M2TW: Worth the Price? [Archive]

Durallan

01-16-2007, 00:50

I won't say anything until they release the final patch for the game because that wouldn't be fair on CA, judging the game that way (even if it should have been released fixed) because I think its what they do after they release a buggy game thats important.

Egosoft had a very buggy game released with X3 Reunion 1.0. VERY buggy. if you install the 2.0 patch the difference is simply astounding and puts my faith back in egosoft even if they were forced to released a buggy version by their publisher.

So I won't judge CA's character until they release the last patch for this game.

Hollerbach

01-16-2007, 01:01

Personally I'm waiting till the gold edition or even in a year or two's time when the game + 1-2 expansions comes out in a single cheap package.

I don't think I'm as picky as some folks and Rome 1.5 and BI post patch are both really fun for me. That being said pre-many patches Rome was not so great.

I'm happy to play Rome for a while still as there's also a heap of good Rome mods I havn't tried yet. Once M2TW is in it's final most bug free state and their are a bunch of great mods around for it then I'll buy it.

Slug For A Butt

01-16-2007, 01:51

I'm with Lusted, I love this game warts and all. Personally, RTW was my favourite TW game so far because of the period, but this I think this is a fun game. I do feel the game was a little rushed for the Christmas market, but hell... they've got a business to run. I also remember the posts bitching because M2TW "is taking sooo long" and the "if it ever arrives" threads, these people are then complaining because it is released maybe a couple of months before it should have been. As long as they patch it afterwards that's fine with me.

And yes, I am building a new machine for this game. So its going to cost me a bit of cash, thats fine as I only upgrade my PC once every couple of years when the new TW title comes out.

I don't know what you find unacceptable, CA supported RTW more than any other TW game (maybe I am wrong, but didn't they patch it more than any other TW game?). So unless I am wrong (I am human :yes: ), your assertion that they didn't support RTW is way off the mark.

Your point is?

*EDIT : Oh, and how can you possibly call RTW a "debacle"? It is a fine game, but maybe you should stick to STW where you had to chase an outnumbered enemy around the battlemap and corner them before they would fight... christ that drove me crazy.

Northnovas

01-16-2007, 02:02

Yes, having just played the MTW VI series this is a step up "warts and all". Not having played the RTW series I have no comparison issues but I am satisfied and waited till the first patch came out before I purchased. Have been playing vanilla and with mods.
If your CPU needs an upgrade then it's worth it to upgrade and get the game. Keep in mind it doesn't not need anything major if you have upgraded in the last year or so. My system is decent and I am very happy with the video card settings on low. It is still a visual experience and runs great.

econ21

01-16-2007, 02:44

I got a new graphics card for this game. It might not have been strictly necessary, but I felt this was the kind of "dead cert" game that justified such an investment. Plus in the long run, it will pay off as other recent games - such as Neverwinter Nights 2 - are surprisingly demanding in hardware.

If you consider RTW a debacle, then don't buy M2TW. The "debacle" view is a surprising view for someone who regularly frequents the EB forums. No RTW = no EB or any other of those stunning mods. I personally don't much like RTW out of the box but I am totally bowled over by some of the mods of it. RTR and EB bring ancient wargames to the computer in a way I would not have imagined possible.

It's not yet clear whether M2TW will generate the same fantastic mods as RTW. Apparently the modders don't have a tool to create new skins for units and without that, the chances for a major team mod might fade away. But given the moves of CA so far towards the modders, I am fairly optimistic they will provide the necessary help. Lusted may know more.

In terms of the vanilla M2TW, it advances on RTW in a number of ways. I also find the strategic and tactical AI significantly better. The campaign map feels almost as tight and competitive as the STW/MTW Risk style maps. And the VH battles are challenging without obvious +7 bonuses to AI stats. Out of the box, I think it is the best TW game so far (for SP). And it would be a great basis for mods. (Ultimately, even EB and RTR etc are limited by rather tame strategic and tactical AI.)

Graphically, of course, it looks very nice - the trailers did not lie. The weather and terrain are particularly striking. Play a battle on the Scottish highlands and you may feel even the wonderful STW Shinano map has finally been equalled.

