Review of Empire for those who like historical correctness

[Daveybaby]

Its really as simple as that.

No, it's not. History isnt interactive. History doesnt have a limited budget and tight timescales. Compromises are a requirement. And by the way, if you can show me one period of history where all historians are in agreement on one undisputed chain of events then i'll eat my hat (cavaeat: i dont own a hat).

I know one thing for a fact, it doesnt matter how much time and money you waste on historical accuracy youre never going to satisfy every armchair game designer and all of their personal hobby horses.

if you are going to produce a game and sell it on the basis of its portrayal of a historical period

I'm not sure that's the basis theyre selling it on, any more than 'last of the mohicans' was sold as a historical documentary.

And.... dude, youve been here a while now. Presumably youre familiar with RTW and M2TW, so if you still expect ETW to be some kind of interactive historical fact dispenser, then... i dont know what to say, other than that you might want to seek professional help for your chronic masochistic behaviour (that goes double for all of the regulars on here that bought the game at release and are shocked and horrified at the number of bugs)

[Unhinged_Loon]

I thought it was a well balanced view, considering the site it is posted on and the admitted priorities of the reviewer.

It had some interesting points...such as:

If it were possible, would it be "fun" to code the AI into modelling the "balance of power" system? a capture of certain lands would trigger most of Europe declaring war on you...or something similar. I can hear the moans now

(I deleted the rest...they weren't actually interesting!)

His final point is probably right. The game industry is designing the equivalent of Holywood films. The dedicated wargame industry may be designing the equivalent of documentaries. There's no point pretending otherwise...It's just annoying when people mistake the two

[AussieGiant]

The great truth from studying history and politics for 8 years...

...very little is black and white...most of it is grey.

And before anyone quotes me an example of something being black and white, ask yourself the following question.

Who wrote it?

And is there someone else out there who also wrote about the same thing?

If the answer to the second question is yes, I'm pretty sure you will have at least two different versions of history.

[Didz]

No, it's not. History isnt interactive. History doesnt have a limited budget and tight timescales.

Then my arguement would be if you haven't got the time, the money or the backing to do it justice, then don't do it at all.

You can make a game based on the 'Hyborian Campaign' or 'Warhammer' and it will sell. That way you aren't going to get arguements about the effective range of you muskets and can scrimp as much as you like.

And.... dude, youve been here a while now. Presumably youre familiar with RTW and M2TW, so if you still expect ETW to be some kind of interactive historical fact dispenser, then... i dont know what to say, other than that you might want to seek professional help for your chronic masochistic behaviour (that goes double for all of the regulars on here that bought the game at release and are shocked and horrified at the number of bugs)

I've been here since Shogun Totalwar and I've bought every title since (except Spartan TW) and no I learnt very early on to treat the CA designers ability to reproduce history with a large pinch of salt. However, that doesn't stop me being dissapointed every time I notice they have failed to do their job properly.

[AussieGiant]

However, that doesn't stop me being dissapointed every time I notice they
have failed to do their job properly.

Sorry Didz, but you will need to show me where CA said this game will be historically accurate (to who's definition would also be nice to know) before you can take that view.

Doing their job "Properly" seems a bit of a harsh statement when you take this into consideration.

[Daveybaby]

Then my arguement would be if you haven't got the time, the money or the backing to do it justice, then don't do it at all.

But why should the rest of us be denied a potentially great game (once the bugs are fixed it might be) because it doesnt match your requirements for historical accuracy.

Seriously dude, 90% of the people that buy the game wont even realise anything is incorrect, and 90% of the ones that do realise wont care. If they code a game to keep the 1% (a generous estimate IMO) that do care happy but that makes the game less fun to play for the other 99% then what sense does that make? The TW series are mainstream games. There are niche (and very low budget) wargames out there for the people that want them. There aren't enough of those people to fund development of a big budget game like ETW.

You can make a game based on the 'Hyborian Campaign' or 'Warhammer' and it will sell. That way you aren't going to get arguements about the effective range of you muskets and can scrimp as much as you like.

Are you sure about that? Fantasy/sci fi nerds arguing about what's canon or not? Ouch.

I've been here since Shogun Totalwar and I've bought every title since (except Spartan TW) and no I learnt very early on to treat the CA designers ability to reproduce history with a large pinch of salt. However, that doesn't stop me being dissapointed every time I notice they have failed to do their job properly.

