Rome II beating Shogun 2 launch

[the_eye]

There are more people playing Rome II right now than played Shogun 2 when it launched! Not bad for a game which, according to certain people here, is dead/failed.


(Yes, I realise that Rome II is free-to-play this weekend, which has boosted its stats, but it's a phenomenal achievement regardless)

[shogon]

Post this again after the Coh2 event is over.

http://www.makewarnotlove.com/

And it looks like Rome lost anyways

[LestaT]

They are still selling ? I'm quite surprised. No 1 today above even Attila.

[Bouncebag]

Post this again after the Coh2 event is over.

http://www.makewarnotlove.com/

And it looks like Rome lost anyways

How they work that out I don't know, No.1 on Top Sellers and 8th on list of most played games on Steam..... (EDIT: even has 17,000+ views compared to 13,000+ views on the Youtube bit of it)


And It is impressive how TWR2 has suprassed S2's figures, even if smudged a bit by the free play weekend. I wonder how Rome II will compare to Attila.

[Ngazi]

I don't think the game is so bad, but I'm sure many more people are interested in multicultural Rome than copy paste Shoguns, in general. Will be more interesting to see what happens to Attila compared to Rome.

[Darios]

I don't think the game is so bad, but I'm sure many more people are interested in multicultural Rome than copy paste Shoguns, in general. Will be more interesting to see what happens to Attila compared to Rome.

That's a very interesting point. While I believe that Attila is clearly the more polished game with better game play and features, the story of the campaign itself is sorta one dimensional and barring significant DLC then it may actually become boring after a while, especially since you only have with Romans, Germans, the Huns, and one Persian faction to choose from.

In general more people love the period of Rome 2 and the game has over thirty playable factions from various different cultures so...I can imagine why people are still playing it.

[DeliCiousTZM]

That's a very interesting point. While I believe that Attila is clearly the more polished game with better game play and features, the story of the campaign itself is sorta one dimensional and barring significant DLC then it may actually become boring after a while, especially since you only have with Romans, Germans, the Huns, and one Persian faction to choose from.

In general more people love the period of Rome 2 and the game has over thirty playable factions from various different cultures so...I can imagine why people are still playing it.

The game isn't out yet, how reliable are you? If you formulate your opinion in this manner? Rome II is a great game and the statistic vouch for it.

[eXistenZ]

Post this again after the Coh2 event is over.

http://www.makewarnotlove.com/

And it looks like Rome lost anyways

While offcours the contest has it part in bumping up the numbers, I cant imagine the overwhelming majority of them only play the game to get dlc for the game they normally dont play

[The Norseman]

Not really? It just shows that Rome DID FAIL. I am pretty sure A LOT of people don't have any interest at all in japanese history as I believe the majority of players are either from Europe or America so naturally most people will think that an European campaign is much more interesting and still it barely beats Shogun 2.

>inb4 2-3 of you does like japanese history and claims it is a fact that most europeans like Japanese history when it is clearly not true.

Also when comparing all the PR done for Rome II it is clear it had a failure to launch as well.

[Rittsy]

Not really? It just shows that Rome DID FAIL. I am pretty sure A LOT of people don't have any interest at all in japanese history as I believe the majority of players are either from Europe or America so naturally most people will think that an European campaign is much more interesting and still it barely beats Shogun 2.

>inb4 2-3 of you does like japanese history and claims it is a fact that most europeans like Japanese history when it is clearly not true.

Also when comparing all the PR done for Rome II it is clear it had a failure to launch as well.

It's a PC exclusive hybrid strategy game. The evidence suggests that financially it did as well as expected. Sega isn't exactly a fan of funding franchises that fail to meet expectations.

[The Norseman]

the game did OK financially-wise, people realized too late that the game was not what it was hyped up to be. People bought it THEN figured out it wasnt any good. Me and lots of my friends bought the game, even pre-ordered, played it for some hours then never again. I mean if they can't fix the multiplayer campaign after 4 attempts and several years it says something. I don't expect the next game to be much different and it will probably do ok financially wise, but there is only so much people are willing to accept before they just stop buying the games. Heck, ill probably buy the next one as well to see how it is.

And if Shogun had as much PR done with it as Shogun it would probably have sold more copies of the game.

[riskymonk]

Its all about the percentages. Shogun 2 had a higher player retention rate in august 2014 when patch 14 came out for rome 2.

Which is higher in percentage terms, having 10 apples and selling 7 or having 100 bananas and selling 40?

We also need to acknowledge that the roman era is more well-known and popular than the japanese era. Japan, like any other country, was going through a civil war. Nothing special. Also Creative Assembly spent more on the marketing for rome 2 than shogun 2. As well as the fact that there are over 10000 subscribers to DEI alone and over 5000 current for Radious. OP hasn't taken into account the number of players who rely on mods to make rome 2 playable and interesting for them. Once he can gather statistics to find that more rome 2 players enjoy vanilla... actually I'm sure I don't need to be patronising and explain the basics of data gathering. We're all smart individuals.

http://www.steamgraph.net/index.php?...q214950&from=0 - So here we see shogun 2 maintains a steady player base while rome 2 fluctuates wildly as people come back after every patch to see the progress.

There was also a data tool on steam that showed the percentages of players playing/returning and shogun 2 and empire had a consistently higher percentage than rome 2 even after patch 14. Napoleon and rome 2 were on par with each other I think though I could be wrong. If anybody can find that and post it here that would be great.

After reading the OP we don't want people with basic Math skills going away thinking their maths teacher was a douche. We don't want gamers going away with this theory as they may put this into practice and start thinking bigger means better. It's all about the quality not the quantity.

[Amur_Tiger]

Its all about the percentages. Shogun 2 had a higher player retention rate in august 2014 when patch 14 came out for rome 2.

Which is higher in percentage terms, having 10 apples and selling 7 or having 100 bananas and selling 40?

We also need to acknowledge that the roman era is more well-known and popular than the japanese era. Japan, like any other country, was going through a civil war. Nothing special. Also Creative Assembly spent more on the marketing for rome 2 than shogun 2. As well as the fact that there are over 10000 subscribers to DEI alone and over 5000 current for Radious. OP hasn't taken into account the number of players who rely on mods to make rome 2 playable and interesting for them. Once he can gather statistics to find that more rome 2 players enjoy vanilla... actually I'm sure I don't need to be patronising and explain the basics of data gathering. We're all smart individuals.

http://www.steamgraph.net/index.php?...q214950&from=0 - So here we see shogun 2 maintains a steady player base while rome 2 fluctuates wildly as people come back after every patch to see the progress.

There was also a data tool on steam that showed the percentages of players playing/returning and shogun 2 and empire had a consistently higher percentage than rome 2 even after patch 14. Napoleon and rome 2 were on par with each other I think though I could be wrong. If anybody can find that and post it here that would be great.

After reading the OP we don't want people with basic Math skills going away thinking their maths teacher was a douche. We don't want gamers going away with this theory as they may put this into practice and start thinking bigger means better. It's all about the quality not the quantity.

Pretty much this. Shogun 2 was never going to be as much of a pull in sales terms, only Medieval had the same draw as Rome in the total war series. The game though was very solid and in spite of being quite passionately interested in antiquity ( finished reading March of the Ten Thousand recently ) I spent nearly 4x as many hours on that game as on Rome 2 and I'd spend more time on Rome 1 then on Shogun 2. Rome 2 simply lacks the longevity of these other games.

[herne_the _hunter]

Rome 2 simply lacks the longevity of these other games.

Have to disagree especially with the dlc campaigns Rome 2 has a charm of its own. Empire is in a worser state but it still is popular and still sells. So I expect Rome 2 to surpass that in the long term.

[the_eye]

Post this again after the Coh2 event is over.

23,047 today, about twice the highest number of concurrent players any other Total War game has ever had this long after release.

Not really? It just shows that Rome DID FAIL. I am pretty sure A LOT of people don't have any interest at all in japanese history as I believe the majority of players are either from Europe or America so naturally most people will think that an European campaign is much more interesting and still it barely beats Shogun 2.

Erm, it "just barely beat" the highest peak Shogun 2 EVER HAD, nearly a year and a half after release. If you compare the peak players for the two titles, Rome II has generally tracked about double what Shogun 2 managed, sometimes more:

Also when comparing all the PR done for Rome II it is clear it had a failure to launch as well.

Most concurrent players, fastest selling, by far the most players still playing over a year after launch. You have a funny definition of failure.

Its all about the percentages. Shogun 2 had a higher player retention rate in august 2014 when patch 14 came out for rome 2.

Nonsense. I'm not sure whether you're comparing both games in August 2014, or both games eleven months after release, but either way it's quite clear that a higher percentage of Rome II owners were still playing. steamgraph.net shows us that the weekly peak for Shogun 2 eleven months after release was around 8,682 and for the beginning of August 2014 was 4,419. Since there must have been at least as many sales of Shogun 2 in 2014 as there were in 2012 we can ignore the latter result since it will clearly have a lower percentage of owners playing. We know from the SEGA financial statements that as of the end of March 2011 Shogun 2 had sold 600,000 copies. Ars Technica reported that Shogun 2 had sold a little over two million copies as of mid April 2014. If we assume a constant rate of sales between those two points then eleven months after release Shogun 2 had probably sold 600,000 + ((2,000,000 - 600,000) * (315 / 775)) = 1,169,000 copies. That figure is slightly off because the latter sales figure includes people who own Fall of the Samurai, so lets call it a round million. That means eleven months after release the highest peak number of concurrent players of Shogun 2 was about 8,682 / 1,000,000 = 0.8682%.

steamgraph.net shows us that at the start of August 2014, eleven months after launch, when patch 14 was released, Rome II peaked at about 17,592 concurrent players. A statistical sample of Steam accounts reveals that at the start of September 2014, approximately 1,408,000 copies of Rome II had been sold. Let's assume that was still the figure a month earlier, which means eleven months after release the highest peak number of concurrent players of Rome II was about 17,592 / 1,408,000 = 1.2494%, much higher than Shogun 2.

