View Full Version : Creative Assembly New interview - only 5 starting factions !
doc_bean
08-22-2006, 11:52
An interview with Bob Smith (http://www.cgonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=855&Itemid=1)
Not much new information. The interesting part seems to be at the very end.
when a player selects one of the five starting factions, they’ll get an introduction to their faction, including a description of likely threats from their neighbours and advice on their initial target regions to conquest.
Ultras DVSC
08-22-2006, 11:58
That's interesting. Maybe the 5 who are represented on the official site under the factions option? But it makes no sense... :inquisitive:
The_Doctor
08-22-2006, 11:59
Why do they do such strange things?:dizzy2:
I can't see any point in locking most of the factions.
The Blind King of Bohemia
08-22-2006, 12:03
That's pretty stupid. I imagine they will be the English, the French, the HRE, Byzantium and possibly a Muslim one.
Little Legioner
08-22-2006, 12:10
What a nonsense decision! And i just wonder why? Why do they put such meaningless limits?
Ok then guys prepare your notepads. We've gotta job to do. Just open Data directory than click :juggle2:
Here we go again...
It seems like a typical kiddy oriented feature/restriction. What next, 'bonus' levels?
On a more positive note... maybe only applies to the tutorial?
It is the same as in Rome: TW, where U could only play the Roman families in the beginning. So I finish first campaign & then play the rest, or I´ll wait for a "all factions mod".
hellenes
08-22-2006, 12:17
The next thing to expect is a port to Nintendo Wii....
Lord Adherbal
08-22-2006, 12:23
this is nothing new (compared to RTW), I don't understand how some of you are surprised/disappointed by it. The first thing I did when I installed RTW is unlock Carthage so I could play the faction I wanted too. I don't have a favorite in MTW2 so it doesnt really matter there. But it only takes 2 minutes to unlock all factions.
It's one of the improvements over RTW. Now you have 5 starting factions instead of 3. Wait until you see the improvements in the battles.
That's interesting. Maybe the 5 who are represented on the official site under the factions option? But it makes no sense... :inquisitive:
Hmmm. That would be the HRE, England, the Papacy, Egypt and Byzantium.
Well, the game is not out yet and honestly, how long do you think it's going to take before someone opens the relevant file and opens every faction? I know my first game will be with the Danes no matter what CA thinks I should play :-) It is odd that they haven't opened every faction after the experience of RTW, though.
Afro Thunder
08-22-2006, 12:56
Oh come on, it wasn't that bad in RTW and you know it. You didn't even have to complete a full Imperial campaign in order to unlock the unlockable factions. All you had to do was finish a short campaign and badda bing, you can now play all the (playable) factions. If there was an exceptionally bad part to it, it was that you couldn't play a few certain factions without modding the game.
Oh come on, it wasn't that bad in RTW
Of course it wasn't. But it is a bit meaningless not to open all playable factions - I mean, what are they trying to protect us from?
It's one of the improvements over RTW. Now you have 5 starting factions instead of 3. Wait until you see the improvements in the battles.
Well I sure hope its not more than 5 factions or its gonna be too complicated for some... :juggle2:
CBR
Duke John
08-22-2006, 13:04
Probably because CA thinks that many options confuses new players.
Geoffrey S
08-22-2006, 13:05
Who cares? In RTW the roman factions were the easiest to play with and were a natural introduction to the game. I certainly didn't mind starting with them, and with the more varied options in MTW2 I don't see this being a problem at all.
Little Legioner
08-22-2006, 13:38
Originally Posted by Puzz3D
It's one of the improvements over RTW. Now you have 5 starting factions instead of 3. Wait until you see the improvements in the battles.
:laugh4: Let me say you what's gonna be?! Timurid Katyusha rocket launchers may be?
Who cares realism let's have some fun! Lets make the game just more accesible right? We are just old school bunch of funs only future lies in console players.
But it only takes 2 minutes to unlock all factions.
Yes 2 minutes for factions but it's only first step. Couple of months for a realism mods and etc etc. Yeah we know rest of story well...
Great news! will read it as soon as i get the time.
and yes its really easy to unlock whatever faction you want. I always go with my favorite faction the first time as that the game gets more challenging when you dont know evrything about it and i really love to meet enemy armies with fearsome units that i diden't have a clue about that they exsisted at all.
hope that Russia will be hard to play as thats my faction.
I don't see a problem with only 5 initial factions :dizzy2:
I like to unlock other factions :P
No problem with this either.
I can spare 1 minute to move some stuff around in a txt-file.:2thumbsup:
It was so damn easy in RTW.
Timurid Katyusha rocket launchers may be?
Indeed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shin_Ki_Chon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_artillery#History
damn you CA for adding a historical accurate weapon. :furious3:
:laugh4:
x-dANGEr
08-22-2006, 14:33
I think that is a wise decision. I don't want to start with a boring material-less campaign (Numidia), I'd rather start with a rich, feutures-full campaign. (Romans)
doc_bean
08-22-2006, 15:11
Wow, this thread turned out a whole lot more negative than I intended, perhaps I should have been more subtle in choosing a title ?
I'm not quite sure what to think of this, on the one hand it does make it easier for new players to choose, and it leaves the possibility for making the other factions harder. OTOH I fear the other factions might not get the same level of attention as those 5, like the generic 'barbarians' in RTW.
This really isn't a buy/no buy deal to me, battle mechanics and AI are, which might be discussed in the next interview. This might get interesting :book:
Darth Nihilus
08-22-2006, 15:25
This is funny because I thought to myself last night that they'd never limit the starting factions like they did in RTW and here it is now. At least when they made you play as a roman faction it was somewhat justified in that there was a lot more work put into roman factions and the game was named after those factions. I don't under stand this, but hey whatever, I'll just change it myself. I want to play as Byzantium fisrt anyway and my guess to the five is England, France, HRE, Byzantines, and Egypt. Anyway, before I really bash the game I'll play it fisrt.
doc_bean
08-22-2006, 15:39
Part 2 is online.
Interesting part:
There are 21 playable and non-playable factions included in the game. Of these there’ll be 17 factions that are playable in the grand campaign.
Geoffrey S
08-22-2006, 15:50
Presumably non-playable factions are Aztecs, Papacy, and emerging factions such as the Mongols and Timurids?
Not really interesting.
It is pretty old infact that there will be 17 playable factions and 4 non-playable(Mongols, Timurids, Papal states and Aztecs)
I don’t beleive faction unlocking is much of an issue at all.
Dr_Who_Regen#4
08-22-2006, 18:00
I agree faction unlocking is not tough...I did it in RTW and I am not somone who ever does Mods, but it was easy to figure out (Just look around until you find the right file).
Also if there are only a few factions to choose from I am sure it is part of CAs approach. For the casual gamer it provides a whole new set of challenges...Basically play the game through and now you get some other factions to play.
People like "cool" endings or bonuses for finsihing games. So this is CA's Bonus for the casual player. Those of us who are more into these games will just mod the seletcion list. Keep in mnd though we are in the minority as most people who buy games do not go to forums to learn more about them...
