Reviews

[quadalpha]

Eurogamer: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-09-02-total-war-rome-2-review


Then a close zoom on a fight between a unit of chariots and elephants reveals that they have parked beside each other and seem to be engaged in a staring contest. I send in the cavalry, zoom a little more and, casual as anything, a floating horse glides sideways into the action.


The game has also had its AI revamped, and I'm pleased to report that it's somewhat cannier. While it was previously all too vulnerable to kiting - where entire armies could be distracted by one or two harassing units - it's now perhaps a little too stoic. It better recognises its advantage in defensive situations, standing firm when it knows it can hurt you, and it enjoys trying to wear your troops out by forcing you to make chase, by trying to keep your forces engaged and by attacking with fresh units. On occasion, it's a victim of its own stubbornness, with enemy defenders stood like mannequins in a mall, refusing to budge when their participation could swing a skirmish. Battles are fun, but still sometimes very dumb.

On the campaign map, it does worse, sometimes attacking with substantially smaller forces that have little hope of tasting victory. It will fail to press advantages or try to break sieges that it has a good chance of lifting. Tugging the difficulty slider up doesn't make it any more sensible, though it does at least make your own citizens increasingly fickle, raising the possibility of revolt at home.

I said that Total War: Rome 2 is a slow game and this comes in part from how mindfully you have to expand your would-be empire. The ancient world is made up of many different cultures and not all of these are keen to bend to your will, requiring particular technological advances and cooing dignitaries to placate them. At the same time, empires have hard limits on the number of agents, armies and fleets they can support, further tempering their growth.

RPS: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/09/02/wot-i-think-total-war-rome-ii/


Sadly, Rome II has taken on board some of Empire’s vices and, while it is in many ways an exceptionally well-crafted game, it is a misstep of sorts. Engage the Irony Alarm – Rome II is a game that reaches too far and wide, creaking under its own weight.


On the whole, the regional management aspect of the game has probably seen the most improvement since Shogun 2. It effectively asks the player to think intelligently, to plan long-term and to provide their growing empire with character and guile.


[stuff about crap AI]


It’s unfortunate that the chances to carry out such movements is rare. The map is huge but limited, presented as a series of corridors between forests and mountains rather than an open place. There’s an obvious benefit – it’s much easier for the developers, and indeed players, to control the flow of armies, making blockades, ambushes and tactical retreats far more common than they might be otherwise. The world does feel more cramped than I would have liked though. All roads may eventually lead to Rome, but there are only a couple leading out of it.

[Lemur]

From the RPS comment section, some questions that get answered re optimization:

Q: What are the loadtimes like? Shogun 2 was unplayable without endless autoresolves later on, even with an SSD.
A: I can tell you they are much quicker than Shogun 2. (I reviewed the game also)
Q: What was the average loadtime for the battles?
A: Load times are alright, but it’s ponderous between turns when calculating AI moves (over a minute late campaign). I moved it to an SSD to see if it helped and it didn’t really.

[BroskiDerpman]

http://www.twitch.tv/psponge

Watching this, confirms most of my criticisms.

[Lemur]

http://www.twitch.tv/psponge

Watching this, confirms most of my criticisms.
Actually, looks pretty good from what I'm seeing.

Also, I have some freelance work I need to deliver first thing in the AM, so the hell with this guy streaming his campaign. Very irritating as I sit here trying to work. How dare he.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Watching this, confirms most of my criticisms.

Could you explain this a bit? I watched the video and psponge played that like a newbee, IMHO. Out numbered, yes, but one does not stand in a static position when faced with greater numbers and expect to win (unless you have some commanding positional advantage, which obviously was not the case).

I thought the review at rockpapershotgun was fair, touching on what the player both liked and disliked.


Though the game will be instantly recognisable to players of the first Rome, The Creative Assembly has made a few additions, with varying degrees of success. Very welcome is the chance to issue instructions to your allies, which can have them attacking a mutual enemy in a particular location, while a new, detailed encyclopedia that covers just about everything in the game is much appreciated.

This is very much an improvement, making allies into something more than mere trading partners....


Less noteworthy is a system for allowing armies to gain traits, along with their leaders, as these offer some strangely stingy bonuses. This is a game that seriously asks you, after a series of victories, whether it's your archers or your infantry that you want to be 3% more dangerous. Naturally, a campaign of many decades presents the opportunity for multiple traits to stack and form more significant bonuses - but while the game's presenting you difficult choices in city management, these just look silly, making you feel like the pettiest of emperors.

3% is a rather silly boost:crazy:


By themselves, none of the things that are wrong with Total War: Rome 2 are that big a deal. If the game itself were an empire, a map upon a wall, we'd note some gains and some losses, glossing over most of the tinier problems because they don't spoil the larger picture. We also might note the stagnation of that empire. For all that the game may have promised, it isn't such a big step forward for the series. It's Total War done a bit bigger, a bit better and a bit different. Its borders hold firm.

And this guy says pretty much the same as the other.....some good things, some not so good.

[Lemur]

PC Gamer (http://www.pcgamer.com/review/total-war-rome-2-review/)

Verdict: Fight past the niggles and you'll find a truly epic grand strategy game with a tremendous sense of spectacle. Go, see, conquer. 85%

bitgamer (http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/pc/2013/09/02/rome-ii-review/1?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+bit-tech%2Fall+(bit-tech.net+feed))

While Total War had its roots in Shogun, Rome has generally been the most fondly remembered entry, considered the high point of the series and the game's natural home. Rome II had an awful lot to live up to, and it does this with the easy confidence of one of the game's own Champions standing in front of an entire army, sword drawn. It's truly an extraordinary creation; vast yet intimate, complex yet accessible, diverse yet cohesive, and vastly different while still recognisably Total War. Say goodbye to your life as you knew it, because the Romans are coming, and things won't ever be the same. 96%

[Vuk]

Well, looks like the naysayers were right this time.

[Lemur]

Related: A reviewer (who has played the almost-release build, natch) is doing an AMA on Reddit right now (http://www.reddit.com/r/totalwar/comments/1lku4g/ama_by_a_reviewer_of_total_war_rome_2/).

[BroskiDerpman]

Pathfinding, unit collision, silly combat mechanics, exploits and bugs carried over from Shogun 2 (Cav drag, Missile shuffle). Wonder if you guys even pay close attention when your units bug out... Shattered unit bug is really annoying too.

Oh drop hacking too, been there since Empire.

A small percent boost in Shogun 2 quickly grows and you could have super Ashigaru eventually.

Our men are shuffling from the battlefield! SHAMEFUL DISPLAY!

[Lemur]

Sorry, but I find any attempt to declare Rome II a failure and/or masterpiece kinda premature.

However, if anyone wants to pat themselves on the back ... eh ... well-done? You successfully passed judgment on a game that isn't even in release patch. Hail, bravo, excelsior, and strike up the band.


http://youtu.be/rjQtzV9IZ0Q

[BroskiDerpman]

Just statin' some bugs mister. :clown:

[fallen851]

Sorry, but I find any attempt to declare Rome II a failure and/or masterpiece kinda premature.


Well, I've read the reviews. They do declare Rome II a success, but it is not without bugs. And that is all I needed to know.