Which is higher in percentage terms, having 10 apples and selling 7 or having 100 bananas and selling 40?

If you were a greengrocer with an unlimited supply of apples and bananas, which would you prefer, 10 people buying apples on your first day of business and 7 of them still returning to your shop a year later or 100 people buying bananas on your first day of business and 40 of them still returning to your shop a year later?

We also need to acknowledge that the roman era is more well-known and popular than the japanese era. Japan, like any other country, was going through a civil war. Nothing special. Also Creative Assembly spent more on the marketing for rome 2 than shogun 2. As well as the fact that there are over 10000 subscribers to DEI alone and over 5000 current for Radious. OP hasn't taken into account the number of players who rely on mods to make rome 2 playable and interesting for them. Once he can gather statistics to find that more rome 2 players enjoy vanilla... actually I'm sure I don't need to be patronising and explain the basics of data gathering. We're all smart individuals.

Yes, we're all smart individuals. Some of us have evidence to back up our assertions though. Others...

http://www.steamgraph.net/index.php?...q214950&from=0 - So here we see shogun 2 maintains a steady player base while rome 2 fluctuates wildly as people come back after every patch to see the progress.

If you look at them both scaled relative to their peaks you'll see that they both fluctuate by about the same percentage. Rome II just has a lot more players.

There was also a data tool on steam that showed the percentages of players playing/returning and shogun 2 and empire had a consistently higher percentage than rome 2 even after patch 14. Napoleon and rome 2 were on par with each other I think though I could be wrong. If anybody can find that and post it here that would be great.

It's not that I don't believe you but... OK, I don't believe you. The best numbers I have show that to be complete baloney.

Pretty much this. Shogun 2 was never going to be as much of a pull in sales terms, only Medieval had the same draw as Rome in the total war series. The game though was very solid and in spite of being quite passionately interested in antiquity ( finished reading March of the Ten Thousand recently ) I spent nearly 4x as many hours on that game as on Rome 2 and I'd spend more time on Rome 1 then on Shogun 2. Rome 2 simply lacks the longevity of these other games.

Most concurrent players, fastest selling, by far the most players still playing over a year after launch. You have a funny definition of lacking longevity.

[T-Duke]

Pre-sales were huge for Rome II and there was a lot of hype considering the time frame is one of most loved (if not the most) on the contrary, Sengoku Jidai era fency less peole. But sales numbers don't necessary match the quality of the product. Shogun II is a very solid and deep game, with great immersion and wise gameplay dynamics while Rome II is, along with Empire, the worse TW ever and a very poor rts in general terms (imho).

[Tim_Ward]

the_eye, what you fail to understand is that Rome 2 was always going to do well. Consider:

• Rome is arguably CA's most popular setting, and Rome 1 was one of their most fondly remembered of their titles (even though it was actually rubbish and people are remembering mods)
• Shogun 2's setting is the least popular of the ones CA has tacked so far being, you know, non-European. Shogun 1 belongs to the first generation of Total War titles and thus the ones that fewest remember.
• While Shogun 2 followed on from a weak release (Empire), Rome 2 is the follow up to a strong release (Shogun 2)
• Rome 2 was easily the most hyped CA release to date.

What you need to be considering before you decide to call Rome 2 a success/failure was whether or not it achieved the sales/player retention it was capable of given it's pedigree and marketing hype, not comparing it to a much smaller title.

You also have to consider the knock-on effect Rome 2 will have on subsequent titles; people may have brought the game, they may play the game but that does not mean they're happy with how the game turned out and this may affect their decisions about whether or not to purchase the next title: they may not buy it, or they may hold off until the game is on Sale - thinking that while the game is fun it was not worth full price so they'll hold off on the next CA game until it's cheaper. This affects CA/Saga's bottom line but does not show up in a crude analysis of sales figures and player retention.

I mean, I still play Rome 2 on occasion, trying out mods and stuff; doesn't mean I'm happy with how the game turned out or that I'm going to buy the next one (haven't brought Attila so far and have no plans to do so - if I see a good sale one day I might get it. this decision is directly connected to the current state of Rome 2).

So, once we see comparable figures for Attila we'll no more.

Except of course we won't... because Attila set in a less popular period to Rome 2 and has benefited from less marketing hype and is basically a expandalone despite CA's protests that it's a full release. So, again, not really comparable just by looking at the raw numbers.

[D@gget]

While Shogun 2 followed on from a weak release (Empire), Rome 2 is the follow up to a strong release (Shogun 2)

I thought Napoleon existed.

[RandomSarmartian]

I thought Napoleon existed.

Hush now thats just the same as Attila, a trumped up expasion pack that releases what the first game SHOULD have been on release day. Just wait till Medieval 3 and its buggy release with yet another Failscape....I mean warscape engine.
Sorry but warscape is OK for empire and the like but it just doesnt work with melee combat well... Still playing IB2/IBFD for my Attila period. That and you can modify their maps....

Excuse the rant I had higher hopes for attila and rome but well happens. Total War

[Princereaper]

It kinda stupid to compare shogun and total war rome 2.

There over what? 100,000 more people at least who own rome total war 2.