M2TW: Disappointing or not

[The Foolish Horseman]

How many people were disappointed with M2TW? I was not, but im sure other people were

[Caius]

Where is Gah! here

[The Foolish Horseman]

i dont know the concept of Gah! please will someone fill me in on it?

[Dutch_guy]

I am of the opinion that M2TW is the better game, keep in mind, I'm comparing both 1.1 patched games.

:balloon2:

[The Foolish Horseman]

fair point dutchy (you dont mind if i call you dutchy right?)

[Dutch_guy]

fair point dutchy (you dont mind if i call you dutchy right?)

Thank you, and no I do not mind at all ~:)

:balloon2:

[The Foolish Horseman]

good i did not want to be falsely portrayed as a rascist

[Artorius Maximus]

I think Medieval II: Total War's features were a little better, but I still love playing Rome: Total War.

And everyone, I present to you a duel between Rome: Total War and Medieval II: Total War! ( See all the smilies below )
:knight: :duel: :viking: :charge:

[The Foolish Horseman]

I think Medieval II: Total War's features were a little better, but I still love playing Rome: Total War.

And everyone, I present to you a duel between Rome: Total War and Medieval II: Total War! ( See all the smilies below )
:knight: :duel: :viking: :charge:


LOL LOL

[Owen Glyndwr]

I thought the game was overall better. Albeit getting rich is much easier, but the battles seem so much more engaging to me.

[Saulot]

I voted the "same" option, because both games have things that i like. For example, merchants and princesses in M2 make the strategic map more interesting to me; on the other hand, Rome seemed to have more provinces in areas that interest me, i.e. Tunisia, Egypt, Sicily, South Italy, Greece.

[CountArach]

I went with "Same", not based on features and stuff, in that sense it is better than Rome, but because it failed to grab my attention enough to warrant finishing a campaign. Also the AI was not worked on enough for my liking and was not a real challenge.

[naut]

Gah.

[ChaosLord]

Dissapointing, CA's downward spiral continues. With some luck and alot of modding it might become decent, but as always I wouldn't advise holding your breath while waiting for it to happen.

[Martok]

Consider this my write-in vote for GAH!

Medieval 2 is somewhat better than Rome, but for me that's not saying much. While it does show CA stepped up their efforts this time around, it still doesn't grip me the way Shogun and MTW (1) do.

[Aemilianus the Younger]

They need to make a RTW 2!!!!
there should be other campiagns like the Alexander campaign not just the Imperial Campaign. For example: Hannibal's Attack on Rome and Julius Caesar's Callic Campiagn for starters.
maybe even some Greek campiagns?

I know i would buy it.

[Noir]

Agree with Martok

Too many campaign features without good reason and previous battle engine settings still missing.

Better than Rome, but that was expected (same engine, need for more sophistication as there is no element of surprise, outcry for battle speeds etc).

Emphasis in blitz strategy.

Winning battles by frontal cavalry charges (!!)

3D map still dissapointing and animations, colors, unit cards and voice work very annoying and childish ("These people will call you king now, sire":no: )

Much more "quantity" and considerably less quality.

Tactical battles a shadow of their former (engine) self.

Tried it at a friend's and decided not to buy now or in the future as the battle engine is missing features that cannot be restored with modding (i had enough of fixing, modding, testing, patching, trying etc with RTW (although certain mods were really worth it) only to find the same good old quick routs occuring in slightly more time than in vanilla).

Can't say i was disapointed - i knew the same engine would be used.

Less spectacle and more tactics will only do it for me (and better battle view and controls - the current ones are incredibly inadequate).

[Tran]

good i did not want to be falsely portrayed as a rascist

You are racist indeed...you made a thread titled 'M2TW: Disappointing or not' but in the poll all the options are its comparison to RTW except the 'Not Worth'. You think everyone has RTW? What about those who only own M2TW? You are racis...wait...maybe it's more like elitist...or...shall we call it Romist or RTWist...~;p

[Braden]

I've found M2 disappointing but only as much as Rome was disappointing initially.

However, I voted "about the same" as M2 has not engaged me anywhere as much as Rome did initially.

I've found the campaign map has TOO much on it now and looks cluttered and confusing (could be my resolution though).

The depiction of the factions hasn't inspired me as much as M1 did.

Graphically wise - of course, its more polished than Rome and enables you to zoom in for greater detail than Rome did but...what commander actually "commands" at that level?? Not many and certainly not me.

One thing, and one I had hoped wouldn't ruin the game, is Time Dilation: the new "turns" system has really FUBAR'd the quality and pace of the campaign game that I can see. Not only has it abstracted the ages of the Avatars (who I became attached too in previous games) but has artifically introduced Factions that just should NOT be there at all! (Americas). I was worried about this concept when it was first announced, hearted by many people who said that it wasn't a problem and didn't matter/make a difference but now...now I've played it...I'm tempted to take the game back to be honest as for my £30 I'm just not playing it!

Honestly, I've had the game since just before the new year and I have played it perhaps for 4 times in total...I'm just not interested in playing it. :thumbsdown:

[phoenix[illusion]]

I am a little disappointed. Campaign map is not historical.

[Lorenzo_H]

Voted better than Rome. Rome was brilliant I have no doubts, but the effects of squalor kind of made it difficult for me. I absolutely loved the Rome graphics, and I think the M2TW graphics are even better.

[Zasz1234]

I said same as. Both have their merits. RTW was more about the Med while M2 is more about central Europe. Phalanxes were great, and the new units in M2 are great so I say about equal. Once the bugs are worked out though M2 will definately kick ass.

[The Spartan (Returns)]

M2 is better but its too much like RTW. thats the problem.

[professorspatula]

I voted for the same as RTW. M2TW has the potential to be far greater, and has some very good things going for it, but sadly my system doesn't approve of the advances in graphics, and I can't appreciate it fully. I find battles are a bit more 'fiddly' than before, and also the campaign a bit lacking in finesse. Moreover, there are too many little bugs and issues that irk me enough so much so that I uninstalled the game in favour of Dawn of War Anthology. Well I only have enough HD space for one. I'll reinstall M2TW later, when there's been some more improvements and better mods. Until then it's RTW and DoW for me.