My one and ONLY gripe about RTW...

[King Azzole]

Surprised this hasnt been mentioned, maybe it has so im sorry if I missed it. The one thing that was alittle disappointing was the lack of blood and dismemberment. I hope the developers allow an option for parents or people who dont wish to see the realism of combat to turn off or password this feature if they implement it. That way people who like the realism and gore of ancient combat to be able to see this reality that this game lacks.

[ShadesPanther]

I wouldn't mind blood and dismemberment as long as it was realistic. If I want over the top gore and such I will play Resident Evil and Quake3

[Sjakihata]

I think it's great there're no gore/blood. It would only attract people not focusing on tactics and eventually boost the current development.

[Jeanne d'arc]

Wow indeed, the fancy graphics and animations distract u from seeing the obvious things like the blood and gore.They really should add it to the game, it doesent have to be like tons off blood but piles off bloody corpses on the battlefield makes nice desktop wallpapers .

[Mr. Juice]

Ehh... can't see blood from a bird's eye view. Though I certainly wouldn't mind some 'realisitic' blood and gore, it won't happen.

[Blodrast]

i also don't believe blood & gore belongs in the TW series as we know them.
If it really is a must for marketing purposes or whatever, fine, as long as it were possible to turn it off.
But I don't think it's a good idea, for several reasons:

- as Sjakihata pointed out, this is too far from the purpose and aim of the game (which may I remind you is strategy and tactics). Blood and gore are fine, but that's not what I'm looking for in this game. There's plenty of other good ones out there, and DOOM3 is right around the corner.
- implementing that would only mean less time is spent on implementing and polishing other aspects of the game; after all, the total amount of time spent developing the game is constant, and putting more time into one section can only happen if you take that time out from another section. I'd very very much rather have the skirmishers working properly, or a decent AI that doesn't charge spears with the general, or is able to use HA in a challenging manner, or that is NOT conquering another province just because that's possible, or that makes decent and meaningful diplomatic decisions, or.... And the list goes on. There's plenty of stuff to fix/improve without spending time on drawing guts and blood spurts on the screen.
- it would reduce the feeling of immersion, being distracting from the main picture.
- it would probably be useless; ok, well this is debatable. Since the aim of the game (as far as the battlefield is concerned, and that's where the gore/blood may appear) is tactics and maneuvers, most people will play the game pretty zoomed out; that is really the only way you can take in the big picture and make decisions. If you're zoomed in close enough to see the blood, then you're probably playing the wrong game anyway.

Well, there's other reasons, but somehow I feel it would be pointless to go too deep on this issue...

Note: please understand that when I say 'you', I mean a generic 'you', not the starter of the topic, or any other one particular person.

[Thoros of Myr]

Blood is fine but I don't need it to make a game "realistic".

[King Azzole]

Well I dont know about you but I enjoy realism, and seeing a bunch of guys laying on the ground "playing dead" is detracting from that. Like I said you could have an option to turn it off, for you people who are somehow distracted by it? Either way im not talking about Kill Bill type blood and gore, more like convincing type blood that the spear my sacred band just rammed through the hastati killed him.

Edit: Another note: Saying that im zooming in means im playing the wrong game is just inane... Jesus think before you post. Your other points were valid till you arrived there...

[Jeanne d'arc]

i also don't believe blood & gore belongs in the TW series as we know them.
If it really is a must for marketing purposes or whatever, fine, as long as it were possible to turn it off.
But I don't think it's a good idea, for several reasons:

- as Sjakihata pointed out, this is too far from the purpose and aim of the game (which may I remind you is strategy and tactics). Blood and gore are fine, but that's not what I'm looking for in this game. There's plenty of other good ones out there, and DOOM3 is right around the corner.
- implementing that would only mean less time is spent on implementing and polishing other aspects of the game; after all, the total amount of time spent developing the game is constant, and putting more time into one section can only happen if you take that time out from another section. I'd very very much rather have the skirmishers working properly, or a decent AI that doesn't charge spears with the general, or is able to use HA in a challenging manner, or that is NOT conquering another province just because that's possible, or that makes decent and meaningful diplomatic decisions, or.... And the list goes on. There's plenty of stuff to fix/improve without spending time on drawing guts and blood spurts on the screen.
- it would reduce the feeling of immersion, being distracting from the main picture.
- it would probably be useless; ok, well this is debatable. Since the aim of the game (as far as the battlefield is concerned, and that's where the gore/blood may appear) is tactics and maneuvers, most people will play the game pretty zoomed out; that is really the only way you can take in the big picture and make decisions. If you're zoomed in close enough to see the blood, then you're probably playing the wrong game anyway.

Well, there's other reasons, but somehow I feel it would be pointless to go too deep on this issue...

Note: please understand that when I say 'you', I mean a generic 'you', not the starter of the topic, or any other one particular person.

Yes, strategy and tactics is important in this game but as we can see rtw is not only about strategy its also about formidable graphics and spectacle and thats what makes this game unique, it has everything the modal gamer wants.
If you wanted a game where u couldend see all the fighting close up in every detail u can possibly imagine then your better off playing the older tw series.
I hope you understand that its not all about the tactics and strategy for some people.

[Blodrast]

@ jeanne d'arc
sure, I understand it's not all about tactics and strategy for everybody.
But that was my opinion, and I'm entitled to it.
And I don't necessarily see a connection between "a beautiful game" and cool graphics and blood & gore. The game is beautiful and the graphics are cool even now, w/out blood, aren't they ?

King Azzole

Edit: Another note: Saying that im zooming in means im playing the wrong game is just inane... Jesus think before you post. Your other points were valid till you arrived there...

Well, that's just my point of view, as I said before. Sure, we're all gonna zoom in several times to see the actual fight, and we're all gonna do that at least a few times for each unit in the game, but the same thing as with the cut scenes goes here as well: they're fun and cool the first few times, but that's it. If you are trying to tell me that you'll be spending most of your time zoomed in to be able to see the blood and gore (because obviously you won't be seeing them from a bird's eye view), then, yes, I believe you're playing the wrong game, because, on the battlefield, you're missing the most important thing that this game has to offer.

And I'd appreciate it if you didn't call my posts "inane". I didn't try to insult you in any way, and I'd like the same amount of respect back from you. If you look at the bottom of my original post, you'll see there is a Note there, specifying that by 'you' I mean a generic 'you', not you personally or anybody else (and it's not been edited, I wrote that when I wrote the post, which should answer your question whether I thought before I posted or not).

[Husar]

I like watching the units fight in close-ups, as long as there is nothing important to do, I zoom in and watch my units fight, not only in RTW, I did it in STW/MI and MTW/VI aswell. But blood? I think in MTW dead unit-sprites include some blood, but I don´t really care. And keep in mind that CA seems to be aiming at younger players(you know, flaming pigs and so on ) and including blood would get the game rated higher, meaning that the marked would be smaller and that´s not CA´s aim I think.
And normally I don´t really recognize if games have blood or not, so I don´t need it.

[Mr. Juice]

I find it amusing that flaming pigs are fine, but a little blood is not.

[Blodrast]

heh, who said they were fine ?

[Mr. Juice]

Well, fine as in the rating the game will recieve.

[Sjakihata]

blood and gore... ponders

in shogun i thought the blood really destroyed the picture. I mean it didnt look like blood. And people who backs they 'inane' demands on gore up with historical accuracy, dont you think other areas need just a little more attention than blood??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

I completely second blodrast, blood and gore is in the same category as screeching women, 'special' ability/diablo 2...

edit: what has fried pork with blood to do?

[King Azzole]

No, I dont think other areas need attention, hence the title of the thread. And you insulted me first, Blodrast, by saying I shouldnt be playing the game. Who are you to tell me what I should or should not play or should or should not do when playing ANY game? That was a very pompous remark, which was probobly a better word than inane but I was alittle upset after reading that, and only for that I apologize.

I still dont see how adding blood and gore will up the rating, violence is violence. Plus if they added a password feature for parents to block it out why not? If parents dont care what there kids are playing in the first place its not CAs concern, but thats another topic of discussion alltogether... Parenting.

[hoom]

It seems very odd to me that you could have a game where the whole point is to leave literally thousands of dead bodies lying around the battlefield (now with flying bodies too!) and yet have people suggest that a bit of blood & dismemberment would detract from the game!

[Lonewarrior]

Yes more bloody battles.

[DemonArchangel]

Still, just a little more blood would be nice, like say, severed arteries gushing Soldier of Fortune 2 splattered gore all over the place, while guts pour out torn abdomens, now THAT would be nice. Well, the snow should have some red on it in the demo and blood should disperse and float off in the river at the ford point.

[King Azzole]

Well, perhaps a slider for violence? Like if slid all the way to the left, no blood and gore like now. But if slid to the right.... ^ what he said.

[octavian]

It seems very odd to me that you could have a game where the whole point is to leave literally thousands of dead bodies lying around the battlefield (now with flying bodies too!) and yet have people suggest that a bit of blood & dismemberment would detract from the game!

unfortunately, the point of the game (at least for me... but i think i speak for others as well) is not to leave thousands of dead men lying on a field, they are a means to an end. the point of the game is namely a strategic victory that combines both military might with political influence. a victory where winning a battle is about more than just watching men die, rather it is about the affects that the battle will have on the rest of your campaign as whole. what about MP you may say, its entire focus is battles therefore making your previous arguments null and void. of course MP is different, a battle in MP doesn't affect your campaign, it is an entirely seperate entity from everything else. in MP however, you wont be spending your time zoomed in watching blood spurt out of someones chest, if you do the battle will be short... and the results not in your favour.

that said, i cant say i would complain if there was a bit more blood im just saying that perhaps if blood and gore is your focus... the TW series may not be the best gaming choice.

and as was said earlier by someone else, when i say you, it is generic, and not directed at one person.

Oct

[Colovion]

Blood? Yeah it's cool. I like watching big movie battles now and then and see little spurts of blood and "blood mists" and blood around the corpses. It deffinately gives me some immersion and ability to connect with the soldiers fighting more. Starcraft was a good game, but the actual battles with the massive amounts of blood and the death screams that the Terran Units gave off were bone chilling and made it seem like they were an actual person rather than a means to an end. Sure, the TOTAL game isn't just about battles and killing people so it isn't a huge deal to me.

It basically boils down to this:

1) Let the Developers deal with fixing glitches, bugs and gameplay issues and streamlining the interface.

2) Let someone mod in the blood if they want it, it would save CA the hassle of the game having to be rated Mature and losing considerable sales in the process.

I would love to see it in tasteful and realistic amounts, but I'm not going to write a letter to CA to see that it's done, but I would download a blood patch just as I did for Medal of Honor: Allied Assault; a little big of blood and "blood puffs" really makes the immersion that much more intense.

[TexRoadkill]

Pools of blood by corpses would be entirely appropriate and it looks a little funny without them. Some blood spray in melee would be the icing on the cake.

And yes I play the game because I love tactical warfare but there's nothing wrong with making it look cool too.

[Ludens]

I recall we had a topic about this a while back. The concencus was that most people weren't interested in gore. And it is not going to be added, because it will only scare away people while it won't attract others.

I don't see the point about blood anyway: if lack of blood distracts from your battlefield experience, then how about the fact that all men in a unit are clones of each other? Or how about the fact that they look the same before or after an intense close combat fight? Blood wasn't flying around in ancient battles. Mud, yes, but not blood.

Frankly, I'd rather have that CA spend time on getting the AI in order and making the game completily moddable.

[Sjakihata]

I completely agree with octavian and ludens

[Leet Eriksson]

There are a ton of reasons why blood and gore are not in, but i'll highlight the most important factor, Marketing. Game is obviously targeted towards teen to maximise the profits, raising it to M might hurt the sales a bit.

That also might explain why there are cheesy units in the game..

[Steppe Merc]

I don't care that much about graphics. It's nice, but tactics are 50 million times more important than blood or graphics.

unfortunately, the point of the game (at least for me... but i think i speak for others as well) is not to leave thousands of dead men lying on a field, they are a means to an end. the point of the game is namely a strategic victory that combines both military might with political influence. a victory where winning a battle is about more than just watching men die, rather it is about the affects that the battle will have on the rest of your campaign as whole.

Brilliantly put. This is exactly my veiw.

[oblivious maximus]

Blood is good! ..would be a great option to turn on/of in the txt file.

[MiniKiller]

I get everyone's point for and against blood option.

I think it should be there but have a default of "off" this way it pleases everyone. It starts off so u dont have to manually turn it off and it can be turned on in the options menu.

[RTKLamorak]

I completely second blodrast, blood and gore is in the same category as screeching women, 'special' ability/diablo 2...

hmmmm

When you kill someone, they bleed. When i play first person shooters, i like to see the reaction to my shots as true to life as possible (e.g SOF2). In sports games, when i tackle i want to see the force of it, and see the realistic cause/effect true to life to. In an RTS if i shoot a tree, or a rock i want to see it fall down, smash/break or whateva, not just it dissapearing off the map :S

So... when i see hundreds of warriors clash at great speed certain a degree of blood SHOULD be shown, no question imo. I dont want all out, over the top blood and guts... but having absoloutely no blood in an "epic" war game seems silly to me, as well as compeltely unrealistic.

Yes, there are more important things to focus time on than gore, but if it doesnt have ANY blood in battles then it is not a "finished" game imo ... id rather wait another 2 months for balanced/realistic speed, as well as properly implemented gore rather than playing an unfinished, and subsequently unrealistic game.