Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 43

Thread: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

  1. #21
    alQamar's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Dortmund, Germany
    Posts
    5,918

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    Thanks for this great article. Sadly we cannot rep the writer directly for the work.

  2. #22

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    I enjoyed reading this article. I haven't played Rome II for a long time and probably won't play it again because I can't shake the feeling of disappointment and that this game can't deliver what I expected at the time I bought it and it still can't deliver.
    One of the few to still have his first avatar in place here on TWC.
    I sometimes miss this place you know. This is where my journey began.


  3. #23

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pseudolivius View Post
    Interesting article, but here are my problems with the game:

    - terrible UI : with 40 unit armies it take 40% of your screen view, the lil` icons who tell you wich unit is firing, routing fighting are mushed up into 1 idiotic in the middle making it difficult to manage and dumb unit cards
    - Diplomacy has no reason behind it, it`s just horrible, factions instantly declare war, don`t trade ,a ask for huge sums of money for no dayum reason.
    - Battle AI is improved but still terrible, siege AI no words, just bleh , campaign AI completely toast
    - No family tree
    - No political system in Rome, seriously ...
    - Unit formations are gone and the rest have such an idiotic design I just cant understand the thoughts in the dev`s head.
    - Battles look just horrible, even with those fancy animations who are so damn fast.All you see is unit making elaborate kill moves with 40 kg`s of armor on them breaking formations and sliding into pre-stances before they execute them.
    - City representation in this game is just stupid, Huge ancient cities are now villages with no walls.I think those guys were smocking too much pot when they made this game.
    - Those huge cities that you saw in the pre-alpha are now gone, cities look like damn parks now. with some buildings sprinkled here and there.
    - also the awsome graphics in the pre-alpha are gone,the textures are low res and pop-up later, no SMAA wich with the low res textures gives you a headache when you play it more, the smoke textures are just gone , you have to zoom in if you want to see a building on fire.
    - Horrific performance issues
    - also some weapons lack the animations for them
    - extremely dumbed down city management it`s almost gone, what you have 6 building slots and you do the same thing since turn 1.
    - The upgrades for your generals are a moron`s design, also you only get 2 traits/character and the rest is replaced by a god damn moronic system of zeal,authority and cuning
    - also the music is preety weak,I heard some play in the previews that are not in the game... why ?

    You lack the freedom in the game, it`s all forced down your throat this blitzkrieg type of gameplay so that you won`t see all the bullcrap design of the game.
    Also the "DLC" (wich is cut content already on the disc since day 1 execpt those mini-expansions) is just insulting, greek city states is the worst one, also the blood pack ( we have to pay for a graphics feature YAY! and people are ok with this O_O).And the "free-lc" they still rub in your face is just cut factions from the game that are already there and they act like it`s this HUUUGE favor to the players, but in reality there were supposed to be there since launch.

    It takes really "good"skills to make a game more complicated by dumbing it down so much.

    I can`t see Rome 2 as a Total War title, because it has nothing to do with strategy, accurate historical representation and immersion like the previous titles.I`ts just an arcade game.It represent every gross part of the gaming industry today, all the lies and false advertisments, the dlc bullcrap it gives you a sense of guild when you buy it and support their ideas and business plans.

    Remember that the last large scaled competent game they made was Medieval 2 in 2006, since then there was no good total war game ( Shogun 2 was a small scaled game and still had some questionable design features, and some bullcrap dlc but it was fun up to some point) Empire, Napoleon and the worst of them all Rome 2 are forgetable and completely failures and it doesn`t look like CA gives a crap about the series and the community, now CA is in with the big boys like EA,SEGA, ACtivision etc.Once the kins of strategy games are now the clowns of the industry.Shame on you CA, seriously shame on you.Never have I ever felt so guilty for buying something.

    I think that the next tw title is their last chance to make something good, people are already giving up on the franchise and for the hype of the next game it won`t work anymore I guarantee it, I wan`t a new total war tittle because I really one that is good, but at the same time I dislike the idea since I know what this company is capable of.

    I`m sorry about my grammar mistakes.
    All good points. Have you played SSHIP mod for M2TW? It's superb. Adds best of vanilla to vastly improved map and units and some minor gameplay improvements. For me it's the best TW experience ever.

  4. #24
    AnthoniusII's Avatar Μέγαc Dομέστικοc
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Thessalonike Greece
    Posts
    20,516

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    Being a TW games players since Shogun I and a person that observes (has passion with) details i have to state my points.
    As visual result Rome 2 is very good game and i would add the quite complex diplomacy with ofcourse the new features like the Land/Naval battles.
    As I wrote in an other thread though 80% of the "new" features Rome 2 brought can be found in well made mods that are FREE and for games that allready payed by us (the customers).
    Yes campaigns in Rome2 can portay the "international" political enviroment better than any previus TW game.
    Issues with armies taking trips in the sea while their homelands were under siege seam to fixed.
    But again...Most of us here in TWC are "hordcore" TW players and having the expirience of mods we expected something more.
    Remember that thanks to a "legal" issue and debate between CA and a modding team , we came in the conclusion that everything made here belongs to CA.
    That was NOT necesary a negatibe point though.
    MEANING that the modding expirience could pass to a TW game combined with new features and graohics modders simply have no means to make.
    Also it was natural to us to expect a game that would combine the entire knowlege of TW game creations to an ultimate TW game!
    The lack of "communication" between TW games recently made inorder to "lend" features to Rome 2 was actually our great disapointment.
    Why?
    Simple!
    With ETW, Napoleon and Shogun II , CA had in its disposal EVERYTHING it would need to create the ultimate game!
    Long distance naval invasions re-apeared in a TW game again in Shogun II after Rome I!!
    That was one of the things that made us happy and hoped for a pefrection in to Rome II!
    ALL we got -even today after 13 patches of fixing a game that was not mature to release- is a huge disapointment and a large number of repeatings the same question again and again!
    WHY?
    This question haunting the game since day 1!
    Why AI is -atleast- as good as Shogun II
    Why AI can not make long distance naval invasions?
    Why AI is so damn not able to siege properly a city?
    Why Rome I , M2TW siege technics left out of a game that now looks older than those OLD TW games?
    Why...a player can not capture as ship the same way he can in ETW and Shogun II?
    Why cities must be huge -by poppulation- and villages on battlefields unless you "invent" how to grow up a city?
    Damn I though populations make cities bigger and not "knowlege" of how to build big cities..But on the other hand i may be wrong as often am it seams!
    Why RTW1,M2TW,ETW building and infrastucture abillities left out of Rome 2?
    Closing ..you see all we got playing this game was not pure pleasure but questions that we got no answers for!
    But IF i remember well we did not pay for making questions but to play a game...Did we after all?

  5. #25

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    What Pseudolivius said. My modding specialty is the M2TW combat system, and it is IMHO a far better tactical simulator than that in R2TW. The M2TW version is extremely versatile and all the vanilla combat system issues are way in the past when its modded, eg see my attached release notes for latest RealCombat mod for M2TW. The M2TW version can comfortably take account of pretty much all the tactical factors that I can see in R2TW.
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by Point Blank; June 23, 2014 at 02:45 PM.

  6. #26

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    Quote Originally Posted by sgz View Post
    All good points. Have you played SSHIP mod for M2TW? It's superb. Adds best of vanilla to vastly improved map and units and some minor gameplay improvements. For me it's the best TW experience ever.
    I had a serious problem with M2TW when it took me just three conquests in the Balkans to reach Constantinople. So I almost immediately gave up on the vanilla campaign and passed on to play Scandinavia and the Aztecs, which was big fun and lasted several months. If SSHIP has a better map and more settlements, I think I should give it a chance.

    Regarding Rome 2 I'm sorry, but I can't take it seriously when essential cities like Capua, Tarentum, Corinth or Byzantium are missing, while there are places like Königsberg (Mons Regius) which is from the 13th century AD. This game is supposed to be on building an empire in historic context. My imagination requires that this context is somehow correct, with corresponding names and so on. I can forgive one or two misrepresentations, but Rome 2 is full of them. Rome 1 vanilla was way better on this aspect.
    Creator of Rome Total History
    Rome 2 sucks, EB, RS and RTR were yesterday...
    Don't you feel like it's time to move on?
    Explore the ancient world, fight epic battles,
    conquer beautiful queens and princesses...
    Try a new groundbreaking mod:
    Experience Rome Total History!
    Play RTH or wait for Rome 3!

  7. #27

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    For me, the removal of family tree and random personal traits are the biggest killer, and i will never EVER get over it. Its been almost a year since I last played the game and was kinda wishing to see mods been dedicated to undo this injustice flaw and give this game another chance, but I guess that wont happen any soon...
    Reg: They've taken everything we had and what have they ever given us in return!?
    Xerxes: The aqueduct. Reg: Oh yeah, yeah they gave us that. Yeah that's true.
    Activist 1: And the sanitation!
    Stan: Oh yes...sanitation, Reg you remember what the city used to be like.
    Reg: all right, that's two things that the Romans have done...
    Matthias: And the roads...
    Reg: Well yes obviously the roads goes without saying. But apart from...
    Activist 2, 3, 4, 5: Irrigation...Medicine...Education...and the wine...
    Francis: Yeah the wine. That's something we'd really miss if the Romans left.

  8. #28

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    Do they still have those stupid flags that you have to capture and instant transport ships?

  9. #29
    eXistenZ's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    7,782

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    Quote Originally Posted by miguel11 View Post
    Let me put into perspective, putting aside the bugs.

    1. UI design flaws, what with the huge unit cards?
    2. Diplomacy, political intrigue, gone.
    3. Family Tree, gone.
    4. Technology Tree, gone.
    5. etc., gone.
    6. Stupid cities that grow and take most of the map, done.
    7. Dumb down archadish game, done.
    2) Rome 1 never had any diplomacy or political intrigue either, so it cant be gone
    4) seriously?
    5) etc. isnt a feature
    7) nobody knows what that means

  10. #30

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    Quote Originally Posted by eXistenZ View Post
    2) Rome 1 never had any diplomacy or political intrigue either, so it cant be gone
    4) seriously?
    5) etc. isnt a feature
    7) nobody knows what that means
    You left the most important part of my statement.

    "The best standard to make this game was there, and it is called Total War Shogun 2"
    Last edited by StealthFox; June 26, 2014 at 01:42 PM.

  11. #31

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    14% of players have failed to complete even one hour, 29% have failed to complete 20 turns in a campaign, 34% have failed to complete 10 hours of gameplay, 71% have failed to complete 100 turns of a campaign game; in fact, 91% of players have failed to complete a military victory in a campaign. Welcome to the 91% Hader. You're not alone.
    Last edited by Zeb77; June 26, 2014 at 01:37 PM.

  12. #32
    eXistenZ's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    7,782

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    22% of civ v players havent found an ancient ruin, which is litterally 5 minutes of gameplay. thats almost 1 out of 4.

    People always buy games that they dont play. Those numbers are meaningless untill put into relation with other games

  13. #33

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    Very nice post.
    I recognise many aspects.

    I bought Rome II at the release and I have to say that I don't expect miracles to happen. I expected things to be a little bit better than in the previous game. (I think a fair expectation). However graphics, ai, and gameplay did not even come close to reaching the brilliant game of Fall of the Samurai.

    I was disappointed and left the game for half a year. Now with some mods like 'Conflictus Antiquarum Culturarum' a lot of extra depth is created. Also many bugs are gone or reduced.

    When I play the game now I enjoy most parts of it. Somehowe though it seems that its either rediculously hard when everybody attacks you or very easy. Like you when you became dominant. This has been the problem with more warscape games. Shogun had it too. In Empire and Napoleon however there were massive clashes.

    If I would some it up then I was left down at:

    - battle graphics
    - ai
    - most important the gameplay.

    There was also not enough depth in cultures, but this was easy for mods to fix.

    I want to finish with my compliments to the campaign map team. It's awesome.

  14. #34

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    Let's be honest. The game was given no thought. It's a travesty. Too many half-arsed concepts, too many deleted features.

  15. #35

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    A useful article and thread, but I'm still in two minds about buying this game. My support for CA dates back to the original Shogun, which was a truly amazing innovation in computer wargaming at the time, and I've purchased every game and expansion pack since except Warpath and Rome 2. Now I'm looking at Rome 2 in the Steam Summer Sale and wondering if it's worth the investment of £14 to find out if it's really as bad as everyone says it is.

  16. #36
    zimmer1lb's Avatar Foederatus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    39

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    I'm using some mods to help balance out the squalor, order and corruption factors. These seem to be way out of balance and despite having initial success in trying to keep a balanced building agenda it eventually falls apart. Leaving me with constant slave/rebel rebellions to the point to where it is extremely difficult to move the legions away from Italy and contend with the growing warfare with neighboring minor countries. Not to mention that as time goes on slaves, rebels and minor countries have better equipment than your troops because you can't afford to upgrade your facilities because of the factors mentioned.

    It seems part of the building problem is a true and vital lack of actual choice of the building types you need to balance out the negatives. It is unreasonable that most of them produce squalor and some produce a negative order and quite a few both. Example: why should a cattle ranch produce squalor when it is miles out in the country, unless they have a poo fest in downtown Rome. So, overall my mods are concerned with the Campaign side of the game one of which gives me archers (hooray).

    Sad thing is. "If" you get a successful campaign going with as few mods as possible.........it can be lost due to an incompatibility with a new patch.

    Overall, thanks for a great game and CA opening up to the modding community. Is it in CA's mind to incorporate many of the mods into their program?? that would sure solve a lot of problems.

    Reps, kudos and many thanks to the modders for their efforts !!!!!!!!!!!


    zimm out

  17. #37
    IlluminatiRex's Avatar Are you on the square?
    Content Staff Citizen

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Illuminati Outpost #5123
    Posts
    3,693
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeb77 View Post
    14% of players have failed to complete even one hour, 29% have failed to complete 20 turns in a campaign, 34% have failed to complete 10 hours of gameplay, 71% have failed to complete 100 turns of a campaign game; in fact, 91% of players have failed to complete a military victory in a campaign. Welcome to the 91% Hader. You're not alone.
    For a fact I know some of the achievements are bugged for me, such as the "Play 100 hours" one. So I wouldn't use achievements as a basis for an argument.

    And the last two paragraphs sum up my views well.

    That's essentially the point. I liked Rome II, despite its most obvious bugs; even those didn't feel game breaking at all to me. I worked around them, more or less. While I raged a bit at first, I eventually just went into those stupid moments of naval battles and siege battles and tried to have fun with what I knew was going to be a derpfest. May have taken away from a more challenging, realistic campaign experience, but it was still fun.

    So in the end, I enjoyed it, and while I can understand how people were frustrated earlier in its lifetime, I think Rome II as I played it recently is actually pretty good, or at least getting pretty close. Hopefully my perspective on my first experience is refreshing or eye opening or...something. Whatever it is to you reading this, what I hope you take away is the knowledge that regardless of Rome II's shortcomings, however significant, does not always mean fun can't be found in one form or another. It's understandable to be frustrated with some things that need obvious work, but the line between constructive criticism and whining is pretty thin. And it all boils down to a matter of perspective. So tread carefully.
    I am the author of the "Weaker Towers" and "Officers Of" series of mods for Total War: Warhammer!
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Holmes
    One of the problems with trying to write about the First World War is that most people have already read Wilfred Owen and Siegfried Sassoon, Pat Barker and Sebastian Faulks before you get to them.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jackie Fisher
    Can the Army win the war before the Navy loses it?

  18. #38
    sabaku_no_gaara's Avatar Indefinitely Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    9,258

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    My biggest problem with Rome II is the fighting, the single combat duels, are a problem for me, I wish a return of soldiers ganging up on soldiers, and formations and being in a shieldwall being effective.

    Watching fights and seeing 2 men fight and the others just looking like idiots when they have a killing blow opportunity frustrates me I want the old fighting system back

  19. #39

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    Quote Originally Posted by IlluminatiRex View Post
    For a fact I know some of the achievements are bugged for me, such as the "Play 100 hours" one. So I wouldn't use achievements as a basis for an argument.
    Unless the bug which afflicts that one achievement is present for tens of thousands of people too, then your personal experience is a little blip on the extremities of irrelevance to an argument based on the steam stats. Fundamentally, and apologies for making it so plain but it seems that some have great difficulty in understanding the point, this reviewer - as did 9 out of 10 players so far - failed to complete a campaign because after a small amount of fun, you reach a point of boredom before then. I find that not so much unique as a very common experience. I found the last two sentences of the review more amusing than anything else in that light. "Stop whining because you can have fun with this game, but not enough to complete a single campaign". Well, yes, quite.

  20. #40
    IlluminatiRex's Avatar Are you on the square?
    Content Staff Citizen

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Illuminati Outpost #5123
    Posts
    3,693
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default Re: Hader's Thoughts...On Rome II. What are yours?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeb77 View Post
    Unless the bug which afflicts that one achievement is present for tens of thousands of people too, then your personal experience is a little blip on the extremities of irrelevance to an argument based on the steam stats. Fundamentally, and apologies for making it so plain but it seems that some have great difficulty in understanding the point, this reviewer - as did 9 out of 10 players so far - failed to complete a campaign because after a small amount of fun, you reach a point of boredom before then. I find that not so much unique as a very common experience. I found the last two sentences of the review more amusing than anything else in that light. "Stop whining because you can have fun with this game, but not enough to complete a single campaign". Well, yes, quite.
    If the achievement is bugged for me, than surely it's bugged for others. You can not just say that it's a little blip, as generally achievement bugs show up for a good amount of people. And in addition to that, some people buy games and never play them. You can't use the achievements as some sort of metric for a reason, because they are not reliable. On top of that you have the people who only play in Offline mode, and thus they don't get the achievements.

    And, if you haven't noticed, vanilla Total War campaigns all hit that breaking point where it just becomes a matter of a steamroll. I've had to push myself in all my completed Total War campaigns to well, complete them. Shogun 2 and FoTS it just got to a point where I was rolling over everyone in my path, and in S2 I even converted to Chrsitanity before I took Kyoto, just to see how much more challenging it could be (hint it wasn't). FoTS I dominated everyone in my path, had Railroads everywhere, and neverending coffers.

    My almost completed Darthmod Empire campaign is similar. I picked Sweden, and slowly but surely it got boring. I had nearly all of Europe in a vice grip. No one was able to stand up to me and not get completely wrecked. I actually gave up before I even finished it, because it was no fun any more. The challenge of planning an invasion, gone. It was a boring Steamroll.

    I always find the fun in Total War not completing campaigns, but in the planning of your wars, the buildup, and the execution of a successful plan. Once that more challenging phase of a campaign is gone, it loses its magic and I start again. That's what is fun about Total War, not steamrolling.

    So if completing campaigns is your metric for how fun and good a Total War game is, then I feel you're greatly mistaken.

    And no, Hader's last two sentences were not that. He said there is a fine line between constructive criticism regarding the game (A family tree would be beneficial to Rome II due to the nature of politics at the time, and would allow for some more detailed political and diplomatic solutions. As well, it allows you to see how a family evolves and devolves over the course of a campaign) and outright whining that the game sucks and no one should play it (ie This game sucks because there is no family tree so you should avoid it all costs).

    I'll end up jumping back into my Pontus campaign sometime though(It's been my favorite), I've been busy with other games and have had a lot of real life stuff going on.
    Last edited by IlluminatiRex; July 03, 2014 at 11:24 AM.
    I am the author of the "Weaker Towers" and "Officers Of" series of mods for Total War: Warhammer!
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Holmes
    One of the problems with trying to write about the First World War is that most people have already read Wilfred Owen and Siegfried Sassoon, Pat Barker and Sebastian Faulks before you get to them.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jackie Fisher
    Can the Army win the war before the Navy loses it?

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •