Printable View
Hey guys,
Sorry if this has been done before. :embarassed:
Logically, Rome would be the best of the games, followed by Medieval and then Shogun.
However, I found Rome to be lacking in many areas and Medieval to be the better game. From what I have read, a lot of the hardcore fans agree with that sentiment.
Also, I remember there has always been a bit of a Shogun vs Medieval argument as well.
So in your opinion, which of the 3 released titles is the best?
Medieval is the greatest. Ten times better than Rome could ever be.
Rome is ok. Good Graphics and such but you just can't beat Medieval. :thumbsup:
Without a doubt, Rome. It was the fist game that attracted me to the totalwar series, (ive now gotten started on medieval and shogun). I like it the best because of the time period. I find the Roman timeframe extremely interesting, and its the only one that I have a fair amount of knowlege about.
However, I can see what you mean when you say that it was missing some components from mtw that made mtw such a great game. However, I think the revolutionary graphics and new features that came with Rome put it over the top.
I can assume that the gamers who started to play the TW series before RTW came out might favour medieval or shogun. However, neither of those time periods really interest me as much as the tme of the Roman Empire......so even if Rome didn't have the best graphics/features of the three games, it would still be the best game to me.
The only thing that might make Rome slightly worse as an overall game is the two expansions (especially BI). IMO, these expansions quite frankly sucked compared to Rome, whereas stw and mtw had interesting and fun to play factions and scenarios in their expansions. In order from best to worst: Rome, Medieval, Mongol Invasion, Shogun, VI, Alexander, and BI
Rome, my WORD.
I must side with CaesarA and choose Rome above all others. Sure, there is some stuff that was better in each of the games, each with their unique flair, but Rome has some great aspects that set it above the rest. I find the battles more interesting, the factions more varied and gameplay more fluid.
Of course, other's mileage may vary.
Your ob't servant,
Aaron
HOLD THE LINE!
Medieval is certainly the game I've played and enjoyed the most, but I've only recently gotten Shogun and can definateely see its appeal. Rome just didn't do it for me.
I'm going to go with medieval because I feel the strategic layer is a little more interesting and the battlefield AI is slightly better. Shogun does have more atmosphere however.
didnt play Shogun so i say Medieval.
RTW does have better graphics but Medieval ai and battles is soooooooo good.
Didn't get a chance to play Shogun, so Medieval it is.
Nice to see the newer members adding Gah! to polls (or did a Mod do that?). :2thumbsup:
I Chose Rome, as I've only played that Shogun and BI.
Since Med 2 is out soon I'm going to stick to playing Rome, and have my first Medieval experience with the new game.
We will see after that huh !!
:2thumbsup:
I like Rome, I dont played Medieval or shogun.
Medieval is the best of the series. It had it's weaknesses, not to mention lack of patching, but on the whole it was very good, although the battle AI was not hard to beat compared to online players. After that I'd say Shoggy and Rome are a pretty close matchup, Shoggy was lacking in some things, but Rome had horrid AI.
Rome!!
I would say that as a whole, Medieval remains my favorite. Shogun comes in a very, very close second, however. (Rome comes in a very distant third.)
Shogun had far and way the best atmosphere, the best AI, and the best overall balance; but I find the medieval period to be more interesting. In addition, MTW's campaign map allowed for greater strategic flexibility, as there are far fewer chokepoints to bottle up your enemies. (It's relatively easy to conquer Japan as the islands are rarely more than 2-3 provinces wide at any point.) It also had a far greater variety of factions and units, plus religion played a much more significant role in the game. Unfortunately, Medieval was not nearly as well balanced as Shogun as a result, but I still enjoy the game somewhat more than its predecessor due to the time period.
As for Rome....well, it looks nice. And it has a good soundtrack.
Medieval as well. Shogun has the best atmosphere and the best balance, but every faction is the same. Medieval had more variety and just a bigger scope. I actually like Rome's campaign map better, once CA fleshes it out.