Most poeple will just play the main 5 factions that CA has chosen (potentially these factions have more events and uniqueness to them then the others). Bascially these are probably their showcase factions and the rest are just their to keep you interested or provide a challenge.
As in Rome, this design decision is based on time constraints in building feature-rich factions versus less rich factions, in regards to graphics uniqueness, voiceovers, campaign assignments from pope/guilds, etc. They lock initial factions so that no matter what initial choice the casual gamer makes, he/she gets the "full game" effect instead of choosing a faction that has been mostly but not fully filled out. Given limited pipeline and resources, they can't do everything for every faction with an engine as complex as RTWs.
So far in this thread, people have called this a stupid, pointless, nonsense, dumbed-down, and unrealistic design decision. I'm not sure these are accurate ways to describe it.
Randarkmaan
08-22-2006, 19:11
On a different note I find this part of the interview very interesting...
In the second part of the Medieval II: Total War Interview, Bob Smith will talk about some of the new features in the game and the A.I. improvements. For more information on the game, visit www.totalwar.com.
Everyone has been complaining that they haven't talked about the AI too much, well, here it is!
5 starting factions is not a problem at all (as others have said), it was really simple to edit the text file so that you unlocked the locked factions...
grapedog
08-22-2006, 20:06
my guess would be so they don't have to create 4 or 5 different tutorials to bring the player through.
If you have a small campaign with 5 somewhat similar factions, it's easy to create a tutorial that will cater to them all...and then you can put very small amount of work required to open the rest of the factions. That way they don't break their fingers making useless tutorials for all the varied factions, for the new people, and can concentrate more on the actual game itself.
that would be my guess on why they leave some locked....but what do i know.
L'Impresario
08-22-2006, 20:08
The 2nd part is out, and I can safely say that all things mentioned are no news at all (except perhaps for the 5 starting factions, but that's no biggie at all).
BTW am I the only one noticing that the wording of most answers is exactly the same with that of previous interviews?
Midnight
08-22-2006, 20:23
Just... why? Why bother placing a pointless restriction that a huge number of people are going to mod to remove?
I really, really hope the starting factions haven't got all the attention, leaving the others not as well fleshed-out (again).
This is funny because I thought to myself last night that they'd never limit the starting factions like they did in RTW and here it is now.
I know the feeling. I believe it was a few months ago when I myself said something to the effect that CA wouldn't repeat their mistake from Rome in limiting the initial faction selection. I'm honestly shocked to see how wrong I was. I'm very disappointed that such an annoying and unnecessary restriction has made it into the game.
Edit: On the other hand, I do appreciate CA was honest enough to give us this information in advance. At least now I know for certain that I don't have to hurry to pick up this game, and that I can definitely wait a while.
[sigh]
BTW am I the only one noticing that the wording of most answers is exactly the same with that of previous interviews?
No, I noticed that as well. I think it's safe to say that any and all interviews will be almost a word-for-word rehash of what's been said before. (Stupid legal NDA's....) ~;)
Midnight has the right of it, I think. In RTW, the Romans had a fair bit of work put into them, while the others were underdone.
The 2nd part is out, and I can safely say that all things mentioned are no news at all (except perhaps for the 5 starting factions, but that's no biggie at all).
BTW am I the only one that the wording of most answers is exactly the same with that of previous interviews?
I noticed that too ! omg, sometimes, you got three lines that just appear in every interview :P
Hochmeister
08-23-2006, 01:51
How good is the A.I. in the real-time battles? Can players use the environment to their advantage?
We’re always striving to make improvements to the battle AI as the Total War series has developed and Medieval II will of course continue this trend. The new environment rendering system has allowed us to create impassable terrain for the first time in the series which will allow the player to tailor their tactics according to the environment, perhaps protecting their flanks with hills or cliffs. The AI will work similar ploys into their deployment and tactics
How to say something without saying anything??:juggle2:
Oh well hopefully CA will inform us closer to the release date as this must be commercially sensitive information I guess. Trying to stay positive:2thumbsup:
Divinus Arma
08-23-2006, 02:00
I find this a very courteous gesture on the part of CA:
We also have to balance this with developing the game for an established Total War audience and strategy fans.
professorspatula
08-23-2006, 03:46
I'm on to CA!! They only introduce these limitations on the number of starting factions because they have a monthly sweepstakes running on this. The employee who correctly guesses how many, 'Eh, I can only play as 5 factions, WTF! My Game is bugged!' threads are posted on the net every month wins a prize - possibly a book token and a Sega baseball cap.
Honestly, I see the point of limiting the factions, but at the same time am a little disappointed. Whereas anyone who knows what Notepad is will probably figure out how to manually unlock the other factions, you'll still get countless people confused and wanting immediate satisfaction by being able to play as who they want from the off. Still it helps solve the problem whereby people still post to this day, 'I just got Some-TW-game, what faction should I play as?'. Well if you only got 5 factions, they're obviously well tailored as starting factions, so take your pick.
I'm just annoyed there's no civil war rebel faction for each of the factions. I want factions to go into civil war, and get to choose which one to ally with. Bah. I demand a Sega baseball cap as compensation. Or a valid book token. Or anything I can flog on ebay.
Duke John
08-23-2006, 09:02
The new environment rendering system has allowed us to create impassable terrain for the first time in the series [...]
Huh?
If this guy doesn't remember the features of M:TW then I have little hope that he remembers what else made M:TW superior to R:TW. It seems to me that CA does his best to cut loose from M:TW and S:TW and sees R:TW as a new starting point of the series. I guess it's time for me to do the same. No longer will I see M2:TW as a sequel to the excellent M:TW, but as a sequel to R:TW, a game which I did not really like and hardly played at all.
:beam:
Myrddraal
08-23-2006, 09:41
It does make you wonder if the new devs have ever played STW or MTW...
It's a bit of an obvious slip.
sunsmountain
08-23-2006, 10:57
It's one of the improvements over RTW. Now you have 5 starting factions instead of 3. Wait until you see the improvements in the battles.
Yeah, didn't you read it? Now you have 2-4 sequential (random, not necessarily logical) attack moves, instead of just the underhand & overhand smash alternating. That should bring kill rates down, a good thing, right? And 5 starting factions only means those 5 will get extra content, while the others get less focus. My guess is:
Egypt (Islamic)
Byzantium Greek (Orthodox)
England (North European Catholic)
Spain (South European Catholic)
Germany (North European Catholic) or France
First 3: Definitely. Spain, I hope so (enjoyed them thoroughly in MTW). Germany or France then seem likely.
Captain Fishpants
08-23-2006, 11:03
It does make you wonder if the new devs have ever played STW or MTW...
It's a bit of an obvious slip.
I suggest you have a look for R T Smith in the credits of previous TW titles before calling Bob Smith "new". He's got a bit of a track record where these games are concerned, you know.
Duke John
08-23-2006, 11:18
That doesn't make it any better :wink:
hellenes
08-23-2006, 11:20
I suggest you have a look for R T Smith in the credits of previous TW titles before calling Bob Smith "new". He's got a bit of a track record where these games are concerned, you know.
