW will more than likely use the engine this game is based off of. And it'll be all the better for it (assuming S2TW is good).

[TosaInu]

Absolutely.

[Togakure]

Indubitably!

[NagatsukaShumi]

Resounding yes.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Yes!!!

:bow:

[A Nerd]

Yes! Samurai, melee, etc. Yes!

[Tuuvi]

I'm excited for Shogun 2, so yes.

[gollum]

RTW2 will be made anyway just after this. It was a pleasant surprise to say the least.

[hoom]

Thoroughly agree with Gregoshis' Post #2 :bow:
Shogun 2 gives CA a chance to get its AI etc into shape to match the graphics.

That said, so-far we haven't seen much sign of better AI, just lots of pretty environments & weather effects :scared:

<dream mode> I hope that Shogun 2 will be a triumph of KISS enabling AI that really lives up to the scope & quality of the rest of the game.
Then that CA come up with a new time period for the next next TW game before doing Rome 2 & then Rome 2 will be an extra awesome triumph.
Like even cooler than Europa Barbarorum II should be (if it manages to get a release out first) ie at least as good as Third Age (thats a high target! But Third Age really does show how good even the old M2TW engine actually is) </dream mode>

[Furunculus]

"Do you like the fact they made a remake of STW instead of RTW?"

Yes.

[Vladimir]

Yes.

Like others have said: KISS. Hopefully this will help them develop multiplayer campaigns. I've dreamed of that for a while.

[gaelic cowboy]

Rome 2 will be crap cos they will fill it full of amazon charioteers and Egyptian archer mummies.

Playing Empire I never really saw the point of having 20-30 different types of riflemen per faction Rome 2 will end up in the same I bet.

[gollum]

Empire had different riflemen because the community was used to and wanted many units in a TW game. It would have been disastrous if they didn't do it thus from a commercial perspective. Even units sold online as extras was popular. It was also a game mechanic way to give character to different nations' armies.

The original RTW wasn't all that better than what you describe from the perspective you see it, but people loved it and it broke CA to the mainstream. I bet RTW2 will be just as succesful if not more; there is a huge fanbase for the Roman era that are period/historical accuracy fans, and with a new engine/graphics, lots of potential for modding and previous know how of the period by CA, RTW2, when made, will be a super hit. Practically all the post RTW TW fanbase is expecting it since it was made.

[gaelic cowboy]

Oh I agree that is what they will do and 90% of the people who buy the game will never use even half the units available even for the one or two nations they generally pick. If people want extra factions give em extra factions but keep the army rosters tight so the game stays balanced.

I always found I was picking the same sort layout for the army in Rome or Medieval 2 and then later in Empire or Napoleon again. Whats the point in having 20-30 riflemen for Britain, I bet if they had put in only 5 no one would have noticed.

[andrewt]

Empire had different riflemen because the community was used to and wanted many units in a TW game. It would have been disastrous if they didn't do it thus from a commercial perspective. Even units sold online as extras was popular. It was also a game mechanic way to give character to different nations' armies.

The original RTW wasn't all that better than what you describe from the perspective you see it, but people loved it and it broke CA to the mainstream. I bet RTW2 will be just as succesful if not more; there is a huge fanbase for the Roman era that are period/historical accuracy fans, and with a new engine/graphics, lots of potential for modding and previous know how of the period by CA, RTW2, when made, will be a super hit. Practically all the post RTW TW fanbase is expecting it since it was made.


I liked that they made Shogun 2 before Rome 2.

As for RTW, I have misgivings about that game. I love the time period and the setting, but it was one of my least favorite games in the entire series. It had the worst historical inaccuracies of any game in the series, especially with the anachronistic Egyptians. The large charge bonuses made gameplay too arcade-like and the battles over too quickly after engagement. CA also fundamentally messed up the army balance of the time period. It was supposed to be a transition period from phalanxes to legion but both were underpowered when compared to the overpowered missile units and the grossly overpowered cavalry in the game.

As for Empire, the problem with its unit roster was the number of units versus how little the units are differentiated from each other. I think the problem actually started out with RTW. The original STW and MTW had unit stats that are more differentiated.

[Swoosh So]

I love the Rome era but rome totalwar was the worst mp release i ever saw for totalwar talk about arcade like urg! I liked the campaigns and the mods were amazing for the time! id love to see rome2 with mod support that would be so amazing but for now im contented with shogun2 theres just something utterly cool about that era and honor and samurai i love it and love movies from that era like ran etc..

[gaelic cowboy]

I love the Rome era but rome totalwar was the worst mp release i ever saw for totalwar talk about arcade like urg! I liked the campaigns and the mods were amazing for the time! id love to see rome2 with mod support that would be so amazing but for now im contented with shogun2 theres just something utterly cool about that era and honor and samurai i love it and love movies from that era like ran etc..

I think we can take it that modding will not be supported or at least it wont be easy to do now that the DLC model has been embraced. They want us buying the next thing not playing MTW pocket mod.