See the thing is, i think they *are* doing their job properly. I dont think it's a lack of ability, I think it's a conscious development decision to spend a certain amount of the budget on historical research, and then after that work has been done, start designing units and maps etc, and start coding the game.

I suspect that during the initial phases of development, things are a lot more historically accurate. But as the development goes on changes have to be made for gameplay/balance/time/budget/processing reasons, and at that point changes get made, and historical accuracy gets compromised. And since there clearly isnt the time and budget to fix gameplay and CTD bugs before release, there probably isnt enough to go go back and re-do all of the historical bits again (even if it was possible to do so without adversely affecting gameplay).

[Obadiah]

I have to agree w Daveybabey- CA *is* doing their job properly. Didz' problem is that he wants them to be doing a different job. Its the old "going into a hardware store and complaining they don't sell fruit." The problem isn't the hardware stores' - its Didz's. Which (dropping the analogy) could be easily solved if there *were* other game companies selling games that really matched what Didz' wants in a game. He'd buy that, be playing to his heart's desire, and not bothering with Empire. But that game (evidently) doesn't exist. So he's frustrated b'c it probably feels like "damn, so close, but again, not quite what I want!" Given that none of us have resources to make our own game from scratch (heck, most of us can't even do the most basic modding, and some of us have trouble even figuring out basic computer stuff), we're left to chose the best of what's available, and wish it aligned more closely with what we want it to be.

[Beskar]

The perfect game for me would be a sci-fi, with tons of politics and social order. It would be like a MMORPG, but it isn't imbalanced with a levelling system that is stupid (like WoW/etc) but is based on the actual skill of the player. There are numerous different civilisations you can join, or even attempt to create your own, or cause a revolution, or destroy. It would be a totally open ended game with the ability to do practically anything. (realistic limits obviously apply)

[Mr Frost]

But why should the rest of us be denied a potentially great game (once the bugs are fixed it might be) because it doesnt match your requirements for historical accuracy.

Seriously dude, 90% of the people that buy the game wont even realise anything is incorrect, and 90% of the ones that do realise wont care. If they code a game to keep the 1% (a generous estimate IMO) that do care happy but that makes the game less fun to play for the other 99% then what sense does that make? The TW series are mainstream games. There are niche (and very low budget) wargames out there for the people that want them. There aren't enough of those people to fund development of a big budget game like ETW....

You're basically saying that if the C/A got the uniforms and units mostly accurate you would have been "denied a potentially great game" .
If you don't know much about the time period and have know interest to learn then how the hell would you know that the units and uniforms were historically accurate to be anoyed by it and how could you find accurate uniforms and units in an historically based game offensive ?

Don't bother pretending that it is terribly expensive to do the research either .
Any respectable and reputable minatures company {whom typically have vast amounts of knowledge from years of careful research that would be applicable here} or even various quality museums would happily do it for them for a small fee and a large listing in the credits .
Free advertising is valuable currency . Large corporations whom already have multi million dollar marketing campaigns actually pay large sums of money for product placements ; paying the information provider and visible listing in the opening game credits would be plenty enough to get the information for very little cost compared to the overall game budget {which was in the millions} .
The C/A clearly made such a deal for the ship plans they used {fire up the game and read what is presented before the menu comes up} .



It sounds like you are a tad solopistic . That elements of historical accuracy that would still allow the same sorts of large battles and gameplay as the game has now which would please gamers like us whilst having absolutely zero detremental effect on the average "doen't care about history" gamer bothers you is quite telling .

Much more than merely the uniforms and military units could have been changed to something more accurate for the period and the game would have been just as much fun for the average gamer as now whilst pleasing the Grognards and all without blowing the budget .

[Daveybaby]

You're basically saying that if the C/A got the uniforms and units mostly accurate you would have been "denied a potentially great game" .

No, I'm saying that if they didnt release the game because it wasnt historically accurate to the level that Didz requires then we would have been denied it.

If you don't know much about the time period and have know interest to learn then how the hell would you know that the units and uniforms were historically accurate to be anoyed by it and how could you find accurate uniforms and units in an historically based game offensive ?

How does didz being annoyed at a lack of historical accuracy equate to me being annoyed if it *is* accurate?

You wouldn't be....if you don't give a flying fart whether its accurate or not then you would buy it anyway. Even if the armies were full of Orc's and Elves

What's going on here? Does everyone here have a poor grasp of basic logic or is it just me?

not being angry because the game is not accurate != being angry because the game is accurate

Jesus.