People talk about gameplay over realism all the time. However, I feel that most of the times CA reduced the realism in Rome compared to Medieval actually detracted from the gameplay, instead of making it better. The AI and pathfinding is a lot worse, especially in sieges. I'm not a fan of the extremely fast-paced and arcade style pace of the battles. Too many battles ended up in a charge and mass rout 5 seconds later, especially if I bring lots of extremely overpowered cavalry. I felt there was something lacking in the atmosphere and gameplay that just reduced the fun factor of the game.
Shogun simply had the best emersion of all the series IMO.
I really can´t say, I like both Medieval and Rome, each has its highlights. While the battlefield AI in MTW seems to be better and the battles themselves are slower, some of MTWs battles tend to get rather tedious, since only sixteen units per side can take part at any time, which means that the big battles are usually one massive attack and then an endless tickle of reinforcements. But at least the battles are decisive (i.e. if you win, you´ve got the province under your control and just have to siege out the castle). The matter of sieges is similar - in MTW, they tend to get rather dull, but what potential they had in RTW (due to the siege engines) got a bit wasted for pathfinding reasons, a poor AI that undermans its cities and the fact that it´s possible to starve out a city without a single loss.
However, I prefer the strategic aspect of the RTW battles, choosing the terrain and the possibility to make use of multiple stacks fighting in one single battle (despite the lag that causes). On the whole I do prefer the RTW strategic map, though army movement by ship is a real pain, I believe even back then it was possible to go from Londinium to Alexandria within half a year.
City building in RTW is much more streamlined than in MTW, which I believe to be good, as it gives the AI access to high-quality troops eventually and makes for better balanced AI armies. It does, however, limit the need for strategic planning from early on which is so crucial in MTW (where it is even even more focussed due to the regional valour boni).
On the other hand, while RTW has way more diplomatic potions, it´s almost impossible to utilize them properly, due to the AI faction behaviour (often I was offered an alliance only to be stabbed in the back the next turn, it seems like there´s a hardcode that demands a backstab).
Finally, the game goals, I think RTW has the better solution, and BI does improve that even more. In MTW you either have to conquer the whole map (conquest) or wait till 1453 (GA) where especially the end-game phase tends to get a bit dull - no enemy can stand against you, the few real challenges are the faction re-emergences (which are a great plus of MTW - I like them a lot), while in RTW you have at least the civil war against the other Roman factions (if you´re so lucky that you can anger the Senate to the point of outlawing you while you don´t have the fifty provinces already, something I´ve never managed :no: ).
So, in the end, both games have an equally well-deserved place on my harddrive and I tend to play them interchangeably.
I voted for MTW, because I like the STW/MTW style combat speed. RTW out of the box is too frenetic. I prefer MTW to STW as it has more variety and scope. The campaign map in STW is rather an unrelenting slog, whereas MTW you have more freedom to stay at peace, turtle, pursue GAs, launch far-away expeditions etc. Plus the STW factions are ultimately rather similar, whereas many of the MTW factions give very different play experiences.
However, I think RTW is the best game of the lot after modding - RTR Platinum, EB, Goth's all factions mod for BI etc manage to combine STW/MTW paced combat with RTWs better graphics and more realistic campaign map (the Risk style one allows more competitive AI, but is less immersive).
I have to say that I voted for Medieval.
If only Rome was Medieval with Rome graphics, it would have been as near perfect as we could get.
One point I have to applaud CA for. Making all the games in the series so Modable, hats off guys - realisation that you'll never please eveyone all the time means that they allowed those "not pleased" to make what they wanted of the game.
Well done.
All in all Medieval total war, the expansion and the XL mod have kept me entertained longer than Rome did, even with mods and PBM's.
So Medieval get's my vote. Rome ,however, does get an honorable mention for getting me involved in the series, and I do love the game - albeit with a couple of mods installed.
:balloon2:
Medieval always wins these votes it's just a better game I guess. I love it by the way.
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by King Henry V
Just wait til mtw2 then it will cast rome into the shadows.Quote:
Originally Posted by King Henry V
what is Gah? I cant figure it out. I feel so stupid. And i call myself a fan.