I predict some kind of Mongol or Korean invasion senario for DLC although I suppose thats hardly a surprise for anyone who remember STW

[Zim]

I do, partly because I've enver played STW (started with MTW). I'm most a fan of the RTW time period, but that just makes the move to East Asia and interesting change for me. Plus, when RTW2 does come out any kinks features used for it from STW2 will be worked out (I hope :clown:).

[Prussian to the Iron]

Yes. I started at Rome, so I never got to play Shogun. I'd love to finally see something so exotic as Dark Ages Japan in a Total War game.

[Phog_of_War]

Dark Ages Japan is such a bad description IMO. Japan, at the time that the Dark Ages were happening in Europe, was almost as advanced as the Chinese or the Muslim countries of the Middle East IIRC. I might be off by a few years or decades on that statement but its true.

Also, I'm not saying you're wrong, its just a bad description of the Edo and Jindai periods in Japan. But in terms of the unrestricted warfare you are correct.

[Daveybaby]

Are they definitely making R2TW next? Has that been confirmed somewhere or are people just assuming?

I can see the point in revisiting shogun and medieval, because technology has moved on so far since the original games, and what with the new style campaign maps etc, the remakes are significantly different games to their originals.

But i really cant see the point of remaking rome with slightly better graphics. The old one still works on current computers (i cant get the original shogun or medieval working on mine) so you'd have to be bringing some significant gameplay changes (not just graphical upgrades) for it to be worth it IMO. Not sure what those would be... i guess you could add naval battles but they wouldnt be a scratch on empire's.

Personally I'm really, really hoping the next TW goes somewhere new (as empire did). I'd rather see a fantasy TW than rome all over again.

[Prussian to the Iron]

Where could it go though? there really aren't that many unused time periods they can use that appeal to a good amount of players. I mean I suppose they could make a game in different parts of the world, like a Total War based entirely in China and the surrounding areas/based just in Southeast Asia and maybe India. I doubt it though since they wouldn't make that right after one in Japan, if anything they could do something about Africa I guess, but eh.

[Daveybaby]

True, its becoming difficult to think of new eras/regions that fit into the TW model - china and india are the two main ones i could think of. But even then, i cant think what new gameplay features these would bring to the game, so it'd be more like playing a well developed mod than a new game. Still better than replaying RTW all over again with better graphics, IMO.

This does make me wonder about where CA go from here. Are they just going to keep churning out the same 4 games over and over with (increasingly marginal) graphical improvements? Will it really be useful to model the individual hairs of stubble on each soldier's face while your player is trying to command an army of 1000's of men zoomed out all of the way? Personally i think that all of the graphics upgrades since RTW have been completely irrelevant to actual gameplay, albeit useful for selling copies of the game via shiny magazine articles. Mind you, this hasnt done the civ franchise any harm.

20th century warfare? It wouldnt be TW as we know it, but at least it'd be different. Fantasy? It would make a lot of fans vomit blood but i have to say it'd be pretty fun to be ordering dragons and elves and whatnot about for a change. Sci-fi space battles? Hmmmm... maybe not.

Meh, having said all of this i'm sure the people at CA have got the next half dozen games roadmapped, so i guess all this wondering is kind of irrelevant innit.

[Prussian to the Iron]

I thought about 20th century, but it really wouldnt fit with Total War. WWII and after was all about squad/small unit based warfare. In WWII you didn't have large masses of soldiers charging at eachother, or getting within range and firing calmly in ranks at eachother. It was mainly urban combat with small individual units all over the place. Yeah you have large armies, but in regards to actual battles it wouldn't work with the Total War we all have played. They'd have to figure out how to work in aircraft, tanks would be tricky too to balance (can't make it too good for obvious balance reasons, but if it takes up a whole unit card then it has to be pretty freakin beast), increase the unit limit while decreasing unit size, and many other things to port it from warfare en masse to the kind we have had in the time period.

Other games have done it successfully, but they don't go by the same tradition Total War does.

[Orda Khan]

It was a better choice because Rome and its period are just too complex. Look at the first offering of RTW ... awful. However, for all those who are hailing this as an amazing step in the right direction, start thinking about FLAMING ARROWS ... yet again. Seems CA are hooked on this nonsense.
Hopefully they will add Korea to the expansion, at least it will offer variety. I only see sengoku jidai as good for MP because of the unit selection. SP, even in the first game, was repetitive and quite boring.

[Prussian to the Iron]

i wish the flaming arrows had better effects. from Rome on through Shogun 2 (as evidenced by the first battle trailer) the flaming arrow impact makes like a mini-explosion for some reason, and it looks really stupid. do they do anything extra besides create panic?

[Tuuvi]

It was a better choice because Rome and its period are just too complex. Look at the first offering of RTW ... awful. However, for all those who are hailing this as an amazing step in the right direction, start thinking about FLAMING ARROWS ... yet again. Seems CA are hooked on this nonsense.
Hopefully they will add Korea to the expansion, at least it will offer variety. I only see sengoku jidai as good for MP because of the unit selection. SP, even in the first game, was repetitive and quite boring.

I think the flaming arrows are somewhat historically accurate, I remember seeing arrowheads made to hold pitch for flaming arrows in one of my archery books, but then again I think they were mostly used to set buildings on fire rather than scare troops like in TW games.