The Total War Series is great, it offers a lot. But for old veterans, this is the same old game with new graphics. We're sick of the terrible path finding and AI. We're sick of the crashes and pressing end turn and waiting for minutes on end. The games just never feel complete, never feel polished, at least the ones I've played.

For people new to the series, this game will be amazing. Old veterans of the TW series have waited through turns, endured crashes, played all kinds of battles, and demolished the AI. We are tired of the flaws that make TW games a chore rather than fun at some point, and CA doesn't seem to fix them. Instead they just add new features and fancy graphics. In short, I feel many of the TW games are flawed at their core; the novelty of the graphics and features wears off eventually, and they don't redeem the game when it just isn't challenging or stable in the end. So it really impresses people when you first play, but over time the issues wear you down, and you give up. It simply isn't a great game, it is just a good game with amazing graphics that could be great. The addition of the naval battles even left one reviewer auto resolving them after a period, because they were simply eye candy with little tactics or strategy involved.

That is why Rome II at this moment is a failure in my eyes. But new people, they'll hail it as a great success. Hopefully CA will patch it appropriately, but if their history with Rome I is any indication, the game will be left unfinished.

[BroskiDerpman]

Amen. That sums up my thoughts as well. Though I would go a little further but there's no need to as of now when the core game needs to be fixed.

[Wilbo]

For me, the reviews have been very positive. The main complaint relates to bugs, but I'm sure these will be fixed post release - Shogun 2 is very stable and has very little wrong with it at all, in my opinion. I'm a touch apprehensive about the 'shallow' diplomatic model, but suspect that CA will have done a good job and so am looking forward to finding out myself.

With regards to the complaints by various members of this forum, I've clocked hundreds of hours across the various Total War games and have rarely been bothered by poor AI or pathfinding, so I expect it won't be an issue with Rome 2 either.

Roll on tomorrow: I have Samnites to conquer.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Just statin' some bugs mister.

Dude.....that's about all you and several others do here. I, for one, am growing extremely weary of the constant nagging and nit-picking.

Yep....the game, and indeed the series, has many flaws and bugs. No question about it. Some are minor, some quite serious. But I don't need to be reminded all the time about how much eye-candy there is in the game; about path-finding bugs; about unit cohesion; blah-blah-blah~:mecry:

If you don't like the friggin' game, play something else....or offer your services to CA to help them correct the games' deficiencies.

Just please stop making every thread that gets posted into a rant about how crappy CA and their games are.

End of :soapbox:

P.S. If you would like a challenge from the AI; decent unit balance (with some very minor tweaking); epically long battles (some can go on for nearly two hours); and battlefields that actually require you to use tactics...........................play the original Shogun. Or better yet, play its' modded version Samurai Warlords. I guarantee you will be crying about the game for a much different reason:inquisitive:

[BroskiDerpman]

I wonder if you actually played Shogun 2, every battle I've played had a bug or exploit in it. Cav drag, fund bug, tosa shuffle, unlimited sea travel, clicking a unit in reserve to charge with cav sends the cav through two units (Even spear unit in front) and wiping out most of both units. LoS issues, skill tree bonuses bugged out.

This is not including ai or pathfinding, balance, battle mechanics, and ui issues. (Let's not get to authenticity shall we?)

Battle mechanics can take a book from NTW 3 or ER mod with more emphasis on keeping unit cohesion and stamina, grand scale movements, more usage of reserves to press areas, more uses of deeper ranks etc, etc.

Balance, in any good tournament there's quite a lot of rules which restrict certain units or builds because of how poorly balanced units are.

Poor pathfinding has cost me many sieges...

@RS

You know I'm allowed to post what I want as long as I don't try to openly insult other people right?



Also, I like TW games simply for the risk style play as in Med1.

Oh I will play a ton of other games and mods...

Oh, why work for CA? Not interested in moving or getting paid less than my dad...

You want to play something slow balanced and interesting like table top try NTW3 mod.

Also not every thread I posted in was a rant about TW Geeze...

[Wilbo]

While that is true, your repeated complaints are extremely tiresome.

Having seen your list of bugs / exploits, I've not noticeably suffered from any of them in single or multiplayer, so am surprised they affect your enjoyment so much.

I recommend avoiding their use, then they probably won't bother you.

[BroskiDerpman]

I got my avatar corrupted and the other one withe the skill tree bonus not active.

[ReluctantSamurai]

You know I'm allowed to post what I want as long as I don't try to openly insult other people right?

Of course I do. That is not my point. I am not the type of poster that constantly belabors a point, and it's irritating to me when someone else does it. You've made your points in numerous posts. Some of what you and several others here say are certainly valid criticisms and some of which I agree with. But.........

..............move on to something else, please.


Also not every thread I posted in was a rant about TW Geeze...

I know. I was just in rant mode.~;)



You want to play something slow balanced and interesting like table top try NTW3 mod

I simply hate that era of military history. When I want something slow and balanced, I play Samurai Warlords or the original Shogun.

[BroskiDerpman]

I see and I respect your differing opinion. Every time I post a criticism I make sure to add a few new bugs or exploits I know of to keep it fresh. XD

Though I will press many of the same things as that's what I'm bugged about for quite a while.

[fallen851]

Dude.....that's about all you and several others do here. I, for one, am growing extremely weary of the constant nagging and nit-picking.


If you don't like the friggin' game, play something else....or offer your services to CA to help them correct the games' deficiencies.

Just please stop making every thread that gets posted into a rant about how crappy CA and their games are.



The pursuit of excellence is one of the few things in this world you can't denounce from any angle. And this criticism was written voluntarily and given freely.

We all want TW to be the best ReluctantSamurai, and you don't get there by apologizing for or ignoring the core issues the game has had for a long time.

I never said their games were crappy, in fact I said:
The Total War Series is great, it offers a lot.

But then I listed the issues that keeps Total War games from getting higher scores with objective review websites, like PC Gamer. 85% is good, and RTW II I'm sure is a good game. But it isn't up to par with Half Life, or Civilization II, and it could be, if CA focused on fixing the issues I listed.

The more we discuss and "complain" about such issues, the higher the likelihood CA will fix them. They've ignored many attempts in the past to fix their games, despite significant community help:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?95825-Bugs-and-Patch-Changes-v1-5&highlight=

And 1.5 was the last patch for RTW.

So in the end, this is our way of telling CA that maybe they should commit more resources to the "boring" stuff, like coding and AI, and less resources to fancy graphics.

[Barkhorn1x]

Sorry, but I find any attempt to declare Rome II a failure and/or masterpiece kinda premature.

However, if anyone wants to pat themselves on the back ... eh ... well-done? You successfully passed judgment on a game that isn't even in release patch. Hail, bravo, excelsior, and strike up the band.


I have to agree here as no one has played the final release version yet. If the bugs aren't addressed in the day 1 patch then game on. But until then keep your powder dry.

[fallen851]

I have to agree here as no one has played the final release version yet. If the bugs aren't addressed in the day 1 patch then game on. But until then keep your powder dry.

So you don't think CA sent their best to the reviewers?

They'd be crazy not too. PC Gamer has a rule that it only reviews what is sent and doesn't re-review games after patches, ect. CA did not send them an unfinished product, trust me. They sent what will be shipped in just a few hours.