"Gah" is basically a generic "Other / Don't Know / Undecided / Don't Care" coverall option.
It's an Org-specific reference. A veteran Org member, Vanya, often writes things like "Gah, good fun!". I guess it's a general term of exclamation, like "Bah!" or "Pah!". Using to cover the "other" category in a poll may signify that people not choosing any of the "proper" options disapprove of or don't care about those options. Or are just sounding off meaninglessly. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by dacdac
ahhh, thanks for the info. Another thing, how do you put the smiley faces to the side on. For me, it looks like this:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/image...gc/gc-wall.gif
:wall:
oh wait, never mind. you just dont see it when posting. Well why did the website still come up?
By game time alone......
STW....Played for about three months. Very good game but the cutframes got a bit repetative. (have to dig that back out by the way:idea2: )
RTW.....Three weeks....ho hum.....back in the box (no need to find it again :skull:). Graphics were very good but I'd rather have a game that has more dimention. If I want to just look at pretty things I can always turn on the tv.
The winner.....MTW.....Two years or so.... (with different mods) and still learning more. Incredible depth. No other game, and there have been many, has captured my attention and held it anywhere close to this game. IF MTW2 combines the gameplay, moddability (sp?), and graphics that it purports then it will be gaming Nirvana. :2thumbsup:
Rome is rubbish and inaccurate, but it has decent graphics (so you can see what happening with reasonable realism) and EB is for Rome, so I think I like Rome the best for those simple reasons.
EB owns them all.
Voted for Rome, it was the first game in which I actually enjoyed fighting the battles, autocalc was so easy with MTW and STW.
Shogun had some beautifull features (assasin movies, nice setting,...) but the lack of different units, poor graphics, not too attractive strategy map, choke points, ... made it less then MTW which had a way of drawing me into a campaign, but still the battles were hell. Rome had great battles, a nice change in campaign map (more and less realistic at times), family members who'd you really cared about,...
It has to be Rome.
medieval
Shogun, I must have spent as much time if not more playing shogun than both medieval and rome. Thats not to say I dont like the others. Medieval was superb, technically better than shogun. But shogun is where my fondest totalwar single player memories come from.
For me, Medieval is the best game ever. Excluding graphics and such, gameplay and other features are much much better than Rome.
So far I would say:
1) Medieval/VI
2) Shogun/MI
3) RTR Platinum
4) Rome
Shogun is the original and classic, but Medieval has much more longevity and plays alot better on the campaign map in my opinion. The battle AI also seems to be markedly better. I don't see a greater variety of units as the biggest advantage that MTW has over STW. The STW map was quite linear with every campaign seeming much the same. One of the best things about MTW is the different culture types and the religious aspects, including the pope. Also generals with real stats and v&vs makes things more interesting and immersive. To the MP community all of this is irrelevant which is why some veterans still prefer STW. In terms of the expansions, MI was quite average. The mongol campaign wasn't that great and the extra fantasy units not really needed. It also messed up the unit stats somewhat, so in view of this MI is not on my list of good expansions. VI was a great expansion. The Viking campaign is a good one, all the extra units are mostly very good, and the prebattle save is useful. For me, Rome is almost unplayable without installing the RTR platinum mod, the AI is arguably quite poor, even then I still have problems with it. As to BI I've no idea as I've never got around to playing it yet.
-Edit: I seem to remember a poll like this over at the .com some months ago where RTW held the vast majority of the votes. It will be interesting to see how this turns out.
Medieval/VI is the best, both campaigns are great fun and a good challenge. Plus, you have different eras to start in ~D
Shogun comes a distant second for me, its good but M:TW was an improvement on every part of it. Mongold Invasion was a bit pants
Rome I hated, it was a backward step from Medieval. The graphics are nice enough but the campaign was dull and the battles too fast.The units were badly unbalanced (Cavalry, the best weapon against phalanxes!) and the AI was a bit dumb (espec in sieges).
S:TW for the battles
M:TW for the campaign
R:TW for the modifications
MTW all the way. One of the best games of all time. Rome = :furious3:
Nothing can beat SHOGUN TW it is the best plus when iget bored i play it iits a fun game
STW hands down. MTW was good, RTW, was alright :-(
STW.I still play it while i bought it when it originally came out.:bow:
Medieval. I kinda like Rome too, but it's just, well, different.
With Medieval I got this "YES!" feeling. It was like a supernatural force attracting me over and over again to the pc. And, except for GTA:SA, it was the only game that made me sleep for less than 5 hours a night during a whole (working) week.
Tough choice, but I have to go with Rome, the sheer depth of the game is what gets me. Shogun was probably the best game of its time, so that is probably my second favorite. Then Medieval, just didnt really do it for me, although I am sure the new one will find the top of my list when it comes out.
Medieval for the battles, Rome for the campaign map. Medieval I've had my best battles of all the games with battles that have taken literally 3-4 hours of battering before beating my opponent. Rome in a sense, was almost too quick and therefore felt unrealistic as a result.
However, on the campaign Rome is a lot smoother in the management of things and I found it a heck of a lot easier to keep track of things. I went back to Medieval again a couple of weeks ago and for instance, I got very frustrated with the number of building messages, those about storms that sunk my ships, assassins or spies that died and so on. These messages came up one at a time whereas with Rome these were all bound up in one easy to read message that you could read at your leisure. I could go on but the campaign side felt smoother and easier to play in Rome in my opinion.
Shogun was good in it's time as it's the first game that really ticked my boxes in having a campaign element and then a proper battle scenario bound up in one game. But that was superceded by Medieval with it's greater unit variety and better campaign map. Besides, I also remember the frustration in a river battle with the Mongol invasion add on. I had the huge shock of enemy reinforcements appearing behind me even though I was successfully defending the only bridge. Not the best bit of coding I've seen in a game ~:)
STW, but MTW:VI has much better modding potential. Especially the unitstat options beat all others.
See, Shogun is the best, it brings out the best of us!!! Good to see you again Tosa!!!:2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by TosaInu
Since ive only ever played MTW I can theoretically only vote for MTW. So i'm going to vote for MTW.:2thumbsup:
I have only played Shogun and MTW. Both great games, but Shogun got boring quickly, as it had a limited number of units and all the factions were similar, not to say the same. The greater variety and depth in MTW, combined with the excellent mods made me vote for MTW.
I personally beleive Rome is better, although some cool gameplay elements were removed that were in medieval....
so my reveiw:
Medieval is better as far as campaign strategy and accuracy,
Rome is better as far as battles and gameplay
some thing i forgot:
i have never played shogun, so no opinion there,
rome has the best mod-friendliness...modding mideval units could hurt somebody,
and so this better supports my support for rome
I loved STW when I first got my hands on it, a completely new gaming concept. I loved how you could actually beat an overwhelming enemy force just by using tactics instead of just having to build more / stronger troops.
I also love how the battle maps look & the general atmosphere of the game.
However, I played MTW for months and mainly online, which was a great experience. And MTW had camels. So MTW received my vote.
(dont have RTW).
I never really played STW, but I did play MTW and RTW. To be honest, MTW had a more in depth gameplay, but it lacked in the graphics department.
So which game (RTW or MTW) did I like better? I would have to say that I enjoyed RTW much more, just because of the improved battlefield graphics.
Now, as you can imagine, I'm really looking forward to M2TW. More in depth gameplay, with killer battlefield graphics! ~D
ROME TOTAL WAR WHAT ELSE:dizzy2:
Rome Total War. Latest and Greatest
RTW wasn't that good, for me anyhow..Bugs,gameplay,meh. MTW was Better with Gameplay wise..
I had to get the old nVidia drivers back in order to play the best of the series, MTW. I'll change them only for the MTW 2 ~D
Medieval w/VI.
Shogun was fantastic, and truly fit the bill as a strategy game. I was schooled more than once in battlefield tactics by a cunning AI. Medieval was on a bigger level, more battle, more choices, just more.
I do enjoy Rome TW, but the AI was/is just pathetic. I was so excited to play on the first day of release, until I saw the enemy General make a suicidal charge at my line of Hastati. The updates have helped, but...
I will say Shogun and know why? When it came out it was SOMETHING. And this game started it all :)
Well put, Steistas. :thumbsup:
Welcome to the Org, btw. ~:cheers:
Rome isn't so bad once you install either the Total Realism mod or EB. It just needs some tweaking. However, I still have fonder feelings for Medieval. I had a real deep love for Arablests. The truncated missile options of the Roman era just don't get me as happy ...
Medieval is the one I come back to most often.
I bought / acquired all three: Shogun/MTW VI and Rome at pretty much the same time. Medieval still has a fascination about it.
Rome <3
What he said. :2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave
Shoggy all the way. :karate:
Shogun. Best atmosphere, immersion, and balance. The tight focus aids all elements of the game. I've never heard anyone else say this before, but I think the art was of the highest quality in Shogun.
Rome is awesome in terms of innovation, most notable in the campaign map. The heightened fidelity increases realism and complicates gameplay. However, the game is a little rough around the edges, with poor AI and balancing.
EDIT- Oh, I must give Medieval an honourable mention. Although I didn't like the game much when I played it (there's not that much innovation, mostly just more content), it is the game that got me into TW. You see, I saw previews for it and thought it looked awesome, but my PC at the time wasn't up to scratch. Soon after, I bought Shogun.
STW was good to the sense of,it never got boring,or to me anyhow,escally when MI came out. MTW was better, lost the feeling alittb bit, then when RTW came out, Yuck, felt like a "normal" SP game..
Very true. The artwork has never been quite as good since, IMHO. Medieval's was a bit scrappy, and Rome's is a bit cartoonish to say the least. I've never liked the portraits since MTW. The VI portraits were rather comical and the rome ones are of the same sort of style.Quote:
Originally Posted by cannon_fodder
I started with Shogun when it first came out, got the expansion pack, completetly skipped medieval for no real reason, then got Rome when it came out and the expansion later. In terms of gameplay Shogun felt better IMO, clever tactics and risky decisions felt much more significant and realistic and had much more of a tangible result one way or the other, battles felt more realistic in terms of fatigue, morale etc. but it did look like a bulldog chewing a wasp. Rome was teh bling smex0orz!!111 but the gameplay always felt lacking - both had brilliant atmosphere and the choice of period was great but the medieval period is by far my favourite so I'm looking forward to m2TW and hoping it will be a succesful crossover of the best of all previous games. Although I liked Romes graphics and setting I never fully completed a campaign and was far more compelled to mod it than with Shogun, which I completed several times and felt was perfect aside from visuals.
As I said, Shogun felt perfect, in terms of atmosphere it ruled, I felt like I was a Daimyo in feudal Japan, 'nuff said really. To be fair to CA it was always going to be easier to get the feeling of Shogun right than it was with the other titles. Feudal Japan was a smaller scope than the whole of Europe, Africa and the Middle East so they could spend more time on getting it right than getting it all in and done.
Probably Rome right now for the graphics, but I expect MTW2 to make the others look bad...
Welcome to the org!
Medieval. :2thumbsup:
Rome Barbarian for me is greatest, however, I still have been playing Medieval VI as I love the game play. cant wait for Medieval 2 to come out next month, already preordered it.
Medieval. Rome is simply not worth playing unmodded, and while I own Shogun I never could get it to run :oops:
I like very much ROME iam still playing it for about two years for me is number one. I dont know about the SHOGUN i never played :beam:
Rome has nice features, which the other titles do not have. What I like most about Rome is the movement point system, which acts as a time layer between the strategy map and tactic battles (it would be nice to have the option to decide where to retreat to when attacked: defending magic hills is better than suffering in a gorge).