The new environment rendering system has allowed us to create impassable terrain for the first time in the series
.....
Reenk Roink
08-23-2006, 11:35
Come on guys, it may just have been an honest slip...
The guy is excited about the new game, he's talking...
Stuff happens... :shrug:
Vladimir
08-23-2006, 12:42
I believe he was speaking in the R:TW realistic mapping context, not the M:TW pre-rendered one.
Orda Khan
08-23-2006, 13:06
No big deal to make all factions playable, same as RTW. However, like others I fail to understand why CA pursue a trend that was unpopular
.....Orda
Myrddraal
08-23-2006, 14:02
I suggest you have a look for R T Smith in the credits of previous TW titles before calling Bob Smith "new". He's got a bit of a track record where these games are concerned, you know.
Quite right. It was a general sarcy comment. My apologies.
I'm sure in his mind he was thinking of RTW, but why did he say 'series'.
It is a bit of a silly thing to say... :shrug:
Not really sure why CA would take this approach. The original Medieval allowed you to play 2 different game types, 3 different eras, and all factions unlocked from the start. This was bad how? :inquisitive:
I think Bob has gotten the "bad" label attached to him simply because when we hear unwelcome news from CA on M2 it's often him who's saying it. I have to admit I fall into the category of those who have unfairly paired up Bob's name with emphasis on style over substance. I'll stop with that now and think a bit more before pidgeonholing the fellow.
Lord Adherbal
08-24-2006, 00:20
Quite right. It was a general sarcy comment. My apiologies.
I'm sure in his mind he was thinking of RTW, but why did he say 'series'.
if they aren't 100% sure it's a new feature then why announce it as a new feature. Might be a small detail but your reaction was justified. Like DJ says, it really makes CA look as if they've forgotten a lot about MTW, and that's very painfull for those of us who are still hoping CA will revert back to the old gameplay.
IrishArmenian
08-24-2006, 01:48
I, for some reeson find it hard to manually unlock factions, my gmae always crashes when trying to pick one (on this computer). Maybe I did something different from my last computer. I would like them to use M:TW for the benchmark. That was the best game in the series (all around, at least for me). I wish they compared it to that instead of Rome.
Bob the Insane
08-24-2006, 02:15
Wow, I come in here to comment on the 5 starting factions thing and I see the whinging thread has spilled over... :inquisitive:
My personal opinion is the same as many here that it is unnecessary to limit us like this, but given how easy it was to mod previously I don't really care that much and a short game as one of the starting factions will hardly be a chore...
It certainly does not bring me to question the ability of the designers or the enthusiasim of the marketing machine...
redriver
08-24-2006, 03:06
... I would like them to use M:TW for the benchmark. That was the best game in the series (all around, at least for me). I wish they compared it to that instead of Rome.
I agree. all three games are different enough and should not be compared against each other because they are in different time periods or parts of the world. m2tw vs mtw on the other hand is a fair call... pls do not compare RTW vs MTW vs STW. it's like comparin' ww1 vs ww2 vs vietnam war.. :)
IrishArmenian
08-24-2006, 03:42
It is not so much about whinging as it is about discussing our views. Whingning is stubbornley negative.
kataphraktoi
08-24-2006, 04:26
Maybe if we were nicer.....u'd be amazed what good manners gets you these days.
If I was a game developer and read criticisms which bordered beyond constructive and evolved into something vicious, I'd say "to hell" with you and make life hard for you....and still have the gratification of knowing that the game will sell well.
IrishArmenian
08-24-2006, 04:36
I don't view my posts as being vicious, though. And when did you become a woman (avatar)?
Callahan9119
08-24-2006, 07:48
i dont see it as a problem, infact i look at it as a challenge to those who wish for more objectives to accomplish and like to unlock things, its never been any problem for me to edit in factions in about a minute
of all the things to rightly complain about, i feel this isnt one of them
lets hear more complaints about glorious achievements and no years ~:argue:
Doug-Thompson
08-24-2006, 19:07
Unlocking factions in R:TW was not a problem, because winning a game as a Roman was a piece of cake.
There's been some speculation on what the five starting factions are. I'm sure somebody's already mentioned the five factions listed on the official website, which look like the frontrunners:
Byz (Greek Orthodox)
HRE (North European Catholic)
England (North European Catholic)
The Papacy (South Europeand Catholic)
Egypt (Islam)
============
I think the purpose of the "unlock" features is to keep a new player from picking some faction he likes for outside, historical or sentimental reasons, then getting clobbered. People with bad first impressions rarely get addicted.
The papacy won't be playable.
They are like the senate in RTW.
Doug-Thompson
08-24-2006, 19:16
The papacy won't be playable.
They are like the senate in RTW.
Back like they were in M:TW, ehh, only moreso.
Leet Eriksson
08-24-2006, 19:55
the best bet for a south european faction would be either italy or spain.
Ignoramus
08-25-2006, 05:53
I, for one, am annoyed about this. In BI, when I trying editing the text files to make the Burgundii
and the Lombardi playable, the game crashes.
=========
However, they did say there were "17 playable factions". Now if this is true, then surely this an improvement over Rome.
Mount Suribachi
08-25-2006, 09:58
I suggest you have a look for R T Smith in the credits of previous TW titles before calling Bob Smith "new". He's got a bit of a track record where these games are concerned, you know.
I have posted before here, and on other forums, what a legend RT Smith is to those of us old enough to remember classic games like Arnhem, Desert Rats, Tobruk & Ancient Battles.
But that doesn't alter the fact that we keep reading in interviews about this "new" feature of impassible terrain.
I'm just surprised & disapointed that after all the furore over unlockable factions in RTW that we have it again in MTW2 ~:(
scotchedpommes
08-27-2006, 04:40
Not really sure why CA would take this approach. The original Medieval allowed you to play 2 different game types, 3 different eras, and all factions unlocked from the start. This was bad how? :inquisitive:
For those who forget, in the original MTW, all minor factions were initially unplayable.
This required a text edit.
[As for the arrangement with this game, provinces and map specifics concern me
more than the text edit.]
City walls
08-27-2006, 14:52
I see it like this
new players-Unlocking factions
Mid players-Follow papacy missions
hardcore players-Conquer the world
Magestryn
08-27-2006, 22:01
I actually think they are knowing full well that people will go and modify the game, but they would at least like to have you see some of the opening sequences to show off all of the hard work they have done
Pras the Reaper
08-28-2006, 07:13
But that doesn't alter the fact that we keep reading in interviews about this "new" feature of impassible terrain.
My quick and dirty analysis...
The communication flow for games usually goes something along these lines:
developer -> studio marketing -> publisher marketing -> journalist -> editor
As you've all pointed out a mistake has been made. It could have been made at any step in the chain. Bob has worked on every Total War game to date. If you had to put money on where the mistake was made, how many of you would bet on it having being Bob?