Some of you might be able to overlook the problems the TW series has, and that is fine. But others have a difficult time when other games don't suffer from such issues. That is fine too.

Again, the pursuit of excellence is one of the few things in this world you can't denounce from any angle.

[ReluctantSamurai]

The more we discuss and "complain" about such issues, the higher the likelihood CA will fix them. They've ignored many attempts in the past to fix their games, despite significant community help.

When enough folks have purchased and played the game for awhile, then start a problem/bug-fix thread. Then every one who has a gripe can post there. CA will have the majority of orgah players comments/opinions all in one place. Who knows? Maybe Jack Lusted or one of the other folks from CA who post here from time-to-time can be of help.

[fallen851]

When enough folks have purchased and played the game for awhile, then start a problem/bug-fix thread. Then every one who has a gripe can post there. CA will have the majority of orgah players comments/opinions all in one place. Who knows? Maybe Jack Lusted or one of the other folks from CA who post here from time-to-time can be of help.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?95825-Bugs-and-Patch-Changes-v1-5&highlight=

Or maybe not?

1.5 was the last patch for RTW too.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree. You want to bet on CA doing what they haven't done in the past and actually finishing a product. In my opinion, that is a bad bet. However, this is a free country and like Donald Rumsfeld says:

"Freedom's untidy, and free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad things."

[ReluctantSamurai]

Or maybe not?

Definitely not. That was for RTW 1. Its' prodigy will need its' own thread right here in the TW: R2 Forum.

[fallen851]

My point was not that the RTW 1 thread would suffice for RTW II... but that CA didn't listen to past problem/bug fix threads, so why bet they will now?

[ReluctantSamurai]

And my point is not that you don't have the right to bitch about things you don't like, but that such discussions should be kept in their own thread (and out of most other discussions) so that anyone who wishes to can peruse to their hearts content.

[quadalpha]

I think there has been a fundamental dissatisfaction about the TW franchise that goes beyond bugs and minor annoyances. This has been masked in the past by other issues, like the massive change of setting for ETW and the excitement over the return to Japan in S2, but there's been a basic difference of vision about what the TW games could be since probably the Sega takeover. There are those of us who look at STW and MTW and see what deep and subtle simulations they could become with modern computing power, but obviously CA have taken a different path. I think, at some level, we have to accept that the bugs and niggles we complain about are things that CA just aren't interested in and won't prioritise. This is nothing against people like Jack Lusted, but there's only so much one or two individuals can do in the face of monolithic corporate culture.

[BroskiDerpman]

I think there has been a fundamental dissatisfaction about the TW franchise that goes beyond bugs and minor annoyances. This has been masked in the past by other issues, like the massive change of setting for ETW and the excitement over the return to Japan in S2, but there's been a basic difference of vision about what the TW games could be since probably the Sega takeover. There are those of us who look at STW and MTW and see what deep and subtle simulations they could become with modern computing power, but obviously CA have taken a different path. I think, at some level, we have to accept that the bugs and niggles we complain about are things that CA just aren't interested in and won't prioritise. This is nothing against people like Jack Lusted, but there's only so much one or two individuals can do in the face of monolithic corporate culture.

As of now I can only imagine how cool and fun of a game a more modern version of Shogun 1 and Medieval 1 be. It simply fits the style of gameplay a TW game is instead of being a jack of all trades strategy game it is now.

With additions from the newer games and upgrades to the older style gameplay... Oh my... Oh my...

To let you guys know just in case you think this is nostalgia, I only started playing Med 1 a few weeks ago.

[Vuk]

Dude.....that's about all you and several others do here. I, for one, am growing extremely weary of the constant nagging and nit-picking.

Yep....the game, and indeed the series, has many flaws and bugs. No question about it. Some are minor, some quite serious. But I don't need to be reminded all the time about how much eye-candy there is in the game; about path-finding bugs; about unit cohesion; blah-blah-blah~:mecry:

If you don't like the friggin' game, play something else....or offer your services to CA to help them correct the games' deficiencies.

Just please stop making every thread that gets posted into a rant about how crappy CA and their games are.

End of :soapbox:

P.S. If you would like a challenge from the AI; decent unit balance (with some very minor tweaking); epically long battles (some can go on for nearly two hours); and battlefields that actually require you to use tactics...........................play the original Shogun. Or better yet, play its' modded version Samurai Warlords. I guarantee you will be crying about the game for a much different reason:inquisitive:


As one of the 'several others' you are referring to, I feel the need to respond to this. You find my dissatisfaction annoying? I find your blind optimism and willingness to overlook anything extremely annoying and a perfect example of the problems in the TW community. Do you see me ranting about it?
It is your right to blindly ignore everything and praise a flawed system, and it is mine to point out the flaws. Live and let live, eh?

Play something else? Like what? Nothing out there compares to TW games. It is because I love the series so much that I spend so much time complaining about the direction they are going. It is one of my three all time favorite franchises, and I desperately do not want to see it ruined. The more dissatisfaction CA sees on the forums, the more likely they will be to do something about it.

If you disagree with us and are completely happy with where the franchise is going, then freely voice that opinion, but do not criticize us for voicing ours. It reeks of arrogance.




The pursuit of excellence is one of the few things in this world you can't denounce from any angle. And this criticism was written voluntarily and given freely.

We all want TW to be the best ReluctantSamurai, and you don't get there by apologizing for or ignoring the core issues the game has had for a long time.

I never said their games were crappy, in fact I said:

But then I listed the issues that keeps Total War games from getting higher scores with objective review websites, like PC Gamer. 85% is good, and RTW II I'm sure is a good game. But it isn't up to par with Half Life, or Civilization II, and it could be, if CA focused on fixing the issues I listed.

The more we discuss and "complain" about such issues, the higher the likelihood CA will fix them. They've ignored many attempts in the past to fix their games, despite significant community help:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?95825-Bugs-and-Patch-Changes-v1-5&highlight=

And 1.5 was the last patch for RTW.

So in the end, this is our way of telling CA that maybe they should commit more resources to the "boring" stuff, like coding and AI, and less resources to fancy graphics.


Exactly what this man here said.




And my point is not that you don't have the right to bitch about things you don't like, but that such discussions should be kept in their own thread (and out of most other discussions) so that anyone who wishes to can peruse to their hearts content.

Really? Says who? You have never complained about anything in a thread that was not specifically dedicated to complaints? I have a feeling that if I spent 10 minutes looking through your old posts I would find out that is not true. Should we also adopt a rule that you can only praise things in threads set up specifically for encouragement. When there is a thread on a game, it is perfectly legitimate to criticize it and to praise it. I fail to see how you harassing and bullying other posters and telling them that they have no rights to express their opinion helps the discussion in any way.
Like I said earlier: live and let live, eh?

[Barkhorn1x]

I think there has been a fundamental dissatisfaction about the TW franchise that goes beyond bugs and minor annoyances. This has been masked in the past by other issues, like the massive change of setting for ETW and the excitement over the return to Japan in S2, but there's been a basic difference of vision about what the TW games could be since probably the Sega takeover. There are those of us who look at STW and MTW and see what deep and subtle simulations they could become with modern computing power, but obviously CA have taken a different path. I think, at some level, we have to accept that the bugs and niggles we complain about are things that CA just aren't interested in and won't prioritise. This is nothing against people like Jack Lusted, but there's only so much one or two individuals can do in the face of monolithic corporate culture.