In terms of CA patching policy, I suspect we will see a repeat of what they've done before. A few patches, each of which significantly improve the game. (For example, the first patch got rid of AI passivity when attacking in field battles - that was a game killing bug for me.) There probably will be some niggling bugs left over at the end of the patching process, but I am not sure how "grievous" they will be. Certainly not game killing. It would be a strange person who would not play a RTW mod because large stone walls are still bugged.

There are signs of some changes at CA. Palamedes in particular seems to be trying to contect with the hardcore modding and MP community, listening to their concerns. I think that's great, as typically those concerns are also things that will enhance the experience of regular players just in SP mode. Right now there are a number of bugs and balance issues, but I am fairly optimistic we will get a reasonable solution from CA and that modders will be able to tweak things further. Let's face it, stats balancing is partly a matter of personal interpretation and preference. The guys who knew for sure how powerful knights were against spears are long dead.

Slug For A Butt

01-16-2007, 03:23

@Northnovas I agree, it IS a step up as far as I'm concerned. And you don't need a mega machine to play it as we all believed (atm I'm only running an AMD Athlon 1900+, 1Gb RAM and a 96xx video... (soon to change) it runs OK on medium settings and is still a treat for the eyeballs).

@econ21 I also agree, it seems a lot more subtle in the way it delivers a better challenge at higher levels, not as clumsy with the +stats. And, oh yes!, RTR was a treat. And this is all to come for M2TW.
:balloon2: I can't wait. :balloon2:

fallen851

01-16-2007, 07:57

Why the debacle with RTW?

I often don't notice bugs in games. But with RTW, I remember starting a game as the Iberians, and immediately noticing my generals were blue...

I also remember when for fun in a custom battle, I took 8 units of Egyptian Cavalry, and ran them into 8 Greek phalanx units with generals cavarly head on. I did this to check out the neat dust effects the cavalry created.

Then as I anticipated the massacre, the cavalry routed the phalanx, despite hitting directly from the front. No flanking.

Of course this totally didn't turn me off from RTW, it does have a lot going for it, but what upsets me is the potential it could have had, if they had spent the time to fix the little stuff. Like the pila bug, in 1.3 no pilas, in 1.5 pilas in melee.

That, and the AI being braindead. I spend about 3 months creating a mod for RTW, only to play campaign and realize even with all my changes, the game wasn't much more fun. After you gain a small "empire" as any nation in RTW, even with mods, the game is over. You can't lose.

Oh well. RTW could have been so much more, and the changes required aren't exactly massive, CA just needs to do the work, and do it right.

econ21

01-16-2007, 10:09

RTW could have been so much more, and the changes required aren't exactly massive, CA just needs to do the work, and do it right.

I agree some small tweaks could have made RTW more challenging. And to be fair, some of them have been done in M2TW. For example, the AI is better at keeping out of reach of a superior human army on the campaign map. And it does more often double up armies, so they can be mutually supporting.

However, I think you are being too harsh in implying it is easy to program an AI that can beat a skilled player in a game as complex as RTW. I've played a fair number of historical wargames and I can't recall one that could do that. To get that, I think you have to simplify the game options (like chess), let the AI cheat/get major bonuses (like Civ) or bring in the computer's speed edge (like RTS)

After you gain a small "empire" as any nation in RTW, even with mods, the game is over. You can't lose.

This is probably still true of M2TW, although there are some fun late game challenges to spice it up (Mongols, Timurids, Aztecs). Plus the campaign time limit is tighter. However, it seems to take M2TW longer to get to that "tipping point" when you are too big to be beat. I got to turn 90+ as England twice, without feeling it was getting too easy. Yes, I was not going to lose but it was challenging to hold onto what I had and incrementally increase it. On VH neighbouring factions tend to pile in on you. Plus, while I could win 1:2 odds battles in RTR, I would not like to chance it in M2TW. Avoiding sacking and obeying the Pope may help restrain the human advantage.