I know I was mortified when I read on these forums some of the stuff I was supposed to have said in a magazine article around January. It was only afterwards that I realised that what I said had been edited, translated for a Belgian games mag, re-edited and then translated back into English.
edyzmedieval
08-28-2006, 10:04
Basically, what Pras is saying, that the magazines are editing intentionally the articles? :inquisitive:
No, he's saying that journalists and PR people don't always report accurately.
I've experienced it personally twice before.
Once was in university politics - it was simply amazing, person A would say "X" and the student newspaper would report person B (in the same party) said "not X" (when they had said no such thing). And not just once, but on virtually every single instance we were reported. Now this was just student politics and student journalism but it made me fear for what goes on in the real world.
The other case was when an academic unit I worked in hired a journalist to present its research. It was just hopeless. What was reported was either completely vacuous or completely wrong. In the end, we had to write the stuff ourselves and politely bid the journalist farewell.
I'm not sure what's going on, but part of it is that the reporters do not have the necessary technical knowledge to understand what they are talking about. Kind of like if you asked me to report something you said in Romanian or something. They use their own words and end up distorting the message horribly.
Dutch_guy
08-28-2006, 14:03
Well to be honest I don't see the problem, as long as we can play the other factions by editing a simple text file then that's it.
I think the purpose of the "unlock" features is to keep a new player from picking some faction he likes for outside, historical or sentimental reasons, then getting clobbered. People with bad first impressions rarely get addicted.
Well, I think it's just there to keep the player playing, give him some sort of a objective other than conquering the twenty needed cities. That simple.
:balloon2:
Well to be honest I don't see the problem, as long as we can play the other factions by editing a simple text file then that's it.
Well, I think it's just there to keep the player playing, give him some sort of a objective other than conquering the twenty needed cities. That simple.
:balloon2:
Do you mean like glorious achievements? I've heard that was an effective way to keep players involved.
Dutch_guy
08-28-2006, 15:58
Do you mean like glorious achievements? I've heard that was an effective way to keep players involved.
I was giving my own opinion on Doug's theory of why there'd only be 5 starting factions, he basically stated it would be more new-comer friendly, I stated it was probably done to give players some sort of objective to complete - some sort of a mission, or goal.
So I didn't exactly mean glorious achievements, but you have heard correctly, it is an excellent way to keep players involved. And I for one, am hoping to see the GAs back in M2TW.
:balloon2:
doc_bean
08-28-2006, 16:21
No, he's saying that journalists and PR people don't always report accurately.
I've experienced it personally twice before.
Once was in university politics - it was simply amazing, person A would say "X" and the student newspaper would report person B (in the same party) said "not X" (when they had said no such thing). And not just once, but on virtually every single instance we were reported. Now this was just student politics and student journalism but it made me fear for what goes on in the real world.
The other case was when an academic unit I worked in hired a journalist to present its research. It was just hopeless. What was reported was either completely vacuous or completely wrong. In the end, we had to write the stuff ourselves and politely bid the journalist farewell.
I'm not sure what's going on, but part of it is that the reporters do not have the necessary technical knowledge to understand what they are talking about. Kind of like if you asked me to report something you said in Romanian or something. They use their own words and end up distorting the message horribly.
I think you're giving people to much credit. I once was interviewed and found my words totally twisted in the newspaper (with a bunch of made up stuff) I complained in a public forum the journalist could moderate and quickly found the entire rant deleted and I got an angry email from the guy in question. When i asked him why he did it he said my real answer didn't make for an interesting story...
:wall: :wall: :wall: :wall:
Mount Suribachi
08-28-2006, 16:58
There's a reason I rate journalists above (below?) politicians and lawyers on my scum-of-the-earth-o-meter. Every experience I, and people I know, have had with them has been overwhelmingly negative ~:(
Vladimir
08-28-2006, 17:08
I know I was mortified when I read on these forums some of the stuff I was supposed to have said in a magazine article around January. It was only afterwards that I realised that what I said had been edited, translated for a Belgian games mag, re-edited and then translated back into English.
That's amazing! I wonder what the margin of error was for each modification. Not to mention the intentional distortions.
I was giving my own opinion on Doug's theory of why there'd only be 5 starting factions, he basically stated it would be more new-comer friendly, I stated it was probably done to give players some sort of objective to complete - some sort of a mission, or goal.
So I didn't exactly mean glorious achievements, but you have heard correctly, it is an excellent way to keep players involved. And I for one, am hoping to see the GAs back in M2TW.
:balloon2:
Yeah, I should've added a [/sarcasm] tag. :laugh4:
I, too, hope frevently there will be a GA mode. IMO its part of the reason MTW was is so special. Has any dev said yay or nay with regards to GA?
If nay, someone should mod them in... :dizzy2:
The Wizard
08-28-2006, 18:28
*slaps forehead*
Here are the 5 starting factions.
https://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y256/Cain2/MTW2/grandcampaign.jpg
England, France, HRE, Venice and Spain.
Here are the 5 starting factions.
https://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y256/Cain2/MTW2/grandcampaign.jpg
England, France, HRE, Venice and Spain.
Thanks TB666. :2thumbsup: (Where'd you find that screeshot, btw?)
All good factions, but they're also all Catholic. What about the Byzantines and the Muslims? Hard to believe they'd be left out of the starting line-up entirely. *sigh* Oh well....
Found it here
http://pff.swrebellion.com/index.php?topic=4646.0
Midnight
08-29-2006, 23:24
That's surprising. I'd have thought that some non-Catholics would get a look in, but apparently not.
Appreciate the link, TB666. :bow: I actually like the screenshot of the French provinces. It looks like CA has toned down the cartoon colors of Rome's map and given M2's map a bit of grittier feel.
That's surprising. I'd have thought that some non-Catholics would get a look in, but apparently not.
Yeah me too. I understand the English, the French, and even the HRE making the "first 5"; but I figured for the other 2 they'd grab one of the Muslim factions (Egyptians would probably be the best candidate) and for sure add the Byzantines! To not include them in the initial 5 factions simply baffles me. :inquisitive:
This feeling is further reinforced when the Spanish and Venetians are in the initial list. While I think both factions will certainly be fun to play (I love the Spanish in the original MTW), I'm in absolute disbelief that they would be among the initial 5 factions, yet the Byz and Muslims aren't. :no:
I never thought Venice would be a starting faction :2thumbsup:
Leet Eriksson
08-30-2006, 00:35
what no danes ~:(
Well i hope they make the short campaigns real real short, maybe have one of frances objectives to conquer the british, that way you march on their 3 small provinces rushing them and unlocking all the factions :idea2:
professorspatula
08-30-2006, 00:40
Well according to that screenshot the short campaign for the English is apparently capture 45 regions and Jerusalem, so that's a fair bit longer than the RTW short campaigns. Makes me think the rate of expansion/speed of strategy part could be quite swift if that's a short campaign.
To be fair, if that's from the demo version, we don't 100% know that's the final 5 starting factions. It might be for the demo, they don't want you to play as various factions until the game hits the shops. To keep the file size down, perhaps many of the eastern factions don't have their full compliment of units in the demo file. I'm obviously just clutching at straws though.