I am afraid you are correct as much as I don't want you to be. :sweatdrop:

[Vuk]

As of now I can only imagine how cool and fun of a game a more modern version of Shogun 1 and Medieval 1 be. It simply fits the style of gameplay a TW game is instead of being a jack of all trades strategy game it is now.

With additions from the newer games and upgrades to the older style gameplay... Oh my... Oh my...

To let you guys know just in case you think this is nostalgia, I only started playing Med 1 a few weeks ago.

RTW is my favorite of the series, and it is considered by many to be what started the downward trend toward 'popular' strategy gaming in the TW series.
I am not one of those people though. The same problems I complain about in the newer games were mostly all in MTW and STW. They are core issues that have not changed.
I for one appreciate and welcome many of the advancements that RTW and ETW have brought, but I just wish they would work more on their foundation.

[BroskiDerpman]

The problem is that CA develops it in a weird way. Especially Empire and Napoleon, wish they had a world map fleshed out with emphasis on war in the colonies, using diplomacy a lot as the time frame suggests and many more time frame related things.

Though I would prefer 17th century, I like my Ottomans and Swiss.

Basing a game off of Med1 and Shogun 1 would work if CA attempted to fix the rest of the problems located in it instead of moving on to tile based maps and such and then starting over again but also leaving features behind from pre 3-d map age.

[ReluctantSamurai]

You find my dissatisfaction annoying?

I find the repetitiveness annoying. As I said, I agree with some of the points you raise....I just don't need to be reminded of them in every other thread.


It is your right to blindly ignore everything and praise a flawed system, and it is mine to point out the flaws.

I do nothing of the sort and have plainly stated what I think are flaws in the TW games that I play.


You have never complained about anything in a thread that was not specifically dedicated to complaints? I have a feeling that if I spent 10 minutes looking through your old posts I would find out that is not true.

What you would find is that I say what I have to say and move on. Perhaps an additional post or two to clarify or to elaborate on how I would do something, but I don't make it a crusade.


I fail to see how you harassing and bullying other posters and telling them that they have no rights to express their opinion helps the discussion in any way.

If you feel harassed or bullied....nothing I can do about that. It's not my intention. And I have never said that folks have no right to express their opinions. Now THAT would be arrogance. Just state your take and move on....

Speaking of moving on....can we please move along with this thread?

[ReluctantSamurai]

but also leaving features behind from pre 3-d map age

The 3D map is precisely the source of many of the problems with TW games. The AI was never upgraded to the point of being able to cope with it, and playtesting is never thorough enough to eliminate such things as pathfinding problems (many of which could be fixed by reconfiguring the area that is causing the problems; or the 'edge of the world' syndrome (where a faction army drives a rebel stack to the outside edge of the map and then just stares at it for the rest of the game); and many others.

I, for one, do not have the need for a 3D campaign map (as cool as they might look) if it means a degradation of gameplay (which is exactly the reason I can still enjoy Shogun 1).

[Vuk]

I'm cool with the 3-d map. To me bugs in battles are more troublesome than on the campaign map.

[Lemur]

I think divvying up posters into CA whiners v. CA defenders isn't real helpful.

On the other hand, I do think making grand, sweeping statements about a game none of us have played in release build shows a trollish level of hubris.

[Vuk]

I think divvying up posters into CA whiners v. CA defenders isn't real helpful.

On the other hand, I do think making grand, sweeping statements about a game none of us have played in release build shows a trollish level of hubris.

Do we have to have played it to make some kind of judgment? If that was the case, we would need to buy and play every video game before we determined we didn't like it. I think there is plenty of evidence from the reviews we have read and videos we have seen to make some solid judgments about it. I gave Shogun II the benefit of the doubt and decided I would wait till I played it, and I cheated myself of $35. I am not gonna make that mistake this time when I can see enough to know that they messed up big time on essential elements. Sorry Lemur, but I think I have seen plenty enough to support the statements I have made (many of which have been tentative). When and if I do buy it, it will probably be only for the mods. Hopefully they will do better next time.

[BroskiDerpman]

Well there are reviews, lets plays and such, you can use past experience and footage shown to judge the game in a non trollish manner.

Plus Total War games are pretty similar with just some kewl features added in and some removed, few tweaks and such.

There are people (quite more than I expected) who got to play it and many others will tomorrow.

Surely it's not in pre-alpha or such status anymore and people can judge the game from the tons of videos, images, text and relate to previous TW experiences.

;)

Edit: Got ninja'd

Also why would I want to buy a game just to see how it is, plus with Steam it's hard to get refunds/returns.

[Lemur]

Do we have to have played it to make some kind of judgment?
At the very least, reports from people who have played it with the day 1 patch would be very, very helpful.

I have not heard from any source that the current reviews incorporate the day 1 patch, PC Gamer policies notwithstanding.

[Vuk]

I'm as interested as you to see what we will be able to see tomorrow. I just have been pretty disappointed with what we have seen so far.

[Monk]

Biggest issue thus far seems for the tendency for the AI to go braindead under certain circumstances and graphical/animation glitches. Sounds like something that can be patched up to not be so horrid. I'm a huge fan of Paradox games, so I'm no stranger to rocky releases. Shogun 2 ended up in a good place so I'm not too worried about Rome 2. Though it's rather clear it won't be fully living up to the hype i'm still looking forward to it quite a bit.

I'm more amazed the extent to which most with early access are plain bad at video games. Total War is not exactly rocket surgery and yet every video I've seen of candid gameplay has been pure comedy. From people claiming it's too easy (while playing on easy/normal) to people who can't even work formations. Wot? I'm not saying you have to be a god at the game to review it, but at least make an effort... This new gaming journalism that has such people in it. :no:

So far the RPS review remains the only good piece of information from the media on this game. It highlights real concerns with the game while praising the good (and not looking like a total :daisy: in the process ).

[quadalpha]

The 3D map is precisely the source of many of the problems with TW games. The AI was never upgraded to the point of being able to cope with it, and playtesting is never thorough enough to eliminate such things as pathfinding problems (many of which could be fixed by reconfiguring the area that is causing the problems; or the 'edge of the world' syndrome (where a faction army drives a rebel stack to the outside edge of the map and then just stares at it for the rest of the game); and many others.

I, for one, do not have the need for a 3D campaign map (as cool as they might look) if it means a degradation of gameplay (which is exactly the reason I can still enjoy Shogun 1).

Yes. I find, as well, that the 3d map is a misstep in terms of immersion and Being-there. Remember how at the edge of the STW and MTW map, you see the table the map is set on? There is no way that any pre-modern (or even before the past half century, really) commander at a strategic level would be able to know where his armies were to the precision shown on the 3d map. All these things CA have been trying to do for immersion and character (the gimmicks, facial animations, ever prettier graphics ...) do not make up for the gameyness introduced by the change in perspective. On the one hand, it shows that maybe the designers on RTW were dazzled by the possibilities of a 3d map and simply did not think through the consequences, and now there's no way they can climb back, especially as TW along with Sports Interactive (Football Manager) are the only two consistently profitable franchises Sega has. And on the other hand, I'm not sure if that fact actually bothers anyone at CA any more. In short, we should probably enjoy the new TW games as much as we can, and hope for another franchise/developer to carry on the potential of the early TW games.