The point is that we wouldnt EVER get the game if we had to wait for the approval of every grognard before CA was allowed to release it.

[Didz]

No, I'm saying that if they didnt release the game because it wasnt historically accurate to the level that Didz requires then we would have been denied it.

And all I'm saying is that if instead of producing a sub-standard historical game they had dropped the pretence and concentrated on making a good fictional game, it would have made no difference, and they would not have made themselves look so stupid.

How does didz being annoyed at a lack of historical accuracy equate to me being annoyed if it *is* accurate?

It doesn't your imagining things again.

The game isn't historically accurate end-of.

What's going on here? Does everyone here have a poor grasp of basic logic or is it just me?

not being angry because the game is not accurate != being angry because the game is accurate

Jesus.

Yep! your definately confused.

The point is that we wouldnt EVER get the game if we had to wait for the approval of every grognard before CA was allowed to release it.

Of course we would, it just wouldn't be a shoddy attempt at a historical one. I fail to see why this is causing you so much of a problem to grasp. Command and Conquer does not pretend to be a historical game but its still a good game. Why are you obsessed with the idea that CA have to pretend to make a historical game for it to be good. Stick a few wizards in and make it even more fun.

[Unhinged_Loon]

Of course we would, it just wouldn't be a shoddy attempt at a historical one. I fail to see why this is causing you so much of a problem to grasp. Command and Conquer does not pretend to be a historical game but its still a good game. Why are you obsessed with the idea that CA have to pretend to make a historical game for it to be good. Stick a few wizards in and make it even more fun.

Does a historically "inspired" game not count at ALL, Didz? because (although I assume you are being deliberately simplistic) there is a lot of ground between a historical simulator and a fantasy game.
Given that it is all but impossible to make a game that is completely accurate in every detail, you are always going to be arguing over MORE or LESS accuracy. Therefore, the whole argument is about HOW MUCH accuracy is the right amount...for you...or any of us. There's not going to be a right answer to that...

[Didz]

But why should the rest of us be denied a potentially great game (once the bugs are fixed it might be) because it doesnt match your requirements for historical accuracy.

You wouldn't be....if you don't give a flying fart whether its accurate or not then you would buy it anyway. Even if the armies were full of Orc's and Elves.

There aren't enough of those people to fund development of a big budget game like ETW.

Thats actually not true. There is a huge untapped market for accurate and playable wargames. The Napoleonic period alone has a devoted wargame following in the millions world wide.

See the thing is, i think they *are* doing their job properly.

Lol! how can you say that....even ignoring the history debate and the woefull lack of proper research, they can't even make what they have produce work. Thats NOT doing your job properly, would you get a plane flown by a guy who hadn't bothered to study the flight manual and didn't know how to work the controls?

I suspect that during the initial phases of development, things are a lot more historically accurate.

Oh! come on you were the one who said that right from day one with Shogun TW these games were never historical accurate, in fact the developers have said in the past that they are not meant to be historical simulations. So, basically they are not even trying to get it right. Which is fair enough, as long as they don't expect people like me to be impressed with their efforts. Personally, I just think its shoddy work.

Incidently, @nafod - Tiller's games are crap - and are recognised as such by most of the online wargame community, even though they are forced to use them due to lack of alternatives. I actually believe they are less historically accurate that the TW titles. Not only that but they are full of expliots which allow gamesmanship ploys to be used during play.

Indeed the reason the wargame market could be so lucrative is that there is really no current competition for a company willing to produce a historically accurate game. Wargamers at present have to make do with the shoddy games that are currently on the market simply becuase there is nothing better.

[impar]

Greetings!

Seriously dude, 90% of the people that buy the game wont even realise anything is incorrect, ...

The sad thing is not that they dont realise the game is incorrect when they start to play, it is that thay still dont realise after playing the game.

From the review:

Honestly, I’ve been there myself. When I was stationed in Europe and was starting my adventure into miniatures wargaming, I got a chance to phone Minifigs UK to order 12 packs of Roman Legionaries in 15mm. I actually got the owner on the phone who replied, "So do you want early Etruscan Roman, Velites, Hastatus, Princeps, Triari with spear, Triari with Pilum, Late Republic, Augustin, 1st Century, Early 2d Century, Mid 2d Century, Late 2d Century, 3d Century, 4th century, 5th century or 3d/early 4th century Praetorians?" I flustered a bit and replied I was looking for the Romans who carried the rectangular shields. The owner responded, "OK, you want the Hollywood Romans."