Total War Returns to Rome

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Total War Returns to Rome

How far will you go for Rome?

With 2011's Total War: Shogun 2 out of the way (and superb), The Creative Assembly has turned its besequeled eye towards another one of its older titles. Today, it announced that Total War: Rome II would be hitting PCs in 2013.

The announcement was accompanied by a neat little live-action trailer portraying some of the more common types of political intrigue of the Roman days. A ruler is overthrown by an ambitious young successor, a female assassin seduces and kills her target, and a soldier is executed, for some reason. That part wasn't really clear. With all the backstabbing (and frontstabbing), though, the message is thus: How far will you go for Rome?

The Creative Assembly says that the sequel will have a bigger map than its highly-lauded 2004 predecessor, and will take the player further to the East. Precisely what that means is uncertain; it's possible that Rome II, like Rome, might have a campaign regarding the exploits of legendary conqueror Alexander the Great. Alternatively, there could be campaigns set in the heyday of the Eastern Roman Empire of Byzantium.

Beyond that, the official site promises an all-new engine for combat with "exotic ancient cities and colossal armies rendered in incredible detail." New camera angles will allow aspiring commanders to watch their legions fight from whatever direction they please. The Creative Assembly also promises that the game will be optimized for desktop PCs as well as laptops, so your desire to conquer for the glory of Rome won't be hampered by your hardware.

Sic Semper Tyrannis! Quid Pro Quo! E Pluribus Unum! Ecce, Romani! Ixnay onay ethay Igpay Atinlay!

Source: Total War: Rome II

Permalink

Rome is STILL my favorite game in the series. Even beating the new Shogun 2. I STILL will go back and play my Steam copy of Rome Gold Edition.

I'm sure people are going to hate on CA for retreading like they did when Shogun 2 was announced, but in my mind Rome 2 is what I've been craving for years.

Whoever wrote this article has an awful grasp of Ancient history.

Please, please, please, for the love of Caesar fix the naval battles.

Hookah:
Whoever wrote this article has an awful grasp of Ancient history.

I don't see anything that's particularly wrong in it. At least nothing that can't be excused by Rule of Entertainment.

I dislike live action trailers. Unless I get to see my female assassins stabbing people mid-sex, I will be disappointed.
Don't fail me, CA.

Fuck!ty yes. Always considered Rome to be the best so this can only be good news!

I still prefer Shogun over all else. Japanese feudalism is by far more interesting to me, probably because of their culture.

JerrytheBullfrog:

Hookah:
Whoever wrote this article has an awful grasp of Ancient history.

I don't see anything that's particularly wrong in it. At least nothing that can't be excused by Rule of Entertainment.

Then you also have an awful grasp of Ancient History.

Friends
Romans
Country men
Lend me your pro-tips!

Fear the eyebrow!

I want this game so hard. SO HARD.

Hookah:

JerrytheBullfrog:

Hookah:
Whoever wrote this article has an awful grasp of Ancient history.

I don't see anything that's particularly wrong in it. At least nothing that can't be excused by Rule of Entertainment.

Then you also have an awful grasp of Ancient History.

The only facts discussed in the article are that the Eastern Roman Empire was Byzantium, and that the first Rome: Total War had a campaign involving Alexander. Both of these are true. Then all the latin at the end which seems to me to be a joke.

So, what are you harping on?

Edit: Maybe you're reading it as the author saying that Alexander was Roman? That's not what I get from the text at all. He's just saying that there was an Alexander campaign in the original Rome: Total War. Which is true.

YES. CAN'T WAIT! This is going to be awesome!

Thank GOD! Seriously, one of the worst things (to me) about the last two TW games have been the utter lack of unit variety. Everyone has nearly identical army lists in Empire, everyone DOES have identical army lists in Shogun 2. The one thing I love about Medieval 2 and Rome has always been the various different armies that face off. Celtic chariots crashing into Roman legions, Greek phalanxes fending off German Berserkers, and so on and so forth. Unlikely enemies facing each other in defiance of history. All Empire had were tons of Line Infantry and some cannons (most obring combat of any TW game ever) and Shogun 2 had mirrored armies for all the clans.

If they can deliver the level of quality seen in Shogun 2, which was pretty polished straight out of the box (as opposed to the bugged, unfinished mess that was Empire) this has the potential to be the best Total War game yet...

Well I kinda just got into the series after receiving a copy of Fall of Samurai, but I've heard good things about the previous Rome TW. That said, without the text at the end, this could very well be a trailer for Spartacus season 3 lol.

There's something about Total War games that rubs me the wrong way. The idea is great, execution seems to work, but I just can't enjoy the gameplay.

Anywho, this is good news. I think the Rome setting is the best possible scenario and context for the series. I'll consider Total War again next year then.

Finally. :D
I've been waiting for Rome 2 for years.
For me, it will likely be the best Total War game of them all. I love the setting and the era, and the new engine will make diplomacy a lot easy and hopefully more viable.

That tagline is pretty freaking badass.

Rome is my favourite game in the series so...

image

I knew it was gonna be Rome, I just knew it!

You guys all owe me money!

Fuck yes.

