Has Rome 2 Vanilla now reached the level of Rome 1 Vanilla

**High Fist** · February 03, 2014, 02:59 PM

Originally Posted by azbestor

... both are not appealing to me, thanks to too old graphics (I know, mods are making miracles, but I prefer to mod game only after being content with vanillia) or too shallow gameplay.

I really advise against that.

I doubt R2's current mods have made huge leaps in progress yet, but RTW mods add so much more than vanilla.

Oh and btw everyone, if you're saying RTW is "piss easy" make sure you play on Hard campaign difficulty, not Very Hard. Reason being that the player receives the same cash bonuses as the AI does at VH. A bug that CA never fixed (funny dat

).

So while Hard isn't very hard, Very Hard is still less hard than Hard.

If you get me.

**Tr0tskY** · February 03, 2014, 02:54 PM

@Sutekh

Rome 1 was better at unit collision.

**PointOfViewGun** · February 03, 2014, 03:17 PM

Originally Posted by Tr0tskY

@Sutekh

Rome 1 was better at unit collision.

Not sure about that but so?

**GoTW Kubee** · February 03, 2014, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by TheSutekh

Not sure about that but so?

Wouldn't you prefer units to act somewhat realistically after impact, instead of warping into a gelatinous mass as in R2? Unit collision is very important for both gameplay and visual reasons.

**PointOfViewGun** · February 03, 2014, 07:27 PM

Originally Posted by GoTW Kubee

Wouldn't you prefer units to act somewhat realistically after impact, instead of warping into a gelatinous mass as in R2? Unit collision is very important for both gameplay and visual reasons.

What does unit collision has to do with Rome I being the foundation for the 3D era allegedly making it great or number of patches being meaningless?

**Dago Red** · February 03, 2014, 04:14 PM

Originally Posted by TheSutekh

Not sure about that but so?

Why?
Or how? Oh, maybe when?

**Tr0tskY** · February 04, 2014, 11:28 AM

Originally Posted by TheSutekh

Not sure about that but so?

How can you not be sure about it? What aren't you sure about? Are you serious? Unit collision is extremely important for simulating realistic battle lines and the movement and pushing of units. Right now you can't even "push" units in Rome 2 like you could in Rome 1.
This is a step forward in your eyes? Actually I don't care.
Rome 2 absolutely does NOT have unit collision unless a unit is on formation attack, whereas Rome 1 has collision for all units at all times. It's pretty simple. To pretend that you don't think this is important and to keep switching the issue and to keep making up stuff is just amazing. Especially for somebody with nearly 20,000 posts. How can you speculate randomly where this budget went? You have absolutely no idea, just like the rest of us!

The building of the motion capture studio is almost certainly not part of the game budget and is more than likely an investment from CA to help the overall business. This studio will obviously be leased and rented out when not in use for games so it's not actually bad business decision either. Anyway, this is totally irrelevant to unit collision, but congratulations on getting me to waste my time talking about it I guess?

**PointOfViewGun** · February 04, 2014, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by Tr0tskY

How can you not be sure about it? What aren't you sure about? Are you serious? Unit collision is extremely important for simulating realistic battle lines and the movement and pushing of units. Right now you can't even "push" units in Rome 2 like you could in Rome 1.
This is a step forward in your eyes? Actually I don't care.
Rome 2 absolutely does NOT have unit collision unless a unit is on formation attack, whereas Rome 1 has collision for all units at all times. It's pretty simple. To pretend that you don't think this is important and to keep switching the issue and to keep making up stuff is just amazing. Especially for somebody with nearly 20,000 posts. How can you speculate randomly where this budget went? You have absolutely no idea, just like the rest of us!

The building of the motion capture studio is almost certainly not part of the game budget and is more than likely an investment from CA to help the overall business. This studio will obviously be leased and rented out when not in use for games so it's not actually bad business decision either. Anyway, this is totally irrelevant to unit collision, but congratulations on getting me to waste my time talking about it I guess?

I'm sure about unit collision's importance. What I'm not sure about is whether Rome I was better at it. Show me where I pretended that I don't think unit collision is important. Show me where I switched the issue. Show me where I made stuff up.

Lovely, others can speculate all they want about the 40% budget in any way they want regardless if its based on facts or not. But, when I speculate that a lot of that budget was spent on a motion capture studio as an investment from SEGA for future titles, god forbid. It's blasphemy. Lovely. By your admission, you have absolutely no idea where the extra budget went but you're almost certain that it was not part of the game budget. You might wanna check and understand that there is worlds apart between having absolutely no idea and being almost certain.

I did not get you to waste your time. You yourself jumped into a discussion you were not part of and now whining about it. Please check multiple times before making such points.

**Tr0tskY** · February 04, 2014, 11:59 AM

Originally Posted by TheSutekh

I'm sure about unit collision's importance. What I'm not sure about is whether Rome I was better at it. Show me where I pretended that I don't think unit collision is important. Show me where I switched the issue. Show me where I made stuff up.

Lovely, others can speculate all they want about the 40% budget in any way they want regardless if its based on facts or not. But, when I speculate that a lot of that budget was spent on a motion capture studio as an investment from SEGA for future titles, god forbid. It's blasphemy. Lovely. By your admission, you have absolutely no idea where the extra budget went but you're almost certain that it was not part of the game budget. You might wanna check and understand that there is worlds apart between having absolutely no idea and being almost certain.

I did not get you to waste your time. You yourself jumped into a discussion you were not part of and now whining about it. Please check multiple times before making such points.

Originally Posted by TheSutekh

Vast majority? The budget increase is said to be 40%. I'm talking about that 40%. But yes, vast majority of that 40% probably went to building that facility and filling with high tech equipment.

Oh and about Unit collision....again I ask you....how can you "not be sure" about it? Please elaborate what you are not sure about, because right now you are just dodging the point I am making.
I'll repeat this once more.

Rome 2 does not have unit collision

**Earl Dibbles Jr** · February 03, 2014, 03:00 PM

Every day my faith in humanity wanes...only 63% saying that Rome 2 is worse than Rome 1 has pushed my faith down even more.

**Man o' War** · February 03, 2014, 03:01 PM

If Rome 1 was so bad and all other TW games so terribly flawed, why on Earth did anyone buy the terribly flawed Rome 2?

**~~John ''True Grit'' Wayne~~** · February 04, 2014, 11:00 AM

The 40 % went on advertising and hype and wages it certainly did not go on a game that worked from day 1.. In Rome 1 the ai knew how to siege.In Rome 2 they throw sticks at metal gates and walk around in circles or just stand there like zombies.In Rome 1 the units and cultures were more diverse and we had better politics and generals that actually lived and seasons and a family tree.Is it too much to expect a pc game to actually work when I buy it on day one.Having to wait 6 mths for it to be OK is not acceptable.If you except these standards then we are doomed and shall receive further rubbish.Empire and Rome 2 are shockingly bad day one of release.

Vast majority? The budget increase is said to be 40%. I'm talking about that 40%. But yes, vast majority of that 40% probably went to building that facility and filling with high tech equipment.

A game that needs 9 patches comes from that lol.I bet it all went on star bucks coffee and natchos and Soho

**PointOfViewGun** · February 04, 2014, 11:05 AM

Shogun II had 15 patches.

**antred** · February 04, 2014, 11:12 AM

Originally Posted by TheSutekh

Shogun II had 15 patches.

Oh, well that's a relief then.

**~~John ''True Grit'' Wayne~~** · February 04, 2014, 11:18 AM

Yay patches are great.At least when I bought Grand Theft Auto I could play the game.When I bought Empire and Rome 2 they had to be patched which took months.Guess what here is a idea just wait till the game is finished and do not put it on the shelves of shops claiming its the greatest ever when it is obvious they are not finished games.I do not buy a TV that does not work from day one so why take this rubbish.

The attitude is lets bring out a game and hype it up then we get the people to beta test the product and patch it till it works ok.Well no I want the game to work from day one.We are paying for a finished product not beta testing.