Well according to that screenshot the short campaign for the English is apparently capture 45 regions and Jerusalem, so that's a fair bit longer than the RTW short campaigns.
Actually that's the big campaign.
He doesn't have the short campaign button checked .
Callatian
08-30-2006, 00:48
Thanks TB666. :2thumbsup: (Where'd you find that screeshot, btw?)
Here?
http://pff.swrebellion.com/index.php?board=42.0
professorspatula
08-30-2006, 00:51
Yea you're right. 45 regions isn't a lot though for the main campaign. In that case, the small one will probably be about 10-15 regions again, plus outliving some neighbouring faction. Still, it's no doubt another thing easy to mod.
Yea you're right. 45 regions isn't a lot though for the main campaign. In that case, the small one will probably be about 10-15 regions again, plus outliving some neighbouring faction. Still, it's no doubt another thing easy to mod.
Well hopefully with the improved AI it will be a real challenge so that 45 provinces will be more then enough.
I'm in absolute disbelief that they would be among the initial 5 factions, yet the Byz and Muslims aren't. :no:
Well, one official rationale for starting with the Romans in RTW was that extra work had gone into them (primarily longer speeches & Senate missions but arguably also fuller tech tree, Roman-style advisors etc) and CA wanted to showcase that.
I suspect the same is true of the 5 Catholic factions - like the Romans, they will share a lot of common material (speeches, crusading, guilds etc.). The muslim/orthodox factions - as well as some smaller Catholic factions - may have a little bit less chrome (shorter speeches, perhaps less involved missions etc.)
There was an element of that even in MTW - some factions had far more interesting GAs and many more historical characters than others.
edit: now I think about it, aren't the 5 M2TW starting factions also the original 5 Catholics with interesting early GAs (Crusades)?
While that may be true, I would have hoped that CA would have included at least one Muslim and one Orthodox faction in the original playable factions. Yes, I'll only play one of the starting factions just long enough to get the feel of new features, then go into the txt files and make all/most of the factions playable, but I still think it would have been considerate if CA had choosen a more diverse group of starting factions.
DisruptorX
08-30-2006, 23:21
I think that is a wise decision. I don't want to start with a boring material-less campaign (Numidia), I'd rather start with a rich, feutures-full campaign. (Romans)
The only time I've ever enjoyed a RTW campaign were my games as Numidia and Spain, two factions that have to be moddable to be playable. The only fun BI campaign I had was as the Berbers.
Its impossible to lose a Roman campaign, and is therefore not even worth playing.
My favourite campaigns in MTW were tiny factions like the Danes, were it takes work to expand and build up forces.
Unlockable factions is pointless and silly, there is no point to it. Unplayable factions is a travesty.
Well, one official rationale for starting with the Romans in RTW was that extra work had gone into them (primarily longer speeches & Senate missions but arguably also fuller tech tree, Roman-style advisors etc) and CA wanted to showcase that.
I suspect the same is true of the 5 Catholic factions - like the Romans, they will share a lot of common material (speeches, crusading, guilds etc.). The muslim/orthodox factions - as well as some smaller Catholic factions - may have a little bit less chrome (shorter speeches, perhaps less involved missions etc.)
That's probably all true, econ; I'd surmised much the same thing. It's not that I don't understand why these Catholic factions are receiving the especiale treatment, however.
I'm saying I don't understand why the Byzantines and at least one of the Muslim factions weren't included as well. I have no trouble understanding that the initial faction selection would probably be *dominated* by Catholic factions (whether that was 3 out of 5, 5 out of 7, or whatever). But to exclude the Muslims and Orthodox entirely? To not give them even one faction on the "starting line-up"? Why?
Most strategy games tout how each faction in their game is different, and how their play styles vary. CA, on the other hand, is going to force players (especially those people who don't know how to mod, which is a pretty large group) to choose between 5 factions that are fairly alike aside from their starting locations. I just don't get it. :shrug:
There was an element of that even in MTW - some factions had far more interesting GAs and many more historical characters than others.
edit: now I think about it, aren't the 5 M2TW starting factions also the original 5 Catholics with interesting early GAs (Crusades)?
Yes, you're right--and it caused a certain amount of rumbling back then as well, although not nearly as much as now. The reason it wasn't as much of an issue back then was that of course most factions were already playable.
I really don't mind if CA has given certain factions a bit more spit and polish; I realize that's going to be inevitable in just about any strategy game. But to limit our initial choices so as not to "overwhelm" new players is quite honestly ridiculous, and personally I would be insulted if I were one of those new players they're targeting. Just about anyone that plays Total War games is going to possess at least a modicum of intelligence (and probably at least a passing interest in history as well)--enough intelligence to decide for themselves which faction they'd like to try out.
CA wants to reach out to a broader audience? Fine. But limiting faction selection is not the way to go about it, as it's a pointless and unnecessary restriction. Unless a lot of 5-year-olds suddenly start playing these games, I very seriously doubt letting us choose our factions is going to "overhwelm" anyone.
DisruptorX
08-31-2006, 02:50
CA wants to reach out to a broader audience? Fine. But limiting faction selection is not the way to go about it, as it's a pointless and unnecessary restriction. Unless a lot of 5-year-olds suddenly start playing these games, I very seriously doubt letting us choose our factions is going to "overhwelm" anyone.
I agree, its an insult to the intelligence of the player. I played civ 2 when I was a kid and certainly didn't feel "overwhelmed". Sure, I lost alot, but I really appreciated the huge scope, I liked it way more than Warcraft 1&2. Total War should be the same way.
Rodion Romanovich
08-31-2006, 08:26
Hm, I just hope all faction descriptions are written so unlocking some of the factions won't cause a CTD! I hope one of these "fast forward" mods spatula did for BI will be possible for MTW2 soon after release so even non-unlockable factions can be played (golden horde for example ~:) )
Midnight
08-31-2006, 11:49
It's going to require some modding to get the Mongols, Timurids and Aztecs to be playable, since none of them begin on the map! I'd imagine the Papacy would also cause some CTDs without some re-working (if re-working here is possible).
I'd be massively disappointed if I couldn't get all the others going with only a quick copy-and-paste from 'Unplayable' and 'Unlockable' to 'Playable'.
And yes, it is insulting that we're not given the full choice. I also have a horrible feeling that, as has been mentioned, the other factions, particularly the Muslims and Orthodox ones, may have been given less attention - I loved the Turks, Egyptians and Byzantines!
Appreciate the link, TB666. :bow: I actually like the screenshot of the French provinces. It looks like CA has toned down the cartoon colors of Rome's map and given M2's map a bit of grittier feel.
agreed.
Mount Suribachi
08-31-2006, 16:15
Strange choice of 5 - I think we all agree that England, HRE, France are no-brainers. Venice, I personally like the fact that this means they get a bit of extra spit & polish (but why no other Italian city states playable?). Spain - I assume will be Castille?
I wonder how much of this has been driven by marketing? It would be interesting to see a breakdown of how many copies of the TW series have been sold in each country. If Britain, Spain, France, Italy & Germany are the top 5, then you can understand that, and it's tough luck Greece & Turkey.
But going by these forums, we have a lot more Turks & Greeks than Italians & Spanish.
Strange choice of 5 - I think we all agree that England, HRE, France are no-brainers. Venice, I personally like the fact that this means they get a bit of extra spit & polish (but why no other Italian city states playable?). Spain - I assume will be Castille?
I wonder how much of this has been driven by marketing? It would be interesting to see a breakdown of how many copies of the TW series have been sold in each country. If Britain, Spain, France, Italy & Germany are the top 5, then you can understand that, and it's tough luck Greece & Turkey.
But going by these forums, we have a lot more Turks & Greeks than Italians & Spanish.
yeah but you must know that the koreans and japanese for example still play starcraft (they love strategy games) and south Korea and Japan is a big market for videogames so why didn't they put the koreans and japanese in Medieval 2 :)
Conradus
08-31-2006, 20:54
On the other hand if CA want's to lure some Americans into buying Medieval II I don't think it would be wise of them to build a game around Asian history.
I hope they'll make Byzantium as interesting as in MTW though, i often found it was the only factions that was trully different from others.
Mount Suribachi
09-02-2006, 11:06
yeah but you must know that the koreans and japanese for example still play starcraft (they love strategy games) and south Korea and Japan is a big market for videogames so why didn't they put the koreans and japanese in Medieval 2 :)
Japan is a very small PC market - its all console. koreans are into online RPGs and MP RTS's, not historical strategy games.
Adherbal']this is nothing new (compared to RTW), I don't understand how some of you are surprised/disappointed by it.
Because we thought they realized how stupid and pointless it was to lock factions ?
It adds nothing to the game but the (granted, slight) annoyance of having to use a "all factions unlocker" at the beginning.
I'm entitled to be disappointed and irritated at idiotic "gameplay features" that have no positive impact and are useful only at exasperating the player.
Nathanael
09-02-2006, 17:28
A lot of people seemed to have missed the interview that said at the end of the day 17 out of 21 factions will be playable. It was linked in the forums, but I forget where.
Anyway, simple math says 21-17=4. We can easily figure out the 4 - the Papacy, the Timurids, the Mongols, and the Aztecs, none of whom I ever expected to be able to play anyway. So quit griping about having to mod the game to unlock the factions! Finish a short campaign and they'll ALL be unlocked, not just half like in RTW.
But I agree that I'm disappointed about no Muslim in the starting 5. Byzantines are interesting, but I can kind of see why they're left out. My ideal would still be England, HRE, Spain, Egypt, Byzantium. France is just a "why?" when you've already got the English, and Italy wasn't that interesting in MTW.
SaberHRE
09-02-2006, 17:54
i dont really care about the factions. But why the hell can't they divide campaigns into early, high, and late :furious3:. I thought that was the most coolest feature of MTW1, but CA seems to ignore the importance of such division. Why?!?!...
:no:
DisruptorX
09-02-2006, 17:59
i dont really care about the factions. But why the hell can't they divide campaigns into early, high, and late :furious3:. I thought that was the most coolest feature of MTW1, but CA seems to ignore the importance of such division. Why?!?!...
:no:
From what I hear, its because it takes three times as long to create and balance, because you are making three effectively seperate campaigns. To tell the truth, I only started one campaign from anything other than the early period, and that was as the Russians, because I wanted to fight the horde.
Now Glorious Acheivement, no excuse for not adding that back in.
Fallen134
09-02-2006, 18:13
Its not that bad of an idea it will introduce you fully to the new concepts of the game
Nathanael
09-02-2006, 18:36
I do wonder if the Byzantines will lose their ability to make Varangian Guards after some time passes since the whole eras thing is over. Or maybe eras is still in, you just can't start from a different one?
It would definitely have a profound impact on the Byzantines, who used to be strong early and progressively weaker in each following era. If they don't lose Varangians, they'll still be quite powerful in the late game (although I guess that could be partially addressed by recruitment pools).
I do wonder if the Byzantines will lose their ability to make Varangian Guards after some time passes since the whole eras thing is over. Or maybe eras is still in, you just can't start from a different one?
It would definitely have a profound impact on the Byzantines, who used to be strong early and progressively weaker in each following era. If they don't lose Varangians, they'll still be quite powerful in the late game (although I guess that could be partially addressed by recruitment pools).
This is what Ca says about byzantium :
The successors of the eastern Roman Empire, they start in control of western Turkey, Greece and the Southern Balkans. Initially their military situation is weak due to the recent disastrous battle of Manzikert. The army has heavy cavalry armed with lances or bows, supported by horse archers infantry spearmen and archers. Later in the game their units will be a little out of date reflecting their conservatism and ancient lineage.
voila :2thumbsup:
Dr_Who_Regen#4
09-02-2006, 21:05
I must have missed this, but where does it say the 5 starting factions will all be catholic factions? :help:
I would be shocked if they do not inlcude Byzantium and a Muslim faction in the starting 5 (esepcially since they talk about the adjustments to Jihad in another interview).
Anyways just wondering if someone could point me to where someone from CA says the 5 initially playable factions will all be catholic.
EDIT: Just looked back and I see the screenshot that shows 5 factions in the grand campaign...so probably just ignore my question...sorry
NeoSpartan
09-02-2006, 21:25
Now that is just sad man, just sad :no:..... All the 5 starting factions are all Catholic.
I don't have any particular beef with 5 factions, so long as they different cultures. BUT since now they are not, then I do have beef with that.:boxing:
For goodness's sake, I hope MTW2 be the most moddable game in the whole TW series.
Mount Suribachi
09-03-2006, 16:30
and Italy wasn't that interesting in MTW.
Because they weren't properly implemented in MTW. There was no unified Italian state in the middle ages, just a load if independant city states, the most powerful of whom was Venice.
*wonders if one of the Venetian missions will be to crusade to Constantinople.....*
Nathanael
09-03-2006, 21:36
Because they weren't properly implemented in MTW. There was no unified Italian state in the middle ages, just a load if independant city states, the most powerful of whom was Venice.
Nah, I'm not one of those hardcore historical purists. I just meant their units weren't very interesting. Italy was basically the same as HRE with crappy boats, Italian infantry (the only plus), and not as easy access to Swiss units.
In the first game, my favorite Catholics were the English, because they got a lot of unique, cool units. Billmen and longbowmen (sweetness!) and hobilars (hobilars were kind of boring), and then highlanders, gallowglasses, (both awesome) and kerns (meh) by grabbing Scotland and Ireland.
Because they weren't properly implemented in MTW. There was no unified Italian state in the middle ages, just a load if independant city states, the most powerful of whom was Venice.
*wonders if one of the Venetian missions will be to crusade to Constantinople.....*
:laugh4: I wonder if they'd be excommunicated for it like in real life?
The French should also be included in that mission, since they provided much of the bulk of the army that sacked Constantinople.
I agree that the limit of 5 factions will be so that the player can unlock other nations. It is like most games and gives the player something to aim towards.
x-dANGEr
09-09-2006, 09:11
GAh.. Am trying not to bash CA here eh!
Five starting factions of the same culture/religion.. So much admired muslims, turks and greeks eh..
Mount Suribachi
09-09-2006, 10:27
I've said this before to Scots, Hungarians, whoever when they've been left out of a previous game. But try not to take it personally. I don't understand or agree with their decision to focus on 5 starting Catholic factions, but its not cos they have something against muslims. The original name of MTW was Crusader: Total War, but they changed it for fear of the potential outcry. They employed a Muslim scholar for MTW (he's listed in the credits) and they've done the same for MTW2.
But leaving out Byzantium & Moors/Ottomans of the unlocked factions (if they have to go that route) is very, very strange. Byz are possibly the most popular faction.
Tiberius maximus
09-10-2006, 02:06
i have no problem with the whole 5 starting factions thing, just as long as when i conquer they world with one then i get to play what ever faction i want, there just better not be any permantly locked factions cause i dont no how to mod
This decision with the 5 factions thing is annoying but easily fixable, however it is also annoying to see 2 CA employee`s post in this thread but not once mention this.
In mtw i loved glorious acheivements and I also loved playing as the smaller factions, sicilians, danes and especially the aragonese.
IrishArmenian
09-14-2006, 06:33
I don't see the problem. I will probably play as the French. Conquer England, ally with the Scots, take Spain, all that good stuff until I unlock Russia. Then I will force the Orthodoxy on the Catholic nations aat the edge of a sword.
supersalsa
09-18-2006, 20:35
I was having a look at this portuguese website and the screenshots of m2tw. I found 1 screen : http://www.g4mers.com/screenshots.aspx?id=499&type=1&page=6 (it the screen 3rd row down on far left) and at the top you get to pick the fraction you want to play as in the grand campaign. It doesnt exactly say the names of the fractions but it has the flags. 1st brits 2nd ??? 3rd germany 4th ??? 5th venice
Im guessin 2nd is like france and 4th is spain
sry if this already been sed it just i nt gd at readin long bit of txt ~:)
Sun of Chersonesos
09-18-2006, 20:50
5 factions, well i can understand they dont wanna confuse people, however it would be slightly more appropriate to put 7 factions playable just so there's still choice but no confusion and you can edit it how you like if u can mod, however if u cant be bothered to go through all those files to mod then 5 is slightly restrictive
A. Smith
09-18-2006, 21:39
I was having a look at this portuguese website and the screenshots of m2tw. I found 1 screen : http://www.g4mers.com/screenshots.aspx?id=499&type=1&page=6 (it the screen 3rd row down on far left) and at the top you get to pick the fraction you want to play as in the grand campaign. It doesnt exactly say the names of the fractions but it has the flags. 1st brits 2nd ??? 3rd germany 4th ??? 5th venice
Im guessin 2nd is like france and 4th is spain
sry if this already been sed it just i nt gd at readin long bit of txt ~:)
yup, 2nd is france and 4this spain. however, its not actually "germany"; its the Holy Roman Empire, wich controled notably switzerland, a part of austri, and northern italy (its not the case in-game, however, sincec they leave a place for the italian cities)
I´m pretty sure CA knows that the community is quite capable of lifting such restriction. I think they just put it on to make it easier for Avarage Joe
Sun of Chersonesos
09-18-2006, 22:06
indubitably, however you can understand if truly non-technical people dont want to go deep into the C:/ files to lift the restrictions, then it could prove as a bit of a problem in the short-term
I´m pretty sure CA knows that the community is quite capable of lifting such restriction. I think they just put it on to make it easier for Avarage Joe
How does making more factions playable at the start confuse people?
The very idea of such a thing is quite frankly ridiculous and patronising.
ChewieTobbacca
09-18-2006, 22:21
I think they did it to make it easier for the normal players to jump in and decide on a faction, of which those 5 are probably among the easier factions to play
Sir Dinadan
09-18-2006, 22:24
Easily modded right? I haven't read anything just posted so. Anyway. This doens't make a new person "overwhelmed" with choices. So I'm fine as long as I can mod it.:2thumbsup:
I see your point, And i didn't really intended any.
Perhabs they just put it in to get some achievements in the game/
supersalsa
09-19-2006, 15:54
yup, 2nd is france and 4this spain. however, its not actually "germany"; its the Holy Roman Empire, wich controled notably switzerland, a part of austri, and northern italy (its not the case in-game, however, sincec they leave a place for the italian cities)
fanks 4 clearin dat up
Did anyone even ever played France?
I thought they were the most boring faction in the game
lancelot
09-19-2006, 16:20
How does making more factions playable at the start confuse people?
The very idea of such a thing is quite frankly ridiculous and patronising.
Couldnt agree more, restricting starting factions is one of the most bewildering things done to a total war title...even more so considering the first 2 total war games (3 if you count V:I) did not have this frankly pointless restriction.
If picking from a list of 5 things or more 'confuses you' chances are you have much bigger problems than playing games.
On a seperate note, what the story with glorious achievements? Another excellent feature removed?
GAH!
Vanya saw the 5 faction mention. But later in same interview, CA said there was 17 total playable factions.
GAH!
gardibolt
09-19-2006, 17:39
Another thing that may enter into the CA thinking is that having limited starting factions means that the early Internet discussion of the game will have a tendency to be focused on those factions and their strategies. This will help build an MTWII community faster since there will be less splintering of initial experiences with the game. If all 17 are available from the start, you don't get that same shared early experience. That's even more true when all 5 are Catholic and thus have more similarities than differences.
Given how important the net is to gaming, I have to believe this thought has come up with them.
If CA has any sense, though, they will hire frogbeastegg to write the player's guide instead of having those useless things Prima puts out.
Ohh interesting
I didn't think of that
Another thing that may enter into the CA thinking is that having limited starting factions means that the early Internet discussion of the game will have a tendency to be focused on those factions and their strategies. This will help build an MTWII community faster since there will be less splintering of initial experiences with the game. If all 17 are available from the start, you don't get that same shared early experience. That's even more true when all 5 are Catholic and thus have more similarities than differences.
Given how important the net is to gaming, I have to believe this thought has come up with them.
If CA has any sense, though, they will hire frogbeastegg to write the player's guide instead of having those useless things Prima puts out.
Yea,I think that is a very good reason.Though I know how to mod,I will most likely not unlock the unlockable factions : ).I think it gives a lot more satisfaction when you unlock factions through annihilating them then just annihilating them.I know,a very unpopular opinion :P
Nah i'm with you on this one.
Though i'm sure it would be. because i wnt to start playing right away, and not waste time modding
PLUS, it gives me a good reason to actually finish a campaign game for once
99.9% of the campaigngames i start, I dont finish
GAH!
Vanya saw the 5 faction mention. But later in same interview, CA said there was 17 total playable factions.
GAH!
