why should total war be realistic?

[sunny44]

99% of games are unrealistic because there... games and there supposed to be fun to play that should be the main concern not how far troops fly or sandal shape, i haven't heard the game been sold as a historical simulator so why all the anger? and i assume it is nearly impossible to make a game 100% realistic that would be fun anyway.
Its funny how people seem to think they know everything about the game from two 5 minute scripted battles at least what til the games out and understand why they did thing the way they have! also i don't understand why CA should make all these changes because a few dozen people don't like them what about the people who do like things like the troops flying around or the unit cards? why should your opinion be listened too and not theirs? these thing are not game beakers so should be left a lone and modded later on. remember its a game for millions of people of all ages and knowledge not for a small number of fanatical history buffs and if you your still not happy the best thing to do is not buy it.

[TheNewKing]

I personally like the Total War games as its realistic gameplay.
I want to see and experience as close as I can get what a real life historic battle would of been like and to be able to command a army as a General.
This is why I do not want the arcade unrealistic game play.

[SillySausage]

I agree with you on the point in SOME way, but I think that there already is enough arcade-ish strategy out there. I mean, I like the Total war of "Yesterday" I want combat to be gruesome and fast, I like the vast diversity of troops, enhanched scripts and at the same time the challenging, but not too overwhelming duties of keeping my Empire up-to-date on the world map. And once you crushed your last opposition in good-ole Rome 1, you know that you achieved something. Against all odds, you fought WAR, and PEACE kept your finances afloat. I want the game to be "unbalanced" if you get what I'm saying. Investing in the wrong building chain should not break your neck as it did in Shogun II, but it should leave a stinging mark the next time you want to train Hoplites in Rome II.

The point is: We got too many Call of Duty-esque games out there. Everything has become sooo softcore. The first Total War games were like a Mountainside: Rough on the edges, Fun to climb, Sad to fail at, and one Heck of a fun to play again. I don't want this game to be Easy. That doesn't give me this sense of accomplishment. So, Creative Assembly, do not take the pre-orderers Mountains and streamline them to a soft hillside, please.

EDIT & Conclusion: This Is not supposed to be an Easy game, Sunny44. This is not supposed to be a funny, arcade-ish and Rollercoaster-like experience. This, my friend, is the face of war. It is gruesome, brutal and dangerous, how the fan of the series likes it. And if you don't like It like that, no one is forcing you to buy the game, but I guarantee you: There is many History fans on here that won't agree with you (like me) And they will demand a Total War game with a Total War installment that Honours the Total War Franchise. Anyways, I am outta here for now.

[Gugg]

I like the Total War games the way they are now. It's good that CA has managed to find some sort of middle ground. I don't want that to change to 1000% historically accurate, because IMHO it would ruin the gameplay.

[dRokon100]

Personally, what you say about arcade is your opinion, and i respect that. But I disagree with that: what you call "realistic" is for me "slow as molasses", and trust me; Rome 1 was far to slow for me(still fun, but too slow).

Plus, if you want REALISTIC WAR, apply with an army, or play one of Paradox Interactive's games. Historically i don't give an rat's about historical accuracy, as long if it's fun. If you want historical accuracy, Total War is NOT your type of game; in an example: Carthage can beat Rome in some Punic War thing. That isn't how "real history" went?

Oh yeah; if CA was like Activision, they'll just reskin the original Rome. And comparing CoD with Total War is like comparing apples to oranges; they were COMPLETELY different.

[master88]

Looks like some persons fun equals the game getting more and more complex thus putting a barrier to entry. They say modding the game is getting harder and harder. Well, I bet people from other gaming forums who mod other graphics intensive games laugh at our "modders" because we sadly don't keep up with the times (reminds you of byzantine empire.....) or dont have enough people to keep up with the times even though CA is giving the modder support.

At the end of the day CA is a business and I must admit, from look of the game they catered alot to our forums but they aint gonna do EVERYTHING that we wish. They even had the decency to tell us some of the things that they would be doing and even give us up-to-date info, etc and still its not good for some of us. Looking at other total war games and this one it is a BIG step forward.

