Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[LoSboccacc]

just preordered it via gmg, out of faith.

question is, gmg mail doesn't have the activation code said to be just below the email. am I missing something?

[umiman]

just preordered it via gmg, out of faith.

question is, gmg mail doesn't have the activation code said to be just below the email. am I missing something?

GMG generally sends out the activation codes for preorders just before release day.

[Dohon]

I was surprised to learn that the game is going to be released in September. I would have placed money on November, even Q1 2014. Not that I mind having the game in september, but still ...

Ah well, time to save up the monies!

[Tack]

I bought it full price. I'm an impulsive sucker.


Apparently because the Creative Assembly make a new engine for every game, they don't exactly make outstanding profits from them. Is why they had their big Hiatus on TWRTS games and instead brought out the recent pieces of critically reviled crap. Is also why they do so much DLC.

This is guesswork and word-of-mouth here. Who knows.

[Mech#4]

I seem to remember one of the developers mentioning early on that they were changing how the player commanded their troops. Does anyone remember the specifics on that? I watched the gameplay video on the Battle of Teutoburg Forest but it seemed pretty much as it is in Shogun 2: Total War.

[Wiles]

I had a question for those who have played the latest Total War games. I was a big fan of the TW series up until Empire, after that I stopped buying them because I was very disappointed with that instalment. I'd love to pick up Rome II, but after Empire I've been hesitant to touch Total War games.   Have the following instalments in the series been better?

[Mudcrab]

Tbh I'm not entirely happy with the direction TW is going, although I am being cynical and will most likely play the shit out of this game...

Edit: Miles Wiles obviously Empire and Shogun played entirely differently however the engine was the same. Empires campaign was a lot different to Shoguns, I played Shogun quite a bit then got bored of it. I think it offers little re-playability and Creative Assembly are going down the action/graphics route to try and get more players, which sucks.

[Xotes]

I had a question for those who have played the latest Total War games. I was a big fan of the TW series up until Empire, after that I stopped buying them because I was very disappointed with that instalment. I'd love to pick up Rome II, but after Empire I've been hesitant to touch Total War games.   Have the following instalments in the series been better?

From what I've heard, Empire was just plain ass. They've apparently stepped it up since then, however, so you should be good.

[Man of Paper]

I must be the only person in the world that enjoys playing (as in like yesterday) Empire. Sure, it's nothing like Rome (which I also played very recently), but they're both entertaining. Sure, it's not up to what we expect from CA, but honestly, it's pretty hard to follow up the first Rome with anything.

[Aptus]

I quite enjoyed Empire as well, but that might just be because I am a sucker for that era. The engine for the game was a major step down in my opinion though, a hell of a lot more closed down than previous installments. The time it took until a "play any faction" mod came out for example, and even then it was a work around of work arounds to get it to kind of, sort of, work.

[Digital Hellhound]

Empire's combat is alright (though the AI is predictably horrible), but it just has no soul. The campaign is painfully dull to play. There's no fun in it anymore. Medieval had all the character traits and retinues (and other 'RPG' elements), different unit types, etc etc., but Empire is just dead. I know many people will disagree with me, but it's pretty much the gut feeling I've gotten while playing. It seems... empty, somehow. Even the visual side of the campaign map is somehow worse.

Shogun 2 is good, though, and Fall of the Samurai for it definitely worth getting. It also has cool multiplayer with persistent, experience-gaining units and whatnot. I hope they keep the army system (probably called your Legion there, I'm sure of it) in Rome 2.

[umiman]

I must be the only person in the world that enjoys playing (as in like yesterday) Empire. Sure, it's nothing like Rome (which I also played very recently), but they're both entertaining. Sure, it's not up to what we expect from CA, but honestly, it's pretty hard to follow up the first Rome with anything.

Empire was unplayable on release.

It pissed a lot of people off.

It's a lot better now though but I think it's still kinda crap. Napoleon is pretty good though.

[krisslanza]

I'm still hoping for an Amazon faction.

Even though it'll never happen. 

[Man of Paper]

Yeah, I avoid first releases and wait for the fun Gold Edition sets and shit. Works out well for me (especially with another certain company that produces grand strategy games known for being unplayable right out of the box. Man, I feel old saying that. Who even buys physical copies of PC games anymore?)

[Tack]

Shogun 2 followed Shogun 1 in that it had a number of cut-and-dried units available to every faction.
Which makes sense, because it was a civil war - everyone had the same units at their command.

However it also made the game a little boring after a certain amount of time because you never changed your playstyle, unlike in Rome and Medieval II, where different factions strengths and weaknesses in heavy infantry, cavalry, missile troops or exotic units made every new campaign a different experience.
Until you played the Seleucid empire and ruined it.