Now let's pray they keep going along this line. Because then, my friends, then... 2015, Medieval 3. Make it so, CA.

Bigeyez:
Rome is STILL my favorite game in the series. Even beating the new Shogun 2. I STILL will go back and play my Steam copy of Rome Gold Edition.

I'm sure people are going to hate on CA for retreading like they did when Shogun 2 was announced, but in my mind Rome 2 is what I've been craving for years.

Yes! Oh gods yes!

While I personally have played Rome only a couple of weeks ago and feel it can't really stand up to Shogun II, it's still the Total War game that's closest to my heart.

All the polish and improved mechanics that have gone into Shogun II in a Rome setting... Take my money now!

YES YES YES! Rome: Total War was my first game from this series and it just blew me away and I'm crazy excited for the sequel.

VladG:

Bigeyez:
Rome is STILL my favorite game in the series. Even beating the new Shogun 2. I STILL will go back and play my Steam copy of Rome Gold Edition.

I'm sure people are going to hate on CA for retreading like they did when Shogun 2 was announced, but in my mind Rome 2 is what I've been craving for years.

Yes! Oh gods yes!

While I personally have played Rome only a couple of weeks ago and feel it can't really stand up to Shogun II, it's still the Total War game that's closest to my heart.

All the polish and improved mechanics that have gone into Shogun II in a Rome setting... Take my money now!

Oh I definitely love Shogun 2, but what puts it below Rome in my list is the sheer number of different unit types in Rome. Shogun 2 has pretty much copy pasted army lists for all it's factions. If they just combine Shogun 2s improvements and graphics with Romes setting and vastly different factions and units it would be a game I'll be playing for years.

DVS BSTrD:
Friends
Romans
Country men
Lend me your pro-tips!

Your general has hidden stats that secretly make it the best unit in the game.

To activate them, run your general straight into a formation of at least three spearmen, without any support of other troops.

You will win much honor and victory! :D

OT: Please them them port it too mac. :(

I now have a date with a furios hand and a box of tissues.... excuse me please

Still haven't gotten around to playing my steam copy of Shogun 2, but it now sounds like a wise choice to have set it on a smaller more focused campaign. Now that they have all that fine tuning finished, they can focus on putting it into a much larger game which is what I really want.

I'm still wondering though if they're ever going to open up some sort of map editor for the game. That's the one thing I've never liked about the series, it's great to start on a historically accurate map but it really cuts down on re-playability. I wish it was like the Civilization series where you can start a game on a variety of randomly generated maps.

And before anyone goes into historical accuracy there's nothing historical about Scotland conquering all of medieval Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East.

Not G. Ivingname:

DVS BSTrD:
Friends
Romans
Country men
Lend me your pro-tips!

Your general has hidden stats that secretly make it the best unit in the game.

To activate them, run your general straight into a formation of at least three spearmen, without any support of other troops.

You will win much honor and victory! :D

OT: Please them them port it too mac. :(

lol, as long as it's straight into the flanks, you're general's going to win XD

Cavalry was so OP in that game, to be honest.

JerrytheBullfrog:

Hookah:

JerrytheBullfrog:

I don't see anything that's particularly wrong in it. At least nothing that can't be excused by Rule of Entertainment.

Then you also have an awful grasp of Ancient History.

The only facts discussed in the article are that the Eastern Roman Empire was Byzantium, and that the first Rome: Total War had a campaign involving Alexander. Both of these are true. Then all the latin at the end which seems to me to be a joke.

So, what are you harping on?

Edit: Maybe you're reading it as the author saying that Alexander was Roman? That's not what I get from the text at all. He's just saying that there was an Alexander campaign in the original Rome: Total War. Which is true.

What and where is Byzantium, dear genius?

My body is ready.

Eghhh...I love Total War...I really do, but can we...you know...kick it up another era. Seriously is there going to be a Total World War?

Hookah:

JerrytheBullfrog:

Hookah:

Then you also have an awful grasp of Ancient History.

The only facts discussed in the article are that the Eastern Roman Empire was Byzantium, and that the first Rome: Total War had a campaign involving Alexander. Both of these are true. Then all the latin at the end which seems to me to be a joke.

So, what are you harping on?

Edit: Maybe you're reading it as the author saying that Alexander was Roman? That's not what I get from the text at all. He's just saying that there was an Alexander campaign in the original Rome: Total War. Which is true.

What and where is Byzantium, dear genius?

You're just nitpicking now

omgomgomgomgomgomgomg!

Yaaaaaaaaay!

I can't wait to play this! ^_^

Hookah:

JerrytheBullfrog:

Hookah:

Then you also have an awful grasp of Ancient History.

The only facts discussed in the article are that the Eastern Roman Empire was Byzantium, and that the first Rome: Total War had a campaign involving Alexander. Both of these are true. Then all the latin at the end which seems to me to be a joke.

So, what are you harping on?

Edit: Maybe you're reading it as the author saying that Alexander was Roman? That's not what I get from the text at all. He's just saying that there was an Alexander campaign in the original Rome: Total War. Which is true.

What and where is Byzantium, dear genius?

ah yes i see the error now. as far as i know, byzantium was the original name of the city taken by the romans before it was constantinople, and it was a fairly important city in the