Playing Civ4 last night, I did think "why can't TW be this challenging?". In that game, on higher difficulty levels, being at war with a couple of AI factions can be a real threat and even if you survive it's quite likely you will lose at the end (they will build the spaceship first). I think the RTW/M2TW strategic AI needs to be programmed to be a more brutal - defend its provinces with decent stacks, accumulate an enormous army of several full stacks before seriously attacking and then mercilessly devour human settlements one by one; ideally in cooperation with an ally or two. It could do that in STW, but has not got there with the RTW style map.

My impression so far from my English games is that the strategic AI lacks a killer instinct; its wars often seem rather half-hearted. However, England has a rather safe strategic position. We are starting a HRE PBM in the Throne Room so this may provide a better test. In MTW, HRE was one faction where the AI could overrun me, piling in from all sides. :sweatdrop:

dismal

01-16-2007, 15:49

As someone who has a job, I consider $40 for a game that you play for hours to be a good deal. The time is worth far more than the $.

DensterNY

01-16-2007, 16:02

As a fan of Total war who has played MTW, MTW:VI, RTW, RTW: BI I have to say that CA is definitely moving in a good direction with MTW2, especially since the latest patch was released. I'm playing a campaign on VH/VH and fine the AI doing some smart things that I hadn't previously experienced with such as:

* Rallying out from behind walls rather than being starved in sieges
* Continually pushing out my merchants to hurt my income stream
* Starting wars to thwart my expansion and growth rather than sit back and watch me become a behemoth.
* Fighting more cohesively than in RTW but not as singularly as MTW

I know it doesn't seem like big advances but it does translate into greater enjoyment and challenge which is the case after all isn't it?

Overall as a previous poster said for $40 or $50 bucks and the fun you'll get out of it, its a definite buy.

redriver

01-16-2007, 16:50

I waited to buy M2TW after the RTW debacle, where bugs are still present, despite a community pointing them out.

But it seems like the same bug had bitten M2TW, and it will be a game with maybe a few patches, but largely unsupported, and with grevious bugs. This is unacceptable to me. Do you guys think that CA has changed their policy from RTW and will support this game?

Furthermore I have to upgrade my computer to run it, which will cost additionally.

Is M2TW worth the price for me?

dead on.. ya hit it on the head bro!
and if ya think RTW was bad meet a new champ! don't recall RTW ever had that many glarin' gamebrakin' bugs this game has had on release!
also, RTW graphics are more than pleasin' especially if ya look at some mods that use medieval theme to make it more fair to compare...

my vote was a big fat NO. I didn't buy the game for 2 reasons:
1) don't have the hardware to enjoy the only thin' m2tw is good for - graphics
2) too many bugs and we already have mtw game.. with more deapth and features just lesser graphics...

Lord_hazard

01-16-2007, 19:20

It will be. Im sure the game will be fixed in due time. Just sad they the pubs had to rush the devs (atleast thats what i think is the most logical explanation.).

Odin

01-16-2007, 19:45

Bijo

01-16-2007, 22:49

@fallen
What I say to you is this: don't get it. This game, wherein many bugs are, is not worth $40 or $50 whatever it costs (forgot the price already, I'd like to forget :P). Or perhaps it is, as it's become the standard to release buggy unfinished games?
Sure, it can be enjoyed, but you'll notice things are wrong therewith as soon as you start playing or when you just pay enough attention (which I wouldn't recommend). But if you decide getting it, just enjoy it :2thumbsup: (and I'd say don't come to this forum to read about bugs and stuff, heh heh).

Slug For A Butt

01-17-2007, 04:50

As someone who has a job, I consider $40 for a game that you play for hours to be a good deal. The time is worth far more than the $.

Comgratulations on having a a job dismal, I'm proud of you. (:idea2: Hey, what a way to get money).
But seriously, that sounds a little condescending. I think the game is worth every penny, but I don't feel the need to tell everyone that my money is worth more than theirs because I've got a job. You know, a lot of the younger generation here probably earn their money too.
But... "As someone that has a job" I'm glad that you are enjoying it. I enjoy it too.