[Vuk]

There is no one to carry on that potential unfortunately. I think that CA is our last best hope. Hopefully they will get back on the straight and narrow soon.

[ReluctantSamurai]

I'm more amazed the extent to which most with early access are plain bad at video games.

Yep. The RPS player has been the only one I've seen so far that looked like they've actually played before:inquisitive:

The rest have been a joke as far as playing with anything resembling skill...and that goes for some of the devs play, as well (the dreadful Macedon-Rome battle comes to mind):creep:

[ReluctantSamurai]

removed dbl post

[CaptainCrunch]

... In short, we should probably enjoy the new TW games as much as we can, and hope for another franchise/developer to carry on the potential of the early TW games.

CA just need to release proper modding tools to the community whenever they feel they've milked the DLC machine as much as possible. From that point forward we will see what the game's true potential is.

[Vuk]

CA just need to release proper modding tools to the community whenever they feel they've milked the DLC machine as much as possible. From that point forward we will see what the game's true potential is.

Or just not lock files and crap from the beginning.
And yeah, I second the bit about most of the players so far not being able to play.

[CaptainCrunch]

Or just not lock files and crap from the beginning...

Unfortunately that went out the window the day publishers discovered the potential of DLC. This is the world we now live in :shame:

[Seabourch]

When did this DLC stuff all start anyway? Could someone explain, I don't mind it as long as they don't start charging for the smallest of things.

[BroskiDerpman]

I,ve been reading the impressions, don't know if this is common on release but there are major graphical issues, (unit multiplier gone too) , really bad battle gameplay balance and common sense issues.

Those seem to be the main complaint also with no foreign language speech. (Polish, Italian, German, Spain, etc)

Even the ones who wanted to defend CA before seem to be puzzled now..

I'll pass. Along with my other complaints before..

[CaptainCrunch]

When did this DLC stuff all start anyway? Could someone explain, I don't mind it as long as they don't start charging for the smallest of things.

I'm not certain as to the exact origins, but I think it started becoming really prevalent after the Xbox 360/PS3 were released as this was the generation of consoles that was always connected to the internet. Followed by a huge shift of publishers from the PC market over to the consoles in terms of games support. So let's say, circa 2005. The micro-transaction/DLC philosophy is very console-centric.

The biggest problem with this 'nickel & dime' approach for PC gamers is that publishers often release games with locked content already in it that they sell as 'Day 1 DLC', which should have been part of the complete game to begin with, and the aforementioned reluctance to allow any modding of their games as a consequence cuz it could interfere with their plans to release more DLC.

[BroskiDerpman]

Oh boy the TWC forums is pissed off pretty bad! XD

[Lemur]

Oh boy the TWC forums is pissed off pretty bad! XD
Isn't that pretty much their default setting?

I've always been given to understand that the TWC membership, for all of their virtues, suffer from BRF (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v98CPXNiSk).

[HopAlongBunny]

Some criticism seems to come down to the simulation/game divide.
Preferences along those lines have always plagued these games; accurate simulation breaks the game aspect for some people and gaminess breaks simulation for others.
The biggest problems for the TW franchise is bugs that destroy enjoyment along both axis

[Hooahguy]

So Ive been playing a bit more and Im getting none of the glitches that others are claiming. Graphics are fine, no lag either. Havent really tried the AI in a real battle, but otherwise, Im not getting the game-destroying bugs that others claim are occurring.

[quadalpha]

Another good article from RPS: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/09/03/the-rps-verdict-total-war-rome-ii/

[fallen851]

Sorry, but I find any attempt to declare Rome II a failure and/or masterpiece kinda premature.

However, if anyone wants to pat themselves on the back ... eh ... well-done? You successfully passed judgment on a game that isn't even in release patch. Hail, bravo, excelsior, and strike up the band.



Nothing pleases me as much as making a prediction that seems blatantly obvious to me, having someone doubt me, then getting to tell them I am right.

I was right. The reviews were right (which passed judgement themselves...). The game is full of bugs... though it is a good game.

You thought there was a chance that CA's vast history of releasing games in a Beta state might end today, and that somehow there was a possibility that some release day patch would change things. It didn't. I literally cannot wait to see what you have to say prior to the release of CA's next game. Most people don't learn.

I think you owe all the people that judged the game based on the reviews an apology. It was not premature. When you used the terms CA whiners vs CA defenders (rather than the opposite, CA critics vs CA apologists, or a middle ground CA critics vs CA defenders) you showed your colors.

[Lemur]

Nothing pleases me as much as making a prediction that seems blatantly obvious to me, having someone doubt me, then getting to tell them I am right.
I am glad you find self-pleasuring both fulfilling and easy.

As for apologies, I think you're swooning with melodrama. Enjoy.

[fallen851]

I'll be looking for your comments next release. I look forward to it.

To be right once, that is great. To be right twice...

Here is another review:

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/09/total-war-rome-ii-review-a-total-mess/

I hope it is wrong though. Let the bugs get fixed and get some mods out to fix the lightning fast battles and I think this could work.

[Lemur]

I look forward to it.
In other words:

https://i.imgur.com/kEx1yi6.jpg

[Hooahguy]

I'll be looking for your comments next release. I look forward to it.

To be right once, that is great. To be right twice...

Here is another review:

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/09/total-war-rome-ii-review-a-total-mess/

I hope it is wrong though. Let the bugs get fixed and get some mods out to fix the lightning fast battles and I think this could work.
From what I can tell it seems like his main complains besides the bad AI (which is really a problem with most TW games, I expect it to be worked on in the coming months) is that its too complex. Which is a silly complaint for me, but for someone looking for a simple game, then its a valid concern.

[CaptainCrunch]

Although I haven't been very impressed with the game so far, I think that 'review' from ars was really weak, highly subjective and poorly executed.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I think divvying up posters into CA whiners v. CA defenders isn't real helpful.

On the other hand, I do think making grand, sweeping statements about a game none of us have played in release build shows a trollish level of hubris.

It is the same argument every release. I just let it go. I keep pre-ordering the games, getting less and less but still immense satisfaction from them. The proof is in the pudding months from now when people are either still playing it or moving on. Do I trust creative assembly? No. Do I think that they have talent? Absolutely. Do I think that they give 2 craps about customer satisfaction? Maybe 2, but 3 craps are too rich for their blood.

[CaptainCrunch]

... I'll buy this one in a year and a half when its on some kind of steam sale for less than ten bucks.

For anyone with more than a passing interest in historical warfare from this period, or a fan of a more realistic experience to their wargaming, I recommend the same thing after playing it all day. By then hopefully they'll have sorted out the collision detection, ironed out some of the more troublesome bugs, improved the AI (even a little would be nice), optimized it some more, and maybe there'll even be some well-made mods for it (*COUGH!* EB3 ~D). <- (OK, that would take a bit longer :dizzy2:)

If they just sort out some of these issues so it's not so glitchy and eventually open it up wide for modding the potential for an incredible game is there I think.

[The Blind King of Bohemia]

Biggest issue thus far seems for the tendency for the AI to go braindead under certain circumstances and graphical/animation glitches. Sounds like something that can be patched up to not be so horrid. I'm a huge fan of Paradox games, so I'm no stranger to rocky releases. Shogun 2 ended up in a good place so I'm not too worried about Rome 2. Though it's rather clear it won't be fully living up to the hype i'm still looking forward to it quite a bit.

I'm more amazed the extent to which most with early access are plain bad at video games. Total War is not exactly rocket surgery and yet every video I've seen of candid gameplay has been pure comedy. From people claiming it's too easy (while playing on easy/normal) to people who can't even work formations. Wot? I'm not saying you have to be a god at the game to review it, but at least make an effort... This new gaming journalism that has such people in it. :no:

So far the RPS review remains the only good piece of information from the media on this game. It highlights real concerns with the game while praising the good (and not looking like a total :daisy: in the process ).

Agree about the AI suicide Monk. I was playing as Macedon and got defeated twice near the Odrysian capital. They then inexplicably marched north, I took their capital with a combined naval/land assault and lost a fair few men doing it and I was literally at the mercy of them. They instead marched south towards my province directly above Pella and just committed mass suicide against my walls! A shame as they held their own in some land/naval battles.

[Barkhorn1x]

"The Guardian" piles on:


Rome II feels like an unfinished game. It is a cruel fact that if you pick this up in a Steam sale in six months' time you'll get a much better experience, and the people who were foolish enough to put their faith and money upfront get the worst of it.

The developers behind Total War: Rome II clearly have enormous talent; but this game as a whole is a failure of project management. So many elements are polished to a shine and yet at no point do they even threaten to come together. And so Rome II comes to depend purely on its battles and the fumes of nostalgia from a game more than a decade old – an inspiration that, in all honesty, it is not fit to be compared to.


http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/sep/06/total-war-rome-ii-review

It's Empire all over again. Oh and when you get right down to it many in the CA crew (I will refrain from naming names) are pretty much liars and PR hacks.

But shame on me because I have been fooled - what? - about 4 times now into pre-ordering.

See you all at the discount bin for the next TW game.

[BroskiDerpman]

I need to get the game, why?

I want to try out this before it's too late. XD

https://youtube.com/watch?v=tjzd5ilKzMM

[Barkhorn1x]

I need to get the game, why?

I want to try out this before it's too late. XD

https://youtube.com/watch?v=tjzd5ilKzMM

OMG - those two were hilarious.

[Hooahguy]

So I played some more and I truly think that with a bit of polishing this will be an amazing game.

Radious from TWC released a bunch of mods that deals with battle morale and the campaign. Also got a 4 turn per year mod that makes me actually invested in my characters.

The battle AI isnt great, but with the morale mod it makes open battles twice as long as they used to be (small battles going from 5 minutes before the mod to 10 minutes, havent done a very large one yet) and they seem to make half-competent decisions, like heading for the high ground in battles and occupying choke points in those small-scale sieges with no walls. Yeah, they lost in the end but in one battle the AI with a reinforcing army made a run for a hill which dominated the landscape. They then beat off my first wave against them and only fell when I flanked their formation. Granted they had better units than I did, but still, I was sort of impressed.

As for the campaign AI, the jury is still out.

[CaptainCrunch]

So I played some more and I truly think that with a bit of polishing this will be an amazing game...

Agreed. IMO, the potential of this game is through the roof... but they definitely have some work to do! And now that the patch cleared up my shadow troubles, I'm really liking the look of it.

I gotta say, that battle you described with the AI would make my day if it happened to me! I'm definitely gonna check out that morale mod ASAP. All the AI has shown me so far is that they like to fall on my spear tips in waves, or show their backs to my cavalry, until they beat a hasty retreat like whipped curs. Just once I'd love to see the AI attack in FORMATION as a unified force without breaking ranks in a tunnel-visioned mad dash to get themselves killed chasing off skirmishers or something while getting poked and trampled to death.

I find the campaign AI to still be highly suspect as well, but I think a lot of it comes from the game's estimation of force. I usually fight seriously outnumbered, but there have been times when the numbers and quality have been evenly matched and yet the pre-battle interface shows the balance of power to be heavily in the AI's favor, when it clearly isn't. The fact that the AI is tactically inept only exacerbates this problem. I think if they address how the AI estimates its force on force comparisons and compensates for the fact that the average human player will invariably outsmart it, we might see some better decision making during the campaign that wont seem so suicidal.

I do enjoy the diplomacy though. Yeah, it's not very realistic at times, but at least now you know what needs to be done before you try to negotiate that deal you've been trying to make. There are times when it seems like the AI is being quite devious in its diplomacy... but that could just be me imagining shit.

[Hooahguy]

Its the Radious Battle mod. Though beware that the TWC, where its hosted on, is being incredibly slow right now.

And diplomacy is annoying me. All I wanted was trade agreements and everyone rejects me, even if they are favorable towards me.

[CaptainCrunch]

Its the Radious Battle mod. Though beware that the TWC, where its hosted on, is being incredibly slow right now.

And diplomacy is annoying me. All I wanted was trade agreements and everyone rejects me, even if they are favorable towards me.

I thought that way as well. It was very annoying trying to negotiate trade agreements with neutral factions, or ones that saw me favorably in the early game, especially since I had a trade agreement with Syracuse at the time and they were actually unfriendly towards me. Then I started thinking about it and it seemed that some of it at least was based off of whether or not that faction was a heavy exporter or importer in comparison to you. Maybe CA modeled in a faction's consideration towards their economy and whether or not a trade agreement with you may flood their market with goods that'll compete with theirs, so they want some financial compensation to offset it?

I could be imagining it of course, and they probably didn't put that much thought into it (if the rest of the game is any indication :laugh4:), but backing up my offers with some gold started working wonders with factions that weren't big exporters themselves. I would estimate how quickly the investment would pay off from the projected trade earnings, offset by my planned military or urban expansions, and sweeten the deal accordingly.

Thanks for the mod tip!

[easytarget]

Here's a review from someone who's not been bought and paid for (god bless Tom Chick, and for that matter Yhatzee too): http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2013/09/06/creative-assembly-fiddles-rome-ii-loads/

Last line of the review: Shogun 2 was the Civilization IV of the Total War series. Rome II is the Civilization V.

[Hooahguy]

Last line of the review: Shogun 2 was the Civilization IV of the Total War series. Rome II is the Civilization V.

I dont know if I would agree with that statement. Shogun 2 was also rough on release, if you remember. Plus at least for me its a really bland period and location. Plus a lack of diversity in units. I bought S2TW after all the patches so I cant really comment on the AI, but Im going to wager that it wasnt great either, from what Ive seen. Just my 2 cents. But its really up to personal opinion. I did not like Civ IV but I loved Civ V, and I think its too early to determine if Rome 2 will become a great game or not.

