Are the Caesar screenshots representative of the final product?

[Riekopo]

I would just like to ask this before the DLC is released because we all know that the screenshots from Rome 2's marketing and previews were not representative of the final product. Specifically the new Caesar screenshots suggest that a better type of AA has been applied probably MSAA. It also looks likes the colors may have been adjusted. Will we actually be able to achieve graphics like that?

http://www.reddit.com/r/totalwar/com...tative_of_the/ Please upvote to counter the users who automatically downvote everything I post because they don't like what I say.

[BunnyPoopCereal]

Redditors are brutal. I always wonder how everything is downvoted so much :\

[King_Porus]

You only got three downvotess on that other reddit thread. I don't know why you're surprised seeing as the answer has already been given by CA. You need to own Rome 2 to buy it, but it will be seperate from the main campaign like Rise of the Samurai from S2, the Warpath campaign from Empire, or the Peninsular campaign for Napoleon.

This topic is equally difficualt to actually have a discussion about. How would we know if the screenshots are representative of the final product. If you don't trust CA, wait for riviews and footage to come out. Simple as that.

P.S. It seems to me that you're suggesting that it won't be representative of the final product and are just trying to start another "Apologist" vs. "Whiner" war. Especially considering this post:

Ya these "screenshots" are likely still what I call "bullshots".

[Sun Jetzu]

They arnt. you can tell they are edited. But the final product should look like something similar. I think we are all sensitive to this because the game was like half finished graphically at release lol

[spanish_emperor]

i heard they're pre-alpha

[Sakanade]

i heard they're pre-alpha

It's super early code, and there is loads of features not just in terms of the graphics but also in terms of the combat and animations that actually aren't in the game yet. So the final game is actually gonna look way way better than those screenshots.

Trust CA, they deliver 100% of their promises
All you have to do is lick the urinal floor in your local pub and hand all of your life savings to CA.

[ststew]

If you have the same computer and settings and photoshop that CA has, then yes it'll be the same... are your graphics the same as my computers? no.. . also, this expansion has nothing to do with the half assed Rome2 they produced... no territories or factions or armies would have been in the released game.. while any hypothetical historical battles that were cut, and added later via dlc.. so what? historical battles are more specific then the general campaign, so should follow that they would be released when that specific area is more focused.

[perifanosEllinas]

The screenshot with the seasons had been used for pre-release marketing.We were promised a Rome 2 with seasons and a couple of weeks before release they just took it back and said the seasons will not be in.Now they are using the exact same picture to advertise a paid DLC mini-campaign that the only "new" feature it brings to the players is a promised feature that was cut before release.So I am asking two simple questions:1)Why would I believe that this screenshot is representative of the actual DLC when this exact screenshot was created to advertise Rome 2 and was not created to advertise this DLC? and 2)Why would I believe that this screenshot is representative of the actual DLC when the massive majority of screenshots that were created for Rome 2 were nowhere near the actual state of the game?

[SKSlave]

Reddit is the main base of CA fanboys who will defend virtually every move to the death. Don't be surprised to receive a lot of hate if you question CA's policies.

as for your question, I very much doubt the screenshots represent the final game. We were baited once with Rome II and it worked. It would only make sense for CA to try again.

[chris10]

Are the Caesar screenshots representative of the final product?

at least as much as the screenshots of Rome 2 before release...

[priam11]

If the op question is to CA then fine. If it is directed to the community, then it makes little sense since no one has seen the final product yet as it is not Dec 12.

[Butan]

If the op question is to CA then fine. If it is directed to the community, then it makes little sense.

To be honest, I think it would be much sillier to direct a question to CA.


But I also think that the OP question is not very productive since we can only believe it or not, depending on our own trust meter. And we can all agree that it is pretty damn low in terms of graphic related screenshotting.

[Humble Warrior]

If the op question is to CA then fine. If it is directed to the community, then it makes little sense since no one has seen the final product yet as it is not Dec 12.

Human beings have the ability to learn from past events. Granted some don`t....

However the question is valid to anyone who has experience of past CA games, can learn and extrapolate.

[priam11]

Human beings have the ability to learn from past events. Granted some don`t....

However the question is valid to anyone who has experience of past CA games, can learn and extrapolate.

Is it a valid question that any answer provided consists of speculation and conjecture? Brilliant. Carry on then.