Fookison

01-17-2007, 06:40

Worth every penny, er dollar spent on this game. My buddy and I have waited for this game for 2 years since RTW came out and we said, we need MTW with those graphics. It went beyond where we anticipated in the game play as well and are loving the great hours of gaming joy!!! Best TW game yet and certainly an improvement on the original game........Bummer to those who are not having a good experience. I like the massive increase in strategy required for the game play period and have not experienced many of the technical glitches some are having.:2thumbsup:

Ars Moriendi

01-17-2007, 13:01

M2TW : is it worth the money I spent on it ?

Let's see how it compares in terms of economic efficiency, dollars per hour of fun :

- football, ticket : 60$ / 2 hours = 30$/h (our team won)
- bar, wine : 30$ / 2 hours = 15$/h (not too drunk)
- movie, DVD : 20$ / 4 hours = 5$/h (good movie, saw it twice)
- movie, theater: 7$ / 2 hours = 3.5$/h (my gf liked it)
- book, 300p : 25$ / 10 hours = 2.5$/h (I'm a slow reader)
- M2TW, 50$ / 100 hours = 0.5$/h (if I play it at least as much as MTW)

The only cheaper form of entertainment I can think of is television.

Notes :
- 100 hours means less than 2h per week for a year - many of us will play more than this.
- no other video game ever got me above 100 hrs of play (except for Angband, but that one was free)
- yes, I do realize that the quality and intensity of enjoyment is a big factor : there's movies I'd pay much more to see, there's no football game I'd pay anything for, and I've read books that are priceless (to me).

Ser Clegane

01-17-2007, 13:54

But seriously, that sounds a little condescending
I do not think that was meant to be condescending.

When you have a full-time job that gives you a decent income your criteria as to what qualifies as a game that is worth its money might change (they certainly did for me).
Relative to my student times time has now become more precious when compared to money.
So, now, if I can really enjoy a game for 10-20 hours, I would consider 40EUR to be a fair deal, even if I lose my interest in that game after these 10-20 hours.
As a student, long-term replay values of a game certainly were more important to me as I could not afford to buy a game very often while I had more time to actually play a game that I bought (e.g., nowadays I will probably never be able to finish a campaign with all available factions)

econ21

01-17-2007, 14:00

Ser Clegane has a point, but earning a wage does not necessarily mean money for games is easy to come by ... if your significant other does not approve of your hobby. :sweatdrop: :whip:

dismal

01-17-2007, 15:49

Ser Clegane has a point, but earning a wage does not necessarily mean money for games is easy to come by ... if your significant other does not approve of your hobby. :sweatdrop: :whip:

Yes, well, that's where the time issue comes in as well. For me time to play is more valuable than the money by far, so I want that time to be enjoyable.

Anyway, I wan't trying to make this about me so I made as generic a comment as possible.

DensterNY

01-17-2007, 16:38

Ser Clegane has a point, but earning a wage does not necessarily mean money for games is easy to come by ... if your significant other does not approve of your hobby. :sweatdrop: :whip:

Hehe... the dreaded significant other who doesn't appreciate the necessity for conquest and glory in a man's heart. They're more feared than the Mongol Horde and are more of a hindrance to an empire than the Pope.

Zasz1234

01-17-2007, 17:41

Definately worth the money. The TW games are getting closer to that sweet sweet goal of Civ games with playable battles. Diplomacy is best yet in this game esp with the Pope so the added complexity on the big map is what did it for me.

The sig other definately makes playing a bit harder:juggle2:

Slug For A Butt

01-18-2007, 03:36

Ser Clegane has a point, but earning a wage does not necessarily mean money for games is easy to come by ... if your significant other does not approve of your hobby. :sweatdrop: :whip:

Sod £30 for the game! I've had to justify over £300 for another machine to play the game as the good Lord intended. That's an expensive game... especially as far as my wife (boss :ballchain: ) is concerned.
Clegane made valid points. Personally, I think having to pay monthly for my mortgage, bills, car, motorbike, daughters etc. should mean I'm more insolvent than most. But I think £30 for a game I'll get months of fun from is cheap.
My only gripe was dismal sounding condescending, almost patronising to other members who maybe received it as a gift or had it bought for them. Apparently his job and hence earned money makes his opinion more valid because its his earned money. I maybe a little too confrontational sometimes (I'm sure I'll be hearing from econ21 :sweatdrop: ), but I would never have dreamt of patronising the other members in this way.

pianonator

01-18-2007, 04:10

Goodness folks. You'd think Medieval 2: Total War had run over your puppy or something. As has been stated, lots of games come out with bugs. However, most are minor. Yes, I'm as angry as all'y'all about the billmen, but I have faith that they'll be fixed. M2TW is playing fine for me, and I was actually quite happy on vanilla RTW for 1 and a half campaigns. I already have the first patch for M2TW, and I can patiently wait for a second one and still have fun. And I totally agree with the price breakdown idea. M2TW has already paid for itself in wages of mental health, and I just bought it over Christmas break. Yes, I think M2TW was worth all the hype, as was RTW and MTW. (Never played Shogun - does that make me a bad person?)

I'll be totally honest with you - I read that this game was in development last Winter. This summer, when it was time to get my College Laptop (yay I'm a freshman), I made sure I got one with a fast processor, big hard drive, and good graphics card (like anyone who does any research before buying things does, instead of just buying a Dell Latitude because your college tells you to) bearing in mind that this game would come out eventually. My Acer is serving me well.

My advice: If you are a fan of Total War already and have played your fill of RTW, get it, because you'll love it. If you're a fan of RTS, go for it - it doesn't get any better than this. Chances are, you're not even on this forum unless you're already a fan of the series. Oh, make sure your computer can handle it. Yes, I know, most of the game's improvements over Rome came with the graphics, but it's a solid, solid game. The bugs can be fixed, and so far haven't really bugged me that much anyway. If your computer can't handle it, don't get a new computer on account of this game, but a new graphics card may not be a bad thing if you know you want the game. One hour of playing the game and you'll feel justified in your expenditure.

All in all, if you're looking to buy a game and your computer can handle it, go for it. If not, it'll be here for when you are. M2TW is huge and full of possibilities and replay time. This series keeps getting better and better. Kudos, CA!

Terribly sorry for that long post. I tend to ramble.

Edit: Ah yes, Significant Other: Total War. It is difficult.

Slug For A Butt

01-18-2007, 04:22

My friend, rambling aside... well said. :balloon2:
And STW was phenomenal when it arrived, but I don't wear rose tinted spectacles and think you would be disappointed if you played it now. It is a good game, but it is also very limited in it's diversity and (for me) longevity in terms of playability.
(I'm now putting my tin helmet on) Stick with RTW or M2TW as far as I'm concerned.

fallen851

01-18-2007, 06:43

It could do that in STW, but has not got there with the RTW style map.

I think this is the problem. I've only played RTW and the demo for STW, which got me into the series. I held off buying STW because RTW was coming out shortly after I played the demo, then I realized I couldn't play RTW because my comp was too slow, so when I upgraded and remembered about RTW I got it.

Anyways, back to the main point, in the STW "battle trainer", I think I have like 60%, 70% max, win ratio against the AI, in the battle with 2 units of spears, 2 units of archers, 1 heavy cav, and 1 spear cav.

The AI is good. It makes good choices, it uses units well, it creates matchup problems for me, and often overruns me.

I've lost a total of two battles in RTW. One where I foolishly charged some rebels up a mountain with town watch, and the other when the Spanish declared war on me and attack 4 units of town watch on the move, with a full stack including Bullmen, and I don't use lame tactics...

However I've taken on three full stacks, with a 3/4 stack, and won. The game is pathetically easy on the battlefield. If that happened in STW, I'm assuming I would lose bad, since I can hardly handle an equal battle...

Now maybe I just suck at STW, I don't know, but I really want effective battle AI!

dismal

01-18-2007, 15:26

My only gripe was dismal sounding condescending, almost patronising to other members who maybe received it as a gift or had it bought for them. Apparently his job and hence earned money makes his opinion more valid because its his earned money. I maybe a little too confrontational sometimes (I'm sure I'll be hearing from econ21 :sweatdrop: ), but I would never have dreamt of patronising the other members in this way.

The question was "was the game worth the price". I answered how I felt about the question that was asked.

Moah

01-18-2007, 15:44

Yes

And I have the answer to the significant other - work abroad! 2 weeks solid every evening gameplay followed by 2 weeks total cold turkey. It's great. Apart from the Cold Turkey. And being away form home for 2 weeks at a time.

Well, apart from the Cold Turkey, being away from home...[what has M2TW ever done for us]

Matty

01-19-2007, 10:21

I paid for a new video card (after paying for an extra GB of RAM) to enable me to actually play the game. So its cost me c. 300 USD to play the game. After struggling with low resolution and eyeball tearing slowness on sieges for a couple of months I can honestly say they were the best value purchases I have made in the last year. But then I do have a job. Ahem. LOVE those blood soaked soldiers at the end of a tough battle....

screwtype

01-22-2007, 03:53

No it isnt. Most new releases now are mediocre beta's that get the label "gold" and they are put out. You buy a new PC game today at release, you can count on some blemishs. If you like the give and take of testing features reporting bugs and participating in solutions by all means shell out your 50.00.

Personally I dont want to be a paying beta tester.

Me either. I will not be buying M2TW until I hear all the major bugs have been fixed. It's plain to me I'd hate to play the game in its current state. There are some people who actually think RTW is a better game, and that says it all to me.

Quite frankly, I'm pretty much finished with being a fan of the Total War series anyhow. In my opinion the only really good game they put out was Shogun/MI, it's been downhill all the way since. I don't see myself ever buying a full price TW game again, in fact I'll probably wait until they are published by Red Ant Software for $9.95.

Odin

01-22-2007, 17:19

Me either. I will not be buying M2TW until I hear all the major bugs have been fixed. It's plain to me I'd hate to play the game in its current state. There are some people who actually think RTW is a better game, and that says it all to me.

Quite frankly, I'm pretty much finished with being a fan of the Total War series anyhow. In my opinion the only really good game they put out was Shogun/MI, it's been downhill all the way since. I don't see myself ever buying a full price TW game again, in fact I'll probably wait until they are published by Red Ant Software for $9.95.

I personally like the time period and I will buy MTW2 some time in the future. That said it is the rare occassion when a PC game is released without some issues (like the spear thing, or cavalry charges). Some guys love the interaction and contibutions you do when you get a early release game.

I tip my hat to them, personally I'll wait until the company patches up thier game to correct issues that should already be fixed. Lots of companies release games and patch later under the guise of "support" and why do they do this?

Mainly because the can, gamers buy the game no matter what. If it wasnt profitable companies wouldnt do it. I understand its a business model and by all accounts (the TW series as an example) its very successful. For me I'll stick with MTW VI with a mod, why? Because its an excellent game refined, patched and modded to get the most out of the system, just like MTW2 will be 6-12 months from now.

screwtype

01-22-2007, 18:45

Perhaps I overstated the case a little. After all I haven't even played the game yet, maybe it's better than I've been led to believe.

All the same, I've been very disappointed to hear about all the bugs, especially with the AI and other important issues such as pathfinding and unit balance. When added to the fact that next to nothing has been done to revamp the clumsy campaign game and primitive economic system since Shogun, which have always been major gripes of mine, and it's clear to me that CA are never going to design the superior strategy game I once hoped to see from them.

But if they can't or won't design a good strategy game, at least I want a decent action game, and the plethora of bugs and AI inadequacies indicate that for whatever reason they are no longer delivering even that much.

And when all is said and done, I've already got three TW games on my hard drive, do I really need another one, especially when it's apparent the gameplay if anything has been going backwards since Shogun? I'm afraid the answer is no. If the AI had been getting better with each new release, I'd probably be lining up to put my money down along with everyone else. But when I know I can get better gameplay and more entertainment from Shogun, why bother?

So there's really no incentive for me to keep supporting this company with my dollars. My only real interest in M2TW is to see how much better the graphics are than in previous games, but I'm certainly not going to lay down AU$100 for the privilege.

