Do you think this launch was worse or the same as Empires?

[DrSane]

If you've forgotten or not experienced Empire total war, heres a recap on why it failed:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naQaRIaXyAUI'm interested in the opinoins of any of the older members who were around for that, I do hope though that in 5 years we're not still waiting for a patch for core parts of the game the same way we were for empire, that games still broken.

[c.ryo]

Rome 2 release is worse then Empire release, full of bugs, no optimisation, gameplay features missing.

[bangell99]

Worse - especially since CA have had 3 previous games on the same engine to get it right.

[Runibl]

Launch definitely feels worse. Still holding hope for the future patches, and modding community....

[Jester]

Empire had some good excuses at least....

it was the 1st game with the new engine, it was the 1st game with a whole new period and different warfare, emphasis on ranged combat instead of melee combat and it also introduced many brand-new features like sea battles etc...


Rome2 has none of these excuses, and after the pretty good Napoleon & Shogun2 releases this one is just a shamefurr dispray

[Zipzopdippidybopbop]

Just as bad, if not worse. Worse because they've done this twice now.

[Quickening]

Empire was an infinitely worse release for me personally, mainly because I couldn't play it and I can play Rome 2 near perfectly. I still remember being so hyped up for Empire that I bought the Special Forces Edition. Of course when I got it the game kept crashing and was just generally an inexcusable, bug-ridden mess. Infinitely worse than Rome 2 is. Medieval 2 was also much worse than Rome 2 is. But I guess it's relative. Sometimes you get lucky with your system specs and some times you don't.

[Legion_IX]

Yes, definately. Also don't forget that a lot of negative critiques were caused due to the Steam back then. Thanks god the times are gone. Now the whole criticism is about the game and not some DRM decisions. It was also understandable for a lot of players that even such a company like CA can sell a badly developed product, especially using a completely new engine. But the second time with all the experience of producing TW games is simply not excusable.

[THE HIGHLANDER]

why dont you whingers maybe put some of the blame for said issues, with sega corp,, they already said yonks ago that total war games lasted too long, ie campaigns and battles ,, and took to long to make ,,
imho sega is to blame for early release and short battles etc,,unoptimised engine,, we all agree its rushed and unpolished, but everyones got a boss ,, you would all do well to remember this

[c.ryo]

As I've already said, most likeley they give us a beta release, so that they can fix all the bugs, test it, release patches and updates and small addons/ dlc and then once its tested on all the PC players as a test subjects, they will release it ( HOPEFULLY THEY WONT , but its heading that way ) on next gen consoles.

[Kolaris8472]

Just as bad, except:

1. I didn't have high expectations for Empire

2. Warscape was ok for Empire, it's frankly for Rome II

So we end up a bit worse off.

[caratacus]

It is truly ironic that by choosing to stick with Warscape as the perceived safe option for the next game after FOTS, CA have actually created a "dogs breakfast" of a Roman strategy game. CA had millions to play with in the budget. But instead of ploughing it into developing a new game engine or alternatively adapting the progress that was achieved with Warscape to produce a global scale 19th century game. The Company decided to extensively adapt Warscape for ancient warfare. big, big mistake .
However given the combat that I have seen, with units forming neat formations before rushing into a mass brawl lasting less than a minute, I seriously wonder whether anyone at CA really understands the concept of battle strategy game. The units look fantastic close up but battles might as well consist of a bunch of ants running about the battlefield.

[MKeogh]

Empire had some good excuses at least....

it was the 1st game with the new engine, it was the 1st game with a whole new period and different warfare, emphasis on ranged combat instead of melee combat and it also introduced many brand-new features like sea battles etc...


Rome2 has none of these excuses, and after the pretty good Napoleon & Shogun2 releases this one is just a shamefurr dispray

This.

ETW was in worse shape upon its initial release: unstable and with a practically non-functioning campaign AI (couldn't even use naval transport or most of the diplomatic features.) However, there was the excuse that it was a brand new engine for CA so there were a lot of "teething" problems. CA eventually solved most of those teething problems with NTW and S2TW which were both well polished upon release.

And that's why the subpar release of Rome2 is so disappointing. It's NOT a brand new gaming engine like ETW. If CA had just done a big Roman "mod" of S2TW with few minor new features then I think most people would have been very happy. Instead they added in all sort of features no one asked for (the silly "power-up" buttons) and redid stuff that worked perfectly fine in previous games (the battlefield UI) for no apparent reason other than "any change is good" when reality it's often not!

It feels substandard in terms of gameplay and graphics to S2TW.

[PROMETHEUS ts]

RTWII is way worse sily for the bad features they implemented and the good ones removed like seasons, walls etc ...

[Prof]

It's exactly the same. The only thing that makes it worse is that the engine is not new anymore, which it was back when ETW awas released.

[Causeless]

The warscape engine isn't the cause for this all. People put far too much emphasis on the engine being the cause of all issues, but remember than CA have the source code and that they had some pretty ye-olde warfare with Shogun 2.Almost all the issues and bugs are tied to the game itself, rather than the engine.

[Hardin]

Empire Total War is actually my favorite one of the series. The launch did have some issues, but I definitely don't think it has any problems anymore. As for Rome 2 I need to play it more before I make my judgement.

[ShadowMassa]

Besides the obvious bugs and bad optimization. The lackluster feeling of the campaign is another let down - No seasons, 1 turn per year (takes you 5-6 years to circle navigate the Black Sea lol), the interface, interacting with factions on the diplomacy screen also seems boring and bare, ect ect. Just a big downgrade on that sector which is critical, makes an RPG game boring.

I would only hope they fix the bugs and the optimization and focus on the lackluster feel of the campaign, if not it's going to go downhill pretty fast. It is what it is...

[Otherdude]

This launch is the exact same as every single Total War release since this site went live, and the forum reaction is likewise exactly the same.

Some people can't play the game at all. Some people can't get more than 10 minutes in without a crash. Most people have to humbly crank down the graphical settings against their will (you mean I have to play at Ultra instead of Extreme?! Am I being detained?!), though some will get to crank them back up after some optimization patches and drivers. Many hate the new features and interface and identify the previous as the pinnacle of game design. Most are a bit annoyed at things in promo material not actually existing in game.

The forums are flooded with talk of how CA lied to us. Some threaten that this is the last Total War purchase they will ever make. There will be 101 lists of 101 Things we need fixed ASAP.

And at the end of the day most of us will still be playing and enjoying it because we love the series enough to about it; I just wish more people did more of the former than the latter. The occasional useful thread helped me identify possible performance issues and bug workarounds while I was at work unable to play. Then when I got home I made the quick changes and had a blast for the rest of the night.

Soon there will be a slew of mods to choose from and in two years everyone will remember Total War: Rome II as the pinnacle of game design when Total Medieval War: III (yeah, that was a jab at your naming consistency, CA!) comes out with a bulky interface and a single rebel faction making expansion too easy.

[kieran12]

Seriously whoever pays for this site upgrade the bandwidth. It taking forever to turn one page. Do a fundraiser the TW community will help out if you can't afford the subscription.Nope Rome 2 is by far, for me, the worst game of the total war series. The campaign and battle maps lag badly. Battles are not at all fun or amazing ( too arcade) When you zoom in to watch a battle every unit is on top of each other fighting, i can't really can't make out individual units all that good. I hate it. As for the AI i think on hard levels it ain't too bad. Empire had bugs, but it was enjoyable you felt good after a battle, and wanted to play on. Rome 2 battles are dull and boring. I have the game since Tuesday i played three hours.