Im not a CA fanboy at all. I like to be reasonable about things, its a game and if you dont like it then....dont buy it. Hmmmmmm, gives me an idea.......

[RGA]

There is always a balance between gameplay and realism in any game. On one end are game such as Call of Duty, purely for fun with little resemblance of reality. On other end are simulation game. Believe me, Total war games are by no mean that hard-core. There are games such as Bus simulator, train simulator, agriculture simulator (no joke) where you scratch your head asking yourself: where's the fun in that. There are games such as flight simulators with hundreds of page of manual. Total war games are always very straight-forward with no steep learning curve. But I digress.

Games are first and foremost for fun. For Total war fans, many if not most of them also history fans, realism means fun. There is nothing cooler than seeing things that you read in history book actually coming to life. Of course, people's history knowledge varies: there are people (I dare to say the majority) who are content with knowing Carthage was arch-enemy of Rome and Alexander was a gay (a tasteless joke of me ). Others, often much fewer in numbers, known by heart what kind of bread Romans ate for breakfast. There is a German idiom which says: "To satisfy everyone is an art which no one masters". CA has to make their choice. Going too much for realism is 1. expensive, 2. time consuming and 3. unnecessary if not even bad for gameplay. Going too much for gameplay and the forum will be flooded with thousands of complaining threads. I myself cannot imagine the situation when RTW is released in 2013 instead of 2003.

Anyway,seeing all kinds of whinners wasting their times writing walls upon walls of text is sometimes very entertaining. It kinda reminds me of my old day where I tried to persuade my friends that gatling gun and katana are actually very bad weapons against zombies, then they looked at me with a smirk and said: Who cares?

[The Juggernaut]

I agree with you on the point in SOME way, but I think that there already is enough arcade-ish strategy out there. I mean, I like the Total war of "Yesterday" I want combat to be gruesome and fast, I like the vast diversity of troops, enhanched scripts and at the same time the challenging, but not too overwhelming duties of keeping my Empire up-to-date on the world map. And once you crushed your last opposition in good-ole Rome 1, you know that you achieved something. Against all odds, you fought WAR, and PEACE kept your finances afloat. I want the game to be "unbalanced" if you get what I'm saying. Investing in the wrong building chain should not break your neck as it did in Shogun II, but it should leave a stinging mark the next time you want to train Hoplites in Rome II.

The point is: We got too many Call of Duty-esque games out there. Everything has become sooo softcore. The first Total War games were like a Mountainside: Rough on the edges, Fun to climb, Sad to fail at, and one Heck of a fun to play again. I don't want this game to be Easy. That doesn't give me this sense of accomplishment. So, Creative Assembly, do not take the pre-orderers Mountains and streamline them to a soft hillside, please.

EDIT & Conclusion: This Is not supposed to be an Easy game, Sunny44. This is not supposed to be a funny, arcade-ish and Rollercoaster-like experience. This, my friend, is the face of war. It is gruesome, brutal and dangerous, how the fan of the series likes it. And if you don't like It like that, no one is forcing you to buy the game, but I guarantee you: There is many History fans on here that won't agree with you (like me) And they will demand a Total War game with a Total War installment that Honours the Total War Franchise. Anyways, I am outta here for now.

This. I literally have nothing else to say.

[ElvenKind]

Looks like some persons fun equals the game getting more and more complex thus putting a barrier to entry. They say modding the game is getting harder and harder. Well, I bet people from other gaming forums who mod other graphics intensive games laugh at our "modders" because we sadly don't keep up with the times (reminds you of byzantine empire.....) or dont have enough people to keep up with the times even though CA is giving the modder support.

At the end of the day CA is a business and I must admit, from look of the game they catered alot to our forums but they aint gonna do EVERYTHING that we wish. They even had the decency to tell us some of the things that they would be doing and even give us up-to-date info, etc and still its not good for some of us. Looking at other total war games and this one it is a BIG step forward.

Im not a CA fanboy at all. I like to be reasonable about things, its a game and if you dont like it then....dont buy it. Hmmmmmm, gives me an idea.......

You should go to those "other gaming forums" and laugh at us along with those "advanced modders".

[Knight of Heaven]

I think people have bad memory. Please go play RTW Vannila and tell me if it isnt arcady.
We have been playing mods for it for so long that we forgot how Vannila RTW is.
From what i can tell Rome II seems much more complex and hard to play then RTW.

[Hattori]

Because it's the only high budgeted game on the market in the position to attempt this. I don't think anybody is demanding Les Grognards or Scourge of War: Gettysburg with amazing graphics but at least keep the authentic feeling of a real battle. See when you have chariots sending men 10 feet in the air it's a huge hit on immersion.

[dRokon100]

I think people have bad memory. Please go play RTW Vannila and tell me if it isnt arcady.
We have been playing mods for it for so long that we forgot how Vannila RTW is.
From what i can tell Rome II seems much more complex and hard to play then RTW.

Indeed: People wore far too much nostalgia goggles; Rome wasn't THAT fun.

[Manu La Canette]

There is always a balance between gameplay and realism in any game. On one end are game such as Call of Duty, purely for fun with little resemblance of reality. On other end are simulation game. Believe me, Total war games are by no mean that hard-core. There are games such as Bus simulator, train simulator, agriculture simulator (no joke) where you scratch your head asking yourself: where's the fun in that. There are games such as flight simulators with hundreds of page of manual. Total war games are always very straight-forward with no steep learning curve. But I digress.

Games are first and foremost for fun. For Total war fans, many if not most of them also history fans, realism means fun. There is nothing cooler than seeing things that you read in history book actually coming to life. Of course, people's history knowledge varies: there are people (I dare to say the majority) who are content with knowing Carthage was arch-enemy of Rome and Alexander was a gay (a tasteless joke of me ). Others, often much fewer in numbers, known by heart what kind of bread Romans ate for breakfast. There is a German idiom which says: "To satisfy everyone is an art which no one masters". CA has to make their choice. Going too much for realism is 1. expensive, 2. time consuming and 3. unnecessary if not even bad for gameplay. Going too much for gameplay and the forum will be flooded with thousands of complaining threads. I myself cannot imagine the situation when RTW is released in 2013 instead of 2003.

Anyway,seeing all kinds of whinners wasting their times writing walls upon walls of text is sometimes very entertaining. It kinda reminds me of my old day where I tried to persuade my friends that gatling gun and katana are actually very bad weapons against zombies, then they looked at me with a smirk and said: Who cares?

I agree with that but just tell me where's the fun in having flying units rather than smashed down ones or simply thrown down? It's actually not a matter of fun or not it's a matter of idiotic scene that hurting the eyes. I'm cool with almost every other aspect of the game so far, but the way those animations are done, it ain't right... They have done super-realistic environments, good looking units and then what, 100 people flying 6 meters in the sky when hit by a chariot just like in Asterix & Obelix... It was ok with Rome 1 graphics because it matched them. But now, come on...

[Gnufan]

Shogun 2 is pretty unrealistic but it has great immersion and fun gameplay. This is what I want from Rome II, fun gameplay and immersion. If they can make the game realistic as well then I'm all for it, but I doubt that's possible.

[Sherm]

A Game must not be realistic, but it does not even cross the border when it is not needed, a game must be reasonable.

[osros]

I agree with you on the point in SOME way, but I think that there already is enough arcade-ish strategy out there. I mean, I like the Total war of "Yesterday" I want combat to be gruesome and fast, I like the vast diversity of troops, enhanched scripts and at the same time the challenging, but not too overwhelming duties of keeping my Empire up-to-date on the world map. And once you crushed your last opposition in good-ole Rome 1, you know that you achieved something. Against all odds, you fought WAR, and PEACE kept your finances afloat. I want the game to be "unbalanced" if you get what I'm saying. Investing in the wrong building chain should not break your neck as it did in Shogun II, but it should leave a stinging mark the next time you want to train Hoplites in Rome II.