TW is definitely in the "budget" category for me now, my interest is primarily in good, complex, immersive, and preferably historically realistic strategy games and that clearly isn't what CA is about. I'm really not sure what they're about anymore, except perhaps selling as many units as humanly possible, but if that's their overriding focus, they won't be selling much to me.

Odin

01-22-2007, 18:59

Perhaps I overstated the case a little. After all I haven't even played the game yet, maybe it's better than I've been led to believe.

A lot of very smart gamers think its a great game, I have no doubt its going to be a gem, but all precious stones need to be polished.

All the same, I've been very disappointed to hear about all the bugs, especially with the AI and other important issues such as pathfinding and unit balance.

I guess this is where you and I differ, I am not dissapointed at all, I have come to expect that new release games arent always up to snuff. As I have said, some guys love to be in on the fix, some (like me) prefer to wait until the games got a little patina on it.

TW is definitely in the "budget" category for me now, my interest is primarily in good, complex, immersive, and preferably historically realistic strategy games and that clearly isn't what CA is about. I'm really not sure what they're about anymore, except perhaps selling as many units as humanly possible, but if that's their overriding focus, they won't be selling much to me.

Well you and I have a completely different outlook, I think CA makes a pretty good game when its all said and done, Ive gotten a lot of enjoyment out of STW and MTW (didnt get RTW, not intrested in the time period). While no game is perfect, CA and the TW series certainly dosent mince its message on what you are getting, its a graphic intensive battle simulation with some strategy elements thrown in.

Steph

01-22-2007, 19:09

Stlaind

01-22-2007, 19:12

I think a lot of people like to kvetch on the forums.
Yeah, the game may well have been rushed, yes there is bugs.
But if you honestly think that neither is going to be the case, you've got no clue about the software industry as a whole.

screwtype

01-22-2007, 19:45

A lot of very smart gamers think its a great game, I have no doubt its going to be a gem, but all precious stones need to be polished

I'd like to believe that, but I have little reason to. Was RTW ever fixed? They stomped most of the serious bugs, yes, but did they ever fix the somnolent AI? No they didn't.

I've just reached the stage where I no longer kid myself that a patch is going to fix the gameplay flaws. Yes, I think many of the bugs will be fixed, but I very much doubt the AI is going to improve noticeably from this point. If I'm wrong, then I'll happily go and buy the game. But I'll believe it when I see it.

I guess this is where you and I differ, I am not dissapointed at all, I have come to expect that new release games arent always up to snuff. As I have said, some guys love to be in on the fix, some (like me) prefer to wait until the games got a little patina on it

I definitely think the smart thing to do is to wait. Not only do you get the game cheaper, but when you finally do get it, you get the benefit of all the patches and all the mods. That way you haven't grown tired of the game before it's even been made halfway playable. You're coming to it fresh when it's at its best.

Well you and I have a completely different outlook, I think CA makes a pretty good game when its all said and done, Ive gotten a lot of enjoyment out of STW and MTW (didnt get RTW, not intrested in the time period). While no game is perfect, CA and the TW series certainly dosent mince its message on what you are getting, its a graphic intensive battle simulation with some strategy elements thrown in.

Yes, I'm not saying it's such a bad paradigm, just that they did it better the first time around, and I see no reason to repeat the experience with inferior gameplay.

Eye candy is all very nice but it certainly isn't worth the cost of a full price game, in fact it's not worth much at all in my book.

Slug For A Butt

01-22-2007, 21:06

But if they can't or won't design a good strategy game, at least I want a decent action game, and the plethora of bugs and AI inadequacies indicate that for whatever reason they are no longer delivering even that much.

Then stick to an action game, with or without the bugs. This isn't an action game! This, as with most TW games, is a good mind stimulater as long as you don't take the easy cheap ways to win such as all out cav attacks (M2) or phalanx wall in the corner of the map (RTW). Not using these lame tactics isn't "restricting yourself", it's just playing the game the way it should be.

Eye candy is all very nice but it certainly isn't worth the cost of a full price game, in fact it's not worth much at all in my book.

We read different books, it is to me. Why don't you stick to STW instead of bitching about a game you haven't even played yet?
Christ... this is what it has come to. Even people that have never played the game jump on the bandwagon and bitch about it, what chance do CA have? As far as I'm concerned you have no valid opinion of this game until you have played it.
Stop jumping on the bandwagon! Make your own mind up.

alex9337

01-22-2007, 22:15

Best game I have ever played. I thoroughly enjoy it. Prior to this, my favourite game was RTW.

This game has been out for now, what, approximately 9 weeks? I got it the first day and have averaged about 20 hours (minimum) per week, for a total of 180 hours of play so far.

For $50, that makes my cost per hour (to date) to be a little over $0.25 per hour.

I am by no means anywhere near being bored with this game yet and I look forward to more patches and more great work by the modding community to extend and enhance my enjoyment even more!

Eventually, I fully expect my cost to use ratio to drop to a fraction of a penny per hour. There are very few forms of entertainment that can match this.

I love the time period, role play the game in my head while I play and am not overly concerned with "achieving" the pre-defined victory conditions that have been set. Actually, the payoff that you get to see when you "win" isn't great, anyway.

I realize that this, like any computer game, has its limitations. However, this does not detract from the splendid graphics and for me, the sheer enjoyment derived from tinkering around with a game that deals with my favourite area of study.

I heartily recommend that you purchase this game if you can enjoy it like I can.

"To me, Lewellyn, To me!"

Callahan9119

01-23-2007, 14:15

i havnt read all these posts, but i said no it isnt worth the price; especially if you are forced to upgrade even 100 dollars worth of ram to play it.

if you started your TW experiance at rtw then u will prolly love this, as do some die hards who just love anything TW. i find it quite lacking in content and depth. besides graphics and diplomacy issues {that have been dying to be fixed since STW} there wasnt really much done to the game....although instead of making the ai fight smarter they just made it charge you right away, which oddly enough does seem to make the fights more challenging

i like the new map that rome brought, but i am still so mad that my favorite aspect of MTW was left out, glorious achievments, i have faithfully bought every single TW game since shogun, and if this was STW2 i would be perfectly happy to have only the option to conquer, as this is what actually happened to japan, but its just cheesy doing it in europe i think....and with each installment i see a continued lack of vision on the part of CA

i mean i wasnt even done with my first campaign as the english and i was already bored and thinking "didnt i just do this as greece"

the short campaigns are ok, but the long ones are so tedious and the fact that i'v done this for the past 5 years just makes it mind numbing...just waiting for a good mod to hopefully be made, or they make an expansion for this set back in japan, or a well made mod to this game adding a glorious achievments type game

if i could actually get online to play my opinion might be different, but as of now my cd key printed inside my game is "invalid" even after going to documents and settings and retyping it, but what else is new :toilet:

ASPER THE GREAT

01-23-2007, 15:15

Well now, I have been playing war games for 30 years now. and the TW games are by far the best ever!!!!:yes: With the bugs included. I bought SG+invasion, ME+inv, Rome+inv, and even screwed around with the mods a bit. The price tag of $40 or $50 might be high for our younger players, but for an adult?????:whip: MEII is by far the best graphics, and AI that CA has put out and you can patch it all you want, but it still gives you hours of enjoyment:2thumbsup: :egypt: :clown:. I wait till some games come on the market & read PC Gamer to see if the game will be worth the box it comes in (sometime the box is better than the game lol:furious3: ). If you are posting on the ORG that says you play the TW games and if you did not buy it yet "THAT IS YOUR FAULT AND YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED". I say it is a must have for any war gamer of any age... GO BUY IT TODAY:laugh4: .

Odin

01-23-2007, 16:42

did not buy it yet "THAT IS YOUR FAULT AND YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED". I say it is a must have for any war gamer of any age... GO BUY IT TODAY:laugh4: .

I dont own the game, but have played the total war series a lot, I have been on these boards since early 04 and consider myself somewhat informed on current issues with the series. There is enough data on the boards, and history with CA that one can make an informed opinion.

Sure if you have the game your in a better informed position, but setting forth conditions by which to post an opinion and its validity seems a bit forward for a person on thier 3rd post.

Perhaps a little more cache before we tell others what they should be ashamed off? :thumbsdown: