IGN Empire: Total War Review (9.5) [Archive]

Dogfish

02-28-2009, 03:26

I saw this over on the official forums, and didn't see it here yet.. the review is really good, 4 pages, too.

http://pc.ign.com/articles/957/957883p2.html

Final quote from Steve Butts:

"I've never given a score this high before, but that's only because I've never played a game as thoroughly enjoyable as Empire Total War."

:beam:

5 DAYS!

Dogfish

02-28-2009, 03:30

Potential double-fail on my part!

a) I probably should've posted in the "Latest ETW Reviews" sticky thread
b) I linked to the second page of the review (http://pc.ign.com/articles/957/957883p1.html)

:oops:

Monk

02-28-2009, 03:31

9.5 from IGN? That is a surprise. :inquisitive:

Here's a direct link (http://pc.ign.com/dor/objects/958390/empire-total-war/videos/emprie_vdr_022709.html) to the video review. Lots of good footage.

pyradyn

02-28-2009, 03:51

Prussia owning Rome is great it makes me giggle

Skott

02-28-2009, 03:59

I dont pay attention to official IGN reviews. I dont consider them a honest unbiased source. But thats just my opinion. :no:

Sol Invictus

02-28-2009, 05:22

Steve Butts is usually dependable. It couldn't be a much better review.

Belgolas

02-28-2009, 05:42

The second highest strategy game they jave rated. Nice!

Eusebius86

02-28-2009, 05:47

What's the highest strategy game they've ever rated? Because ETW is going to be AMAZING!!!

Monk

02-28-2009, 06:18

Steve Butts is usually dependable. It couldn't be a much better review.

I agree. IGN gets a hugely bad rap, most of it deservedly so, but they have a few reviewers who are pretty good. As someone pointed out they normally don't tend to score strategy games this high. Which lead to my earlier post and initial surprise when I saw the score.

Even if you don't like IGN i really recommend checking out the Video Review and the written, there's some new screens and great footage to be had.

Also, cheers for the find Dogfish!

Belgolas

02-28-2009, 06:41

What's the highest strategy game they've ever rated? Because ETW is going to be AMAZING!!!

Black and white. That game back then didn't deserve the rating it got. Anyways IGN PC is a lot tougher on rating games so if it got this high of a rating then it has to be good. There are no PC games rated 10/10 but there are several dozen console games rated 10/10(most don't deserve that high of a score. Like GTAIV is not a perfect game. Maybe someone is paying them :no:) This is the 7th highest rated PC game at IGN of all time.

Apparently it has as high of a rating as Star Craft.

http://pc.ign.com/index/reviews.html?constraint.floor.article.overall_rating=9&constraint.return_all=is_true&sort.attribute=article.overall_rating&sort.order=desc

pevergreen

02-28-2009, 06:59

Even then, there are some short term goals for the English. If they can strike out against the French in Canada and take out the Cherokee in the south, the entire colonial protectorate, from the Carolinas up through Maine, will merge with the British empire.

Oh dear lord. This is incredible.

A Very Super Market

02-28-2009, 07:05

Where does it say that?

pevergreen

02-28-2009, 07:06

First page. Think of the mods now!

Monk

02-28-2009, 07:32

Oh dear lord. This is incredible.

This might explain why the colonials have appeared as if they are directly controlled by the British in some screen shots. Clearly the AI had achieved that condition and merged the colonies with its empire. :2thumbsup:

Gregoshi

02-28-2009, 08:14

It is going to be a long painful wait until I can get a PC with enough muscle to play this game. :wall:

DEY123

02-28-2009, 08:29

I clicked on one of th epictures in the review and I saw units with 200 men in them...

http://media.pc.ign.com/media/958/958390/img_6504212.html

I'm sure that will make a bunch of people with powerhouse machines happy.

Marten

02-28-2009, 08:54

Prussia owning Rome is great it makes me giggle

Me 2! Obviously there are money cheats ... he took over half of Europe in relatively short time.

Maybe that's it, why the AI didn't like him ... :laugh4: Anyway, good find and very good review.

A Very Super Market

02-28-2009, 08:58

You don't need a powerhouse to have huge unit sizes on somewhat low settings

Polemists

02-28-2009, 09:15

Well mostly it comes down to a graphics card, and speed combo but unless you are supporting 512 and Duo or upwards you are going to be playing this on Low-Med.

Let me say I don't not think IGN is the be all end all of reviewers but regardless of how you feel about the scores they do post more information in reviews then most other sites. You get 4 pages here of review where other sites give you 3 paragraphs.

Now, they mention some things I don't care for. For one thing I find the esponiage slider in CivIV possibly the most boring mechanic ever invented. So I'd rather stick with spy agents but to each thier own.

IGN is probably the best review from a major site you are going to find. Gamespot and Gamespy generally match IGN in review style.

Most people will inevitably only care about how they player and enjoy it, or how a fellow Orgah who they trust plays and enjoys it.

It looks like a great game...march cannot come soon enough.

Sir Beane

02-28-2009, 13:17

Oh boy oh boy oh boy! This is great news. I tend to read reviwes for the words rather than for the finishing number, but 9.5 is suitably impressive. :2thumbsup:

Plus that reviews has loads of juicy info. Factions changing alliance based on completing historic goals? Awesome!

Polemists

02-28-2009, 14:22

I honestly like the fact that Allies change opinon based on how powerful you are.

It would make alot more sense to me to see other nations get hostile as you start to rule the world. Rather then just arbitarily attacking you.

We may not get coalitions as a faction, but it seems likely that if you become a world power the other nations may become a coalition against you.

Unlike mtw2 where no matter what you did by turn 5 the nations of the world formed a coalition against you

MTW2:
"DID HE JUST BUILD A STABLE?"
"UNITE THE NATIONS FOR A ATTACK"

:laugh4:

A Very Super Market

02-28-2009, 17:17

Gah! Memories of Milan....

Coalitions happened so many times in the 18th century, that I'm hoping its actually an integral part of gameplay. There should sometimes be a faction so powerful that you just can't defeat it, and have to enlist help from your neighbours.

Then backstab them.

Lusitani

02-28-2009, 17:39

Hmmm multiple days to finnish a game in the grand campaign??? I want weeks...or even months!! :laugh4:

V.

CBR

02-28-2009, 19:12

Hm from the video it seems star forts are just a standard walled structure with a different shape than earlier TW titles. So nothing special about sieges except a simple bombardment to break down part of the wall.

A shame really as this era had the most interesting siege warfare and CA could have made something good if they wanted.

CBR

Explodingcannonballfromhell

02-28-2009, 19:43

Its a good preview but he is not saying much in terms of performance besides that hes got it running on a quad core and an 8800 GTX.

hoom

02-28-2009, 23:44

For one thing, it seems that your own success inspires other nations to hate you, and I've found that it's harder to make friends when I'm doing well than it is when I've got my back against the wall.
Secondly, the AI never really comes back with a counterproposal when they reject an offer, so players aren't ever really going to be sure what they need to do to sweeten the pot. hmm, this was something I thought was going to be much improved, not good :no:

It should at least give some sort of counter-offer or hint as to why your offer is rejected:
-My Allies gave me a bunch of stuff (extent of details affected by presence of Rakes?) to be at war with you, so you need to offer me a better deal.

-I hate you because you took this province from me (give it back & we might be able to at least have a truce)

-You're at war with my more powerful Ally & we think that combined we'll beat you, so I won't make peace. (make peace with the more powerful country & the smaller one will be more likely to make peace)

-You're too big & powerful, give me some tech & a bunch of money then we can talk (details of desired techs/quantity of money needed affected by presence of Rakes?)

-My nation could never be at peace with a country that allows slavery or which is allied to one that does (break alliance with country x and I'd be willing to do a deal)

Stuff like that is what I've been expecting/hoping for.

ArtillerySmoke

02-28-2009, 23:49

Best Strategy Game of All Time coming to us Wednesday.

Alexander the Pretty Good

03-01-2009, 01:07

Monk

03-01-2009, 01:17

See, with ratings inflation saying something is "better than Starcraft" doesn't really mean anything.

As always, Total War veterans are the best (if most ornery) reviewers we have. The thin red line of pre-orderers must hold for long enough to give the grumblers a better look at things!