[DarrenTotalWar]

What screenshots? The seasons one?

[Aenima]

Of course not. The Rome 2 screenies were all taken on a super-system that most of us could never dream of having, and then touched up afterwards.

What I've learned over the past few months is never to trust the pics of a game to be representative of how it'll be, because there's nothing to stop them having been played on a super-system (if a PC game) and then edited to look better afterwards (for both PC and console) And even in terms of video footage, only console footage is really representative of what everyone can expect, since the differences in HD tvs is minor compared to the differences in gaming rigs.

PS - and one can't forget the fact that Rome 2 is optimised terribly. I mean atrociously. I admit that it plays poorly on my laptop because it's a laptop, however my laptop exceeds many of the recommended, not minimum specs, and here's the thing, even at the worst graphics and lowest unit sizes, the framerate is unbearable both in and out of battle. If my specs should guarantee a 9/10 or even 8/10 experience on a computer, then I'd expect it to play out at around 7/10 or 6/10 on my laptop - 5/10 at the very worst - but the play experience on this thing is closer to 1/10. Battles play terribly, horrificaly jerky thanks to the poor framerate, and on the campaign map it's unbearable, no word of a lie. I had to wait like 10 seconds after clicking on an army before the game registered that I'd clicked...and this is all on the lowest settings possible.

Below are how my specs stack up to the recommended specs, as well as how it was predicted to run. Again, even for a laptop, I would have expected it to be perform a helluva lot better than it can

[Totalheadache]

Of course not. The Rome 2 screenies were all taken on a super-system that most of us could never dream of having, and then touched up afterwards.

What I've learned over the past few months is never to trust the pics of a game to be representative of how it'll be, because there's nothing to stop them having been played on a super-system (if a PC game) and then edited to look better afterwards (for both PC and console) And even in terms of video footage, only console footage is really representative of what everyone can expect, since the differences in HD tvs is minor compared to the differences in gaming rigs.

PS - and one can't forget the fact that Rome 2 is optimised terribly. I mean atrociously. I admit that it plays poorly on my laptop because it's a laptop, however my laptop exceeds many of the recommended, not minimum specs, and here's the thing, even at the worst graphics and lowest unit sizes, the framerate is unbearable both in and out of battle. If my specs should guarantee a 9/10 or even 8/10 experience on a computer, then I'd expect it to play out at around 7/10 or 6/10 on my laptop - 5/10 at the very worst - but the play experience on this thing is closer to 1/10. Battles play terribly, horrificaly jerky thanks to the poor framerate, and on the campaign map it's unbearable, no word of a lie. I had to wait like 10 seconds after clicking on an army before the game registered that I'd clicked...and this is all on the lowest settings possible.

Below are how my specs stack up to the recommended specs, as well as how it was predicted to run. Again, even for a laptop, I would have expected it to be perform a helluva lot better than it can

rubbish. there's loads of people out there who build rigs that are just as powerfull if not more so than what CA can build.

could do it myself if i wanted to drop around £1500...(there's a few hundred over @guru who have dual 780's etc). ((and my current build is around that or it was 2 yrs back).

ofc they might be using a super high res but again you can buy 4k res screens now for your own pc so the difference isnt great again.

what we are seeing is doctored pics. nothing that you or i couldnt do if we wanted.

[pajomife]

Yes it is,Photoshop or else.

[zeroFreeze]

May as well ask the question of other game releases; simple answer... of course the screenshots aren't completely representative of the final product. Everyone should know this by now if you've been a consumer and are over the age of 9. CA doctor the screenshots with contrast curves, colour corrections, probably build in game console commands for better AA/or just use a higher resolution like 1440p (2K). No company has not doctored their products for marketing purposes.

[Totalheadache]

May as well ask the question of other game releases; simple answer... of course the screenshots aren't completely representative of the final product. Everyone should know this by now if you've been a consumer and are over the age of 9. CA doctor the screenshots with contrast curves, colour corrections, probably build in game console commands for better AA/or just use a higher resolution like 1440p (2K). No company has not doctored their products for marketing purposes.

quite a few release a demo/beta so there's no need to.

plus all of the screenshots of bf4/ass creed4 look to me exactly like what i have seen in-game.

so i think your last statement is very likely false. not that a lot dont do it.

let me put it like this i am very good looking with a big willy. why would i photoshop myself if i look that good? common sense no boyo?