[easytarget]

I dont know if I would agree with that statement. Shogun 2 was also rough on release, if you remember. Plus at least for me its a really bland period and location. Plus a lack of diversity in units. I bought S2TW after all the patches so I cant really comment on the AI, but Im going to wager that it wasnt great either, from what Ive seen. Just my 2 cents. But its really up to personal opinion. I did not like Civ IV but I loved Civ V, and I think its too early to determine if Rome 2 will become a great game or not.

Not even close, I played it the day it released, Shogun 2 was in no such state. As for the unit diversity noise, which is what it is, it misses the rather obvious point of all TW games, they are all rock, paper, scissors with different wrappers on the units.

[Hooahguy]

Not even close, I played it the day it released, Shogun 2 was in no such state. As for the unit diversity noise, which is what it is, it misses the rather obvious point of all TW games, they are all rock, paper, scissors with different wrappers on the units.

While I did hear that it was more solid gameplay-wise upon release I heard that it had a lot of graphical glitches. But again, I didnt play it upon release so Im not truly qualified to comment.

Again, Im not excusing CA's shoddy performance, I just dont think writing off this game just yet is wise, especially since with just 6 small mods the game has been made 100 times more fun for me.

[ReluctantSamurai]

But comments like these make me wonder just how much can mods do:shrug:


Creative Assembly obviously had some cool design ideas about limited resources with the agents, provinces, and armies, but it’s all lost in an empty game that scrambles to assure you that nothing’s of consequence. Don’t worry, those stats don’t matter. They all give similar bonuses and your general will be dead soon anyway. Don’t worry, that defeat doesn’t matter. You can resurrect the army with all its upgrades intact back home. Don’t worry, the diplomatic AI doesn’t matter. You have no real control over its moods, so it’s just there to be conquered.


Things like Gravitas, Influence, and Ambition, which should be at the core of the design, make zero sense in practice. I started out with 93% influence in Macedon. Now I have 43%, which worried me for a while, but I couldn’t really do anything to change it, no matter how many promotions, adoptions, or bribes I performed, so I ignored it for the past fifty turns and am better for it. It’s a game where nothing connects and you don’t know why because it won’t tell you.


Shogun 2 had your own individual general and units gain experience as you fought your way across an abstracted map of Japan. By the time you’d put ten hours into the Avatar Conquest mode, you had a general that specialized in one type of combat, but that was able to be tweaked in a few different ways to surprise whomever you fought, with different units having been given different specialties by you. It was a bit overwhelming at times, but incredibly fun and ambitious.

Rome II is just the one-off point-buy system you’re probably used to already, no different than the singleplayer custom battle mode, but with a human instead of an AI. My assumption is that it was just too difficult to add the faction decision layer to the existing Avatar Conquest mode, especially with the short cycle they seem to have been on, but it still represents a huge step back for the series.

If true, not good...not good at all.............

[BroskiDerpman]

Graphics issues were just no dx11 and AA yet on release. (You could enable it through Nvidia though)

Units actually felt different compared to the numerous clones in many other TWs (Including Rome mods)

If buying Rome 2 wait a little for a high chance of Amazon selling the game as low as 7.49-2.49 USD with all dlc discounted or wait for Gold Edition.

Waiting a little will usually pay off for all TW games in the end unless you really want to play the really broken MP right now. (It's essentially Napoleon with the flaws of Napoleon in still)

@RS

Exactly. I really wonder, I know for sure there won't be a mod like EB2 or gets close enough to compare.

[Myth]

Reading these forums the past few days (oh, the R2TW craze and me at the beach with only my phone to see what's going on) I'm basically feeling more sorry that I didn't play Shougn and Medeival and that my current PC probably can't run them.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Myth.....if you partition your HD and then install WinXP on the partition, you can get either of the originals to run. I have a pretty utd rig which I built myself, and both games run very well with a few minor caveats

a. more than likely you will have to tweak your vidcard setting way down and turn off things like AA
b. if you have the Sold Out Software version of Shogun, you cannot exit the game in a normal manner but have to use Alt-Tab and then the Task Manager

Minor inconveniences:sneaky:

[Myth]

To partitition, one must first format. And to format, one first must back up their data. And that is work, and this one shall do no such thing until forced by a virus. :laugh4:

[ReluctantSamurai]

With a partition manager (is Partition Magic still around?) you don't have to format the entire disc. If you have enough free space, you can use that to create a new partition. Perhaps one of the wireheads around here can chime in?

[quadalpha]

The regular old partition thing in Windows can create a partition in spare space without formatting the whole drive now. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/gg309170.aspx

[ReluctantSamurai]

:bow:

So there ya go Myth.....no excuse now:inquisitive:

:laugh4:

[Hooahguy]

The Angry Joe Review.

He really hits on a lot of the problems of Rome 2. Even though I havent seen an AI as stupid as he has seen, a lot of the problems that he points out needs to be addressed.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_QK-lcW8a8

[ShadesPanther]

The Angry Joe Review.

He really hits on a lot of the problems of Rome 2. Even though I havent seen an AI as stupid as he has seen, a lot of the problems that he points out needs to be addressed.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_QK-lcW8a8

All his points are valid to me.
You do have to question how other reviewers didn't notice all the bugs (or were paid not to care). It shows why you can't trust reviewers for big magazines/websites now.

He also made the AI guy look like a complete idiot.

I feel the same as him about the game. I love it but very disappointed about it.

[Hooahguy]

He also hit on a point which I did not think of before: if Rome 2 had such a big budget, what was it all spent on? Clearly it was advertising.

My main theory here is that Sega demanded an early September release to combat the GTA V release, when in reality, it should have been at around Christmas.

Even better, I do kinda wonder why CA and Sega just dont release it as a public beta and have us the fan base do their bug testing for them. For free basically. It makes so much sense!

Dont get me wrong though, I still really enjoy the game. My 13 or so hours Ive already spent I think were very well spent. Yeah, the campaign AI is I think worse than ETW and I have only had one open field battle so far, but Im still enjoying the game and Im not going to lose hope that through patching over the next few months and mods this can be the jewel this was promised to be.

[AntiDamascus]

Even better, I do kinda wonder why CA and Sega just dont release it as a public beta and have us the fan base do their bug testing for them. For free basically. It makes so much sense!



Because "pirated copies" I assume.

[Hooahguy]

Because "pirated copies" I assume.

Yeah, I dont buy that excuse. Bohemia Interactive released Arma III as an alpha like what? 5-6 months ago? Allowed for the community to look for bugs and glitches, and now, a few days from release, its very, very good, and I cant wait to see more when its all done.

[AntiDamascus]

Yeah, I dont buy that excuse. Bohemia Interactive released Arma III as an alpha like what? 5-6 months ago? Allowed for the community to look for bugs and glitches, and now, a few days from release, its very, very good, and I cant wait to see more when its all done.

Oh I agree that open betas can be totally useful in helping to catch bugs and "hey, where did you put...."

But there are really only 2 reasons why they wouldn't do that. Crippling fear of theft and piracy or the weird "knowledge" that they had everything right and therefore didn't need a beta. But no one could really play this game and think...... wait now I'm not so sure.

[Myth]

Not to burst your bubble or anything but pirated copies of R2TW came out on launch day. And pirating the game is actually very easy from what I read, it just requires an installation.

[AntiDamascus]

Not to burst your bubble or anything but pirated copies of R2TW came out on launch day. And pirating the game is actually very easy from what I read, it just requires an installation.

I don't have a bubble to burst, I don't care why or if people pirate. That was just a reason for "why not beta?!"

[Myth]

I suspect it has to do with the publisher, rather than the developers.

[AntiDamascus]

I suspect it has to do with the publisher, rather than the developers.

Totally. I don't think anyone at CA would really have an issue with a beta. That's most likely some suits in an office going "Release the game... for free? before release date? I think not"

[The Stranger]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_QK-lcW8a8#t=577

not a normal review, but honest atleast

[Hooahguy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_QK-lcW8a8#t=577

not a normal review, but honest atleast

Already been posted, page 3, but eh, who cares, right?

[Barkhorn1x]

Angry Joe is hilarious!!!!!!!!! :yes:

[Risasi]

...My main theory here is that Sega demanded an early September release to combat the GTA V release, when in reality, it should have been at around Christmas...


See that right there. If it's true, is the most asinine, stupid logic to use. And tells you the bean counters are in control. If they are afraid of competition from the GTA series robbing release sales, it just shows how short-sighted they really are. They aren't even the same type of game! Even if they competed for initial release purchases, it doesn't matter. If kiddies who have no money hear it's a good game, they will buy it a couple months from release date.
Rome 2 has received so much bad publicity now many people won't be buying this until a year down the road...and probably wait for it to hit the $30 mark. This makes Sega sound like the movie industry.

Me personally. I hate Steam. I understand why they use it. I just think it's *draconian. So yes, I hate Steam with a passion. But not militantly so. I did buy two copies of Shogun 2, but not FotS yet. I am also more of a fan of mods. I won't be buying Rome 2 for what it is, but potentially for what it might be. If they get broken stuff patched up the wazoo, lose the stupid capture flags and fix the battle AI, and then someone gets an Europa Barbarorum or Roma Surrectum type mod going, I'll be all over it for that SP aspect. Right now it seems MP is broken. Either way I'll give it a look again in a year and a half. Time will tell...


----
*Steam: My biggest gripe is the umbilical cord they want to constantly maintain. If they adjusted two things I'd be perfectly content with it;
- One-time authentication, generate me a key and I'm done. Keeping a disc in the drive is bad enough, but keeping an internet connection is equally bad. Worst case, even just authentication when installing and patching would be more reasonable. Most of my game playing is single player, and some random LAN parties w/ friends. Very little online play. Yes, I know you can put Steam in offline mode, but I've had problems with it before.

- I usually end up buying multiple copies of the same game. Why? LAN gaming. I usually keep a couple machines, sometimes a friend will drop by and we'll have an spontaneous game going. Or I'll loan out to friends, etc. for LAN patries. My frustration here is Steam makes me maintain an account for each copy. Even if I could set up multiple accounts and tie it to one email address, that would be fantastic. Instead I've got to keep several email accounts (or aliases), keep track of the passwords, who is using what, etc. Very obnoxious.

[The Stranger]

Already been posted, page 3, but eh, who cares, right?

indeed. who cares. not sega :O

[komnenos]

What do you expect for next DLC of this game? I hope they release for example Iberian culture pack for it.

[fallen851]

All his points are valid to me.
You do have to question how other reviewers didn't notice all the bugs (or were paid not to care). It shows why you can't trust reviewers for big magazines/websites now.

He also made the AI guy look like a complete idiot.

I feel the same as him about the game. I love it but very disappointed about it.

The real question isn't why other reviewers didn't notice these issues.

The real question is why CA didn't test it enough and released it with these issues.

I died laughing several times in Angry Joe's review. Especially at 11:15 mark with the sideways ship...

[Hooahguy]

The real question is why CA didn't test it enough and released it with these issues.


As I said before, I think it was Sega who pushed for an early September release, and CA had to somehow make that deadline, and in the process, a lot of things became collateral damage. Like optimization, AI, etc.

[ReluctantSamurai]

The real question is why CA didn't test it enough and released it with these issues.

Yes, that's certainly a big why....but I'm afraid only Mike Simpson or some other higher up has the answer:creep:

OTOH, the posting by those who are actually playing the game, is that with enough patches, R2 could be a decent game.

I would save the CA-bashing for the next release, seeing as how R2 has been out for over a week now, and such questions as why this and why that are kinda moot, no?:shrug:

[Lemur]

CA-bashing
You know, since the release I don't think there's been much of that around here. Just a deep and abiding ... sadness.

https://i.imgur.com/tlSd6zX.gif

[ReluctantSamurai]

Yes, bashing is probably a bit over-the-top....but my point is still the same. It's out now, so why is rather moot. Better to ask where to from here, IMHO.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Here's the first intelligent, constructive measure I've seen for dealing with the "flag" issue:

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?620340-How-to-fix-quot-Victory-Points-quot

I still wouldn't be entirely happy with this, but it takes matters out of the game-breaker realm into one I could learn to live with....

[BroskiDerpman]

The problem is that CA added it to the wrong game type. They put it in SP but MP has none and is a corner camp fest.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Huh?~:confused:

Did you read that dude's post? and comment to what he posted?

[BroskiDerpman]

I read as much as I can.

Just giving some feedback on Mp, I think nobody here cares about a decent TW MP. I do not jot down on how CA screwed up on implementing CPs, I'm talking about: Why doesn't MP have it when it needs it more to counter corner camping.

The ideas are good, makes it bearable to me thoughI hate CPs in SP with a passion.

Edit: I wonder if you read my post at all either...

[ReluctantSamurai]

I wonder if you read my post at all either

I did. So what did you think of his ideas of making the flags count for morale penalties instead of insta-win? or as a siege engine workshop area when attempting to break a siege? or any other of his ideas?

[BroskiDerpman]

Good stuff. Though the timer needs to increase instead of being 50 seconds.

[jaspritsingh]

I feel the screwup is largely due to SEGA. These people had super consoles and yet they ran their business to the ground. Now they are after TW. CA maybe a developer but its very hard to argue with the suit who pays the bills and salaries. Everyone needs their salary right ?

Instead of flaming CA, the feedback must be directed at SEGA (though it wont do any good there either)

[Hooahguy]

Instead of flaming CA, the feedback must be directed at SEGA (though it wont do any good there either)

Right there- we need to give them feedback, not grief. Anything harsh has already been said. Right now we need to help them patch the game to what it should have been by giving them helpful feedback on what works and what doesnt so we get our moneys worth, instead of just ranting how they are the worst people ever for pushing out an unfinished product.

[Barkhorn1x]

Right there- we need to give them feedback, not grief. Anything harsh has already been said. Right now we need to help them patch the game to what it should have been by giving them helpful feedback on what works and what doesnt so we get our moneys worth, instead of just ranting how they are the worst people ever for pushing out an unfinished product.

Agree whole heartedly...



...and shamelessly post whoring to get to 1,000! :yes:

[BroskiDerpman]

Hmm now we just need to collect all the criticisms from many rants other people and I made. Anybody care to make a document on it and send it to CA? :whip: Romans! Use the whip!

(Rome 2 reference)