Vanya, you're alive! :jawdrop: Long time no see! ~:wave: :bow:
The other 12 factions are "unlockable"; they become available only after you've completed a campaign as one of the first 5. :wall:
lancelot
09-20-2006, 12:16
Another thing that may enter into the CA thinking is that having limited starting factions means that the early Internet discussion of the game will have a tendency to be focused on those factions and their strategies. This will help build an MTWII community faster since there will be less splintering of initial experiences with the game. If all 17 are available from the start, you don't get that same shared early experience. That's even more true when all 5 are Catholic and thus have more similarities than differences.
Considering the number and size of the communities that grew when shogun and medieval1 came out I dont particularly agree with that line of reasoning...there was (and still is) more than enough net buzz to keep anyone happy.
blackeyetolga
09-20-2006, 13:18
You didn't even have to complete a full Imperial campaign in order to unlock the unlockable factions.
rory_20_uk
09-20-2006, 15:44
How many games have something such as an "advanced tab" with a suitable warning that this can completely unbalance the entire game? With this magic thing, many options could be altered through a simple GUI, such as altering different aspects of AI for example.
All the total war games so far have difficulty ratings for factions. So the newbies can select an "Easy" one, whereas the veterans can select one of the others if they should so choose.
People that find this too hard should not be playing games, they should be doing remedial English language courses.
~:smoking:
How many games have something such as an "advanced tab" with a suitable warning that this can completely unbalance the entire game? With this magic thing, many options could be altered through a simple GUI, such as altering different aspects of AI for example.
All the total war games so far have difficulty ratings for factions. So the newbies can select an "Easy" one, whereas the veterans can select one of the others if they should so choose.
People that find this too hard should not be playing games, they should be doing remedial English language courses.
~:smoking:
LOL. :laugh4: That's the point I've been trying to make, though. Most people that play TW games are generally intelligent enough to make their own choice about which faction they'd want to play as. Unless CA is trying to get kindergardeners into the game, forcing players to choose between 5 initial factions just seems absurd to me.
lancelot
09-21-2006, 13:29
^And have CA given an actual explanation for this 'feature'?
^And have CA given an actual explanation for this 'feature'?
I doubt we'll be getting one.
I think people wouldn't be as annoyed by some of CA's more odd decisions if CA just explained the reasoning behind them. I know I would.
This whole only 5 playable factions at the start just seems silly...it will probably be easy mod (no doubt MTW2 will have a descr_strat.txt file or something ;)) but that doesn't stop it from an illogical and cerazy decision.
The more I read about MTW2 the less interested I get in it. CA never seems to listen to their fans. Oh well
I think CA is afraid of new comers playing a faction that is too dificult for them. By limiting the factions to only a few, perhaps nobody will be confused this way or be 'tricked' in to playing a difficult faction.
Another reason is to give you more incentive to beat the game at least once, because unlockable factions are a prize for doing so.
Having said all that, I think they're all piss poor reasons.
Nobody has ever given the faction locking a public praising, to my knowledge, but I have heard numerous people grumble about it.
I hope modders can unlock the non-playable factions (all 21). I have a feeling though that the non-playables will have fewer units and be given less attention.
A. Smith
09-30-2006, 23:40
21 playable factions is improbable. the only faction you could play to some extent would be the papal states... aztecs are alone in the new world (thus have nothing to do for a few hundred years) while the two others are emergeants, so again you would have to do nothing for a few hundred years.
I think CA is afraid of new comers playing a faction that is too dificult for them. By limiting the factions to only a few, perhaps nobody will be confused this way or be 'tricked' in to playing a difficult faction.
...then why dont they just add 'Difficulty: Very Easy/Easy/Moderate/Slightly Hard/Hard/Very Hard' or whatever?
lancelot
10-01-2006, 13:18
I think CA is afraid of new comers playing a faction that is too dificult for them. By limiting the factions to only a few, perhaps nobody will be confused this way or be 'tricked' in to playing a difficult faction.
So what did we do when we found a faction in Shogun, then MTW, then VI too hard? We quit and picked another one...simple.
tricked into playing a difficult faction?!?!? :wall: Er...what?
Sorry dude but that line of reasoning is completely flawed.
There is simply no reason whatsoever for limiting factions short of CA thinking we are a bunch of brain dead idiots, too stupid to make basic decisions.
CrackerJap
10-01-2006, 14:54
Its so that the average gamer will have to play more if they want to play any other factions in the campaign map. Basically its a gimmick to get people to spend more time on the game and increase the likelihood that they would buy other TW products.
Faenaris
10-01-2006, 16:02
I think the reason why CA has chosen to "block" most factions for your first game is simply because the factions that you can play are the ones that are the most "fluffy". In RTW, Rome had the most "fluffy" options and features (i.e. longer speeches, senate missions, largest unit roster, ...). I believe they are following the same path for M2TW.
Besides, you can most probably mod the game and have all the factions in 5 minutes. And even if you can't mod, someone will post a mod on the forums. So, I don't really see what all the fuss is regarding the limited starting choice. Granted, we don't like it. But we can change it, so it isn't the end of the world. :)
The thing that we CAN rave and rant about it is the possibility that Muslim and Orthodox factions seem to be less fluffy than the main factions. That I don't like. Ofcourse, I hope CA will prove me wrong. :)
CaesarAugustus
10-01-2006, 21:55
I think the reason why CA has chosen to "block" most factions for your first game is simply because the factions that you can play are the ones that are the most "fluffy". In RTW, Rome had the most "fluffy" options and features (i.e. longer speeches, senate missions, largest unit roster, ...). I believe they are following the same path for M2TW.
If that is true than they should have five "fluffy" factions from different cultures. For example, the starting factions could be England (catholic), Byzantines (orthodox), Egyptians/Turks(muslim), HRE (another catholic), and Venetians (just because i think theyre so damn cool:laugh4: )
That way it would be something like
3 'fluffy' catholic (if you take the venetian thing seroiusly)
1 'fluffy' orthodox
and 1 or 2 'fluffy' muslim
That might keep everyone happy if CA just HAS to make only 5 starter factions that get special treatment above the rest.
Polemists
10-02-2006, 01:00
I think you'll lose this argument against CA. Since CA has final say, and they choose certain areas.CA has a history of focusing on certain areas, more then others. Your not going to convince them to put in 17 playable factions and make them all equal.
Good news, most have speaches. (let's just hope there all cool , where as in rome only romans had cool ones). There seems to be a rather robust unit list. I agree though they want you to experience the most you can starting off. Not try like Almohads, and then be all mad cause you don't have as much to do as say HRE.
It makes sense marketing wise, and it's way it is. No point gettin all mad, just accept it.
So what did we do when we found a faction in Shogun, then MTW, then VI too hard? We quit and picked another one...simple.
tricked into playing a difficult faction?!?!? Er...what?
Sorry dude but that line of reasoning is completely flawed.
There is simply no reason whatsoever for limiting factions short of CA thinking we are a bunch of brain dead idiots, too stupid to make basic decisions.
YOu didn't read my entire comment.
It's just to make things a bit more interesting. You unlock things...
No different to advancing periods or tech trees.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.