Was there a shift in design during the development of ROME II?

**Generals_Bodyguard** · 09-13-2013, 04:36

Something has been bothering me since the release of ROME II. It's pretty clear right now that not everything went according to plan for CA. There were some major changes, cuts and changes to the total war formula. The poor state of the game seem to lead to speculation that there was a shift in design halfway through development. I know I don't have hard solid evidence for this and these are usually things that game studios don't share with everyone. Why the change in lead designer from Jamie Ferguson to James Russell?

If anyone shares the same thought as me, please post why you think there was this shift.

**fallen851** · 09-13-2013, 11:02

The Total War games I've bought have been the most flawed and least patched games I've bought. Rome II is no different. Rome I was left in an unfinished state with a myriad of bugs documented by the community.

The scope of Rome II was more than the CA team could handle, so a lot of features were left out or are in an unfinished state. Shogun II is about their limit, and it shows.

However, because of what CA tries to set out to do (combine turned based strategy with real time tactics, which is an epic undertaking), there are a lot of apologists out there. The idea behind the TW games is awesome. The execution always seems to be just off. Thus many give CA the benefit of the doubt and explain away their failures and shortcomings. They also believe that CA will "fix" the game, when in the end, they simply don't. For this reason, CA knows it can release a game in the state Rome II is in, and people will defend them. It has already happened. There is a strong sentiment even on this forum, that since most other Total War game weren't released in a near finished state, why should we expect Rome II to be? CA can always count on their apologists...

**Sp4** · 09-13-2013, 11:59

I'm not saying Rome 2 is finished and I've never really felt the need to defend CA in anything they do but it's always pretty hard to please everyone. If you look at the amount and scope of the mods available for TW games, you start wondering why are half of these people even here? They obviously have no interest in a game made by CA but that's probably cause CA is the only company that does this stuff and we're "stuck" with them.

**Myth** · 09-13-2013, 14:07

To each their own. I did not enjoy Shogun II, polished as it was. It had a ton of things that I did not accept or did not find enjoyable for a TW game. I'm enjoying R2TW now and am hopeful that it will become better as time and patches go.

**BroskiDerpman** · 09-13-2013, 14:22

Perhaps the political system feeling bland... Or the over streamlining of the campaign and some features cut out. That's what's bugging me when there needs to be quite a few brand new features that actually matter.

The game as of now just feels too barebones for my tastes and as I said; I'll go wait for a huge sale or Gold Edition.

Game has potential, just not executed properly.

**andrewt** · 09-13-2013, 15:57

Originally Posted by BroskiDerpman

Perhaps the political system feeling bland... Or the over streamlining of the campaign and some features cut out. That's what's bugging me when there needs to be quite a few brand new features that actually matter.

The game as of now just feels too barebones for my tastes and as I said; I'll go wait for a huge sale or Gold Edition.

Game has potential, just not executed properly.

I'm the opposite. CA's biggest problem has been the inability to cut features that don't mesh well with the game. I feel like the internal political system should have been removed in Rome 2. It's too tacked on and feels like just a way to waste the player's money in the midgame so he doesn't steamroll as fast. There are no benefits to playing the political game. It's all damage mitigation.

The city-building system is the deepest in the series. Public order is tracked on a provincial level. Food surplus is tracked on a faction level. That allows the player to build centers of excellence in certain provinces that consume food and turn other provinces into food generating provinces. Economic buildings provide either income or a %bonus to certain amounts of income, so there is some mixing and matching going on. That said, some of the numbers are just off. Again, it's just a case of CA biting more than it could chew. Certain upgrades, certain building lines are just not worth it because the bonuses don't offset the costs.

**maestro** · 09-13-2013, 14:24

Originally Posted by Myth

To each their own. I did not enjoy Shogun II, polished as it was. It had a ton of things that I did not accept or did not find enjoyable for a TW game. I'm enjoying R2TW now and am hopeful that it will become better as time and patches go.

I echo this sentiment. Shogun 2 was extremely boring for me but one of the "cleanest" TW releases I can remember. I'm enjoying R2 as much as I can remember enjoying M1 and that's saying something.

**Hooahguy** · 09-13-2013, 14:34

Originally Posted by maestro

I echo this sentiment. Shogun 2 was extremely boring for me but one of the "cleanest" TW releases I can remember. I'm enjoying R2 as much as I can remember enjoying M1 and that's saying something.

Agreed. I couldnt play more than 3 hours of Shogun 2, but that might be as I have no interest in the time period, I felt the map was way too small, and siege battles were bland as well.