Looks like i'll be one of those who gives you more cautious gents a look before you decide. I just pre-ordered the normal version of ETW on Steam. :2thumbsup:

ArtillerySmoke

03-01-2009, 02:26

Looks like i'll be one of those who gives you more cautious gents a look before you decide. I just pre-ordered the normal version of ETW on Steam. :2thumbsup:

Collector's Edition = Picking it up on Wednesday.

LOL'ing at Failhammer 2 right now.

And LOL'ing at people who think the AI will shoot itself in the back. This is the game of the year.

What else would you vote for...Lich King? LOLZ

Meneldil

03-01-2009, 06:14

Polemists

03-01-2009, 07:23

Yea if you hate RTW and MTW2 chances are you'll not love Empire TW.

I mean it is the TW series. Only so much changes.

For rest of us, who enjoyed RTW and MTW2, i'm sure it will be fun.:2thumbsup:

Alexander the Pretty Good

03-01-2009, 07:34

I don't know. The campaign was what really killed Rome and M2 for me (killed is a little strong, I played it a lot when it came out, but less than M1). It sounds like CA has improved the campaign map in a lot of ways, while I like the setting better for the land battles. Throw in what may be even more mod support, and I'm really hopeful.

That's why I'm counting on people like Monk to be ruthless in pointing out ETW's flaws. To keep me from buying ETW until the 2nd patch and/or the first significant mods.

Gregoshi

03-01-2009, 07:46

Megas Methuselah

03-01-2009, 08:30

I'm just gonna buy it. IGN's review or your pathetic opinions will hold no sway on my noble resolve to get my royal hands on the game in all its glory. :snobby:

Polemists

03-01-2009, 08:59

Needless to say, at some point I will be taking Megas down a peg or two in a multiplayer campaign :laugh4:

That said, there were alot of us that enjoyed RTW and MTW2 and still play them.

While empire does alot new, government is new, ai is new, new units, new land battles, new trade, and new city set up. Alot has also remained the same. Such as the exact same diplomacy options as before. Routing in battle as before. Movement on landmap as before. (Though now you can recruit in the field.)

I think it will be different, but to say Empire will be 100% different compared to MTW2 would be silly. It's still the same series, the same ideas, the same turn based gameplay. It's just lots of new features. :2thumbsup:

Sir Beane

03-01-2009, 11:21

I'm with Alexander. While I'm excited and pleased with the great IGN review, the reviews here from fellow Orgahs will hold more sway with me. Plus with an upgrade of my gaming rig months away at the very least, there will be some time after the initial excitement/disappointment to shake out a more realistic appraisal of the game. I am hoping for a fun, challenging and immersive game and I hope CA has found the magic again. Time will tell.

If you wait to get the game a few month after it comes out you also have the benefit of any patches that have been released, as well as whatever fantastic mods will be out by then.

I'm far too impatient to wait however, and I'll get the game no matter what people say about it. I like to form my own opinion, and I have unusual tastes :laugh4:.

Dogfish

03-01-2009, 15:50

I'm really looking for to dominating the oceans with the new naval battles. Such a big new feature. Oh, the times I've been playing all the other TW games wishing I didn't have to auto-resolve when on the blue portions of the map.

That also makes me full of anticipation with regards to the modding possibilities too. Hopefully CA kept the architecture fairly open to allow for such things. I would love to be playing a Rome conversion based on this new engine, ramming ships, being able to raid the countryside, research technology...

Alexander XXI

03-01-2009, 16:45

Monk

03-01-2009, 18:46

A promising sign that their are not any glaring problems like there were in the original release of MTWII. Does anyone know if the game (outside the US) will be delivered on the release date? Or, due to the Steam rules about activation, mean that the game will not arrive at the shops and warehouses until the wednesday? So therefore may not be posted until wednesday at the earliest?

I dunno, but Amazon.com is promising that it will ship the game on the fourth. It's possible then that they already have it in stock and are just waiting to be able to send it out.

PanzerJaeger

03-01-2009, 19:08

Just like RTW and M2TW were going to be the best games of the world, yay.