The point is: We got too many Call of Duty-esque games out there. Everything has become sooo softcore. The first Total War games were like a Mountainside: Rough on the edges, Fun to climb, Sad to fail at, and one Heck of a fun to play again. I don't want this game to be Easy. That doesn't give me this sense of accomplishment. So, Creative Assembly, do not take the pre-orderers Mountains and streamline them to a soft hillside, please.

EDIT & Conclusion: This Is not supposed to be an Easy game, Sunny44. This is not supposed to be a funny, arcade-ish and Rollercoaster-like experience. This, my friend, is the face of war. It is gruesome, brutal and dangerous, how the fan of the series likes it. And if you don't like It like that, no one is forcing you to buy the game, but I guarantee you: There is many History fans on here that won't agree with you (like me) And they will demand a Total War game with a Total War installment that Honours the Total War Franchise. Anyways, I am outta here for now.

Nice +Rep

I can over look alot, but when it comes to visuals I dislike silly, goofy, over the top stuff and I know you know what Im talking about. The more real the better upto a point for me I dont mind micro but not too much. for example I want the realism of dealing with supplies and a baggage train but dont want to micro manage it to death. What got everyone including me upset is that it could of been so much better but the powers that be decided to go so far with it and not go all the way. Dont get me wrong I will play it I may like it but if things dont change there will be stuff keeping me and most of us from loving it.

[Manu La Canette]

Shogun 2 is pretty unrealistic but it has great immersion and fun gameplay. This is what I want from Rome II, fun gameplay and immersion. If they can make the game realistic as well then I'm all for it, but I doubt that's possible.

Uh, Shogun 2 had no flying soldiers on cavalry charge... The killing animations looked great as well. The only overly thing in S2TW was the blood pack that yet fits well the whole spirit of the game.

Flying soldiers in Rome II don't match the game style. They wanted to show the 'dark side' of war, well I can't help but hear the Benny Hill's music when I see 60 men flying 10 meters high when hit...

[RGA]

I agree with that but just tell me where's the fun in having flying units rather than smashed down ones or simply thrown down? It's actually not a matter of fun or not it's a matter of idiotic scene that hurting the eyes. I'm cool with almost every other aspect of the game so far, but the way those animations are done, it ain't right... They have done super-realistic environments, good looking units and then what, 100 people flying 6 meters in the sky when hit by a chariot just like in Asterix & Obelix... It was ok with Rome 1 graphics because it matched them. But now, come on...

The sky jumping as result of cavalry/ chariot charge was in RTW back then and it did blow my mind seeing this for the first time. And I did quite enjoyed it for a while. Not every people think about their physics lecture while playing game. Sure, it is highly unrealistic, but let's say, it's a little homage to our good old Rome 1, OK

[Cheap]

CA was known to have a good formula for a TBS & RTS historically grounded with some gameplay amenagements. Good mechanics, good graphics, good mods.
That's what got me into this serie and most of the times, modders managed to make the game far better than vanilla by correcting silly noob-attracting features like men flying or musket fire accuracy or arrows trails etc.
@RGA: I don't think realism is as expensive or time-consuming than designing the fly of a man hit by a hurtling chariot or shiny explosions of a ballista projectile smashing every men in a 32lb shell explosion radius.
Gameplay is was defines a game and what differentiates it from its competitors. If TW is going to be as flashy and quick and arcady and capture-pointy as its competitors, then it won't be TW anymore but another franchise among others.




If I didn't like realism and historical accuracy, I'd want to have mega königtigers en masse or laser guided ballistas, and I'd buy mega deathground oblivious schock battle of rampage VII, company of heros or other flashy things like that.


I'll buy this R2TW to see what happened to CA and if it's realy what it's looking like and if mods come after I get bored of this test , then I suppose I won't interest me anymore in this studio's work at all, and try to find others little studios who are making games which they believe will please their fans, not their shareholders.

edit: +rep to sausage

[Petroniu]

Should it not be?