Did CA bought over the idea from the makers of IMPERIAL GLORY?
I just realise that ETW has a lot of similarity with the old Napoleonic game Imperial Glory. Just wondering does anyone feel and experience the same thing as I do. ETW feels like a combination of Imperial Glory and M2TW engine, from field to naval battle to teching. I would be good to know the two games developers combine the effort to make such a wonderful game.
Re: Did CA bought over the idea from the makers of IMPERIAL GLORY?
Its the evolution of the TW series. Everything else copies it.:tongue:
Re: Did CA bought over the idea from the makers of IMPERIAL GLORY?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pevergreen
Its the evolution of the TW series. Everything else copies it.:tongue:
Hear Hear
Re: Did CA bought over the idea from the makers of IMPERIAL GLORY?
I think Imperial took alot of ideas from the TW games, but some how forgot to make it good battles etc were far to simple
Sv: Re: Did CA bought over the idea from the makers of IMPERIAL GLORY?
Considering that IG was just a cheap copy of Total war I would not say so.
One review I read refered to IG as Total war's retarded half-brother I remember.
But even if IG wouldn't have copied TW, CA would still go for this period.
The period is perfect for a game like Total war so we would have seen it anyway especially since people started asking about naval battles and this period offers the best when it comes to that.
Re: Sv: Re: Did CA bought over the idea from the makers of IMPERIAL GLORY?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TB666
Total war so we would have seen it anyway especially since people started asking about naval battles and this period offers the best when it comes to that.
Bit of topic but would love to see Sea battles in more ancient times :egypt: ramming ships, getting the oars broken from the enemy etc would be cool :idea2:
Sv: Re: Sv: Re: Did CA bought over the idea from the makers of IMPERIAL GLORY?
Give me a 1st rate ship of the line over a trireme anyday I'm just saying. :yes:
Re: Sv: Re: Did CA bought over the idea from the makers of IMPERIAL GLORY?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dradem
Bit of topic but would love to see Sea battles in more ancient times :egypt: ramming ships, getting the oars broken from the enemy etc would be cool :idea2:
Yeah, except there are no collisions now. I wanted to see some boughs break and tried to ram the enemy a lot of times. It seems no one has the balls for real ship battles any more.:beam:
On topic: IG (sadly) was ultimately disappoiting. However (sadly, again) it still had better diplomacy. You could get coalitions together, sign treaties, etc.
Re: Sv: Re: Did CA bought over the idea from the makers of IMPERIAL GLORY?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mister V
Yeah, except there are no collisions now. I wanted to see some boughs break and tried to ram the enemy a lot of times. It seems no one has the balls for real ship battles any more.:beam:
On topic: IG (sadly) was ultimately disappoiting. However (sadly, again) it still had better diplomacy. You could get coalitions together, sign treaties, etc.
I've had friendly collisions dismast a few of my ships. Part of that awesome grouped pathfinding. I try to turn my line, go check on another group, come back and see the 2nd ship has rammed the lead ship and the mast is laying off into the sea.
Collisions, good. Pathfinding, BAD.
Sv: Re: Sv: Re: Did CA bought over the idea from the makers of IMPERIAL GLORY?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mister V
On topic: IG (sadly) was ultimately disappoiting. However (sadly, again) it still had better diplomacy. You could get coalitions together, sign treaties, etc.
Actually diplomacy was even worse then ETW.
The AI was a complete retard.
It would only accept deals if it benefited you. If you tried to make a good deal that benefit them you would get refused on the spot and relations would suffer.
Combine this with the locked alliances made back-stabbing impossible and very few wars broke it.
It was a complete bore and most of the expansion took places thanks to the fact if you got 100 in diplomacy with a nation you could take over the nation without any questions asked.
A nice system until you realise how easy it is to get to 100.
No need to buy an army, just keep ripping the AI off in diplomacy deals and they will love you so much for it that they will let you rule them. The more you rip them off, the more they will love you.
Examples of ripping them off: You wanna buy 10000 wood from let say france and you offer to pay 100 gold for it.
The AI will agree to this.
However if you want 100 wood and offer 10000 gold they will refuse.
Re: Sv: Re: Did CA bought over the idea from the makers of IMPERIAL GLORY?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mister V
Yeah, except there are no collisions now. I wanted to see some boughs break and tried to ram the enemy a lot of times. It seems no one has the balls for real ship battles any more.:beam:
I've seen plenty of collisions involving perfect condition ships that resulted in the bowsprit breaking off, the officer quarters and rudder smashed or even the ship sinking.
Re: Did CA bought over the idea from the makers of IMPERIAL GLORY?
The game has been in the works for more than 5 years. I think they got the idea all by them selves.
IG has been around for going on 4 years.
I am sure the devs have been inspired by all sorts of games but not sure you could say this is one.
Re: Did CA bought over the idea from the makers of IMPERIAL GLORY?
It's like any thing else . . . two projects covering the same material or with the sam goal are liable to arrive at similar results. Take a look at some military aircraft, for example. Their are many superficial similarities between the Ki-61 and BF-109, or the B-52 and Tu-95, or the F-15 and F/A-18 and the MiG-29 and Su-27. However, these similarities are the result of designers building planes with to fill the same combat roles, not necessarily because they directly copied designs from one another.
Re: Did CA bought over the idea from the makers of IMPERIAL GLORY?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NimitsTexan
It's like any thing else . . . two projects covering the same material or with the sam goal are liable to arrive at similar results. Take a look at some military aircraft, for example. Their are many superficial similarities between the Ki-61 and BF-109, or the B-52 and Tu-95, or the F-15 and F/A-18 and the MiG-29 and Su-27. However, these similarities are the result of designers building planes with to fill the same combat roles, not necessarily because they directly copied designs from one another.
This is also found in nature, as parallel evolution. You sometimes find certain species that have incredibly similar characteristics but are not at all related to each other. This is almost always because they fulfill the same ecological niche.
If we count this niche as 'strategy game set in the 18th century' it's no surprise more that two games can be deveoped that end up very similar. :2thumbsup:
Re: Did CA bought over the idea from the makers of IMPERIAL GLORY?
They both have combat, muskets, diplomacy and ships. I never knew that having such ideas in a game would be classed as original and would be copying from another game.
It's like the idea of playing a game of a person with a gun, first-shooter, is an automatic copy of Doom.
Games are copies of things in reality and other constructs. You have to imagine a developer, working on a game, the original developer who went "I know... let's put diplomacy in the game" did people all around gasp in amazement "What an amazing idea! Who would have thought of that! you are such a mastermind, an idea of diplomacy... how would this diplomacy work?". Then all ever after games who put diplomacy in or when it was used in reality, copied that originals great work.