Seriously, I'm as much waiting ETW as most of you guys are, but having been sincerely disappointed by both RTW and M2TW, I can't help but think ETW will be the same thing: a potentially great game that will ultimately fail at entertaining me.

My fears exactly. RTW and M2TW were two of the biggest disappointments I've experienced in gaming - not so much because they were terrible games, but because they were so much worse than the previous titles.

SP has never been my thing, but it was so odd/buggy in those two it was pretty much unplayable for me. What was truly sad, though, was the destruction of the MP community. All the great clans and all the great players pretty much disappeared. What is left is just a shell of what used to be...

STW/MTW certainly had their issues, but what made them great was the combat system. While not perfect, it was far more balanced and allowed for so much more tactical depth than the next engine. I think everyone just assumed that RTW would continue with the same battle dynamics as the older games with awesome new graphics. Sadly, something was lost in translation. I think Puzz said the guy whow created the system quit/was fired. :shrug:

As much as we all love to see the little guys slugging it out, it gets old - fast. The truth is, graphics will never compensate for sub-standard gameplay.

In any event, the ETW demo has given me some reasons for hope. I could tell right away that M2TW was going to suck. The jury's still out on this one...

Polemists

03-02-2009, 06:53

As much as we all love to see the little guys slugging it out, it gets old - fast. The truth is, graphics will never compensate for sub-standard gameplay.

Well I never found the gameplay or balance of RTW or MTW2 to be that horrible but that's me.

In regards to Monk's comment, since yes I hope to get it from amazon. Yes the current rumor is that the game will ship on the 4th

ArtillerySmoke

03-02-2009, 17:30

DisruptorX

03-02-2009, 17:35

Well I never found the gameplay or balance of RTW or MTW2 to be that horrible but that's me.

Start a skirmish in RTW. Field nothing but light cavalry against enemy spearmen and heavy infantry. Laugh as your completely unarmored horsemen armed with nothing but a light spear crush everything they fight. Saying that RTW lacks balance is an understatement. I have literally conquered Rome with Numidian Cavalry only. Thats not even getting into the fact that men seem to run about 30 miles per hour, and horses about 60.

The latter concern was my biggest fear for Empire, though it seems that only horses are too fast, men run at a reasonable speed.

In any event, why can't I preload this yet? :wall:

Meneldil

03-02-2009, 17:59

Well I never found the gameplay or balance of RTW or MTW2 to be that horrible but that's me.

In regards to Monk's comment, since yes I hope to get it from amazon. Yes the current rumor is that the game will ship on the 4th

Well, STW and MTW fights required a bit more than a cavalry charge to be won, and also lasted more than 30 seconds.

Most battles in RTW and M2TW follow the same pattern:
- Archers shoot at the opponent but cause little harm.
- Infantry clash in the middle of the field.
- The first one who make a cavalry charge in the rear of said infantry see the whole opposing army breaking and fleeing.

Believe me when I say I vaslty prefered STW and MTW fights. The graphics weren't nearly as fancy, but it felt much better nonetheless. Not to mention the AI was IMO vastly better.

Now, I couldn't play ETW demo on my laptop thanks to the crazy requirements, so I can't really say how I liked the battles into it. I'm still hoping that ETW will prove to be as challenging as MTW or STW, but I fear that CA decided to water-down everything to cater to casual gaming.

Sir Beane

03-02-2009, 18:06

Well, STW and MTW fights required a bit more than a cavalry charge to be won, and also lasted more than 30 seconds.

Most battles in RTW and M2TW follow the same pattern:
- Archers shoot at the opponent but cause little harm.
- Infantry clash in the middle of the field.
- The first one who make a cavalry charge in the rear of said infantry see the whole opposing army breaking and fleeing.

Believe me when I say I vaslty prefered STW and MTW fights. The graphics weren't nearly as fancy, but it felt much better nonetheless. Not to mention the AI was IMO vastly better.

Now, I couldn't play ETW demo on my laptop thanks to the crazy requirements, so I can't really say how I liked the battles into it. I'm still hoping that ETW will prove to be as challenging as MTW or STW, but I fear that CA decided to water-down everything to cater to casual gaming.

I know it isn't much, but having played the demo it didn't give me the impression being watered down for the masses. It seemed much more intelligent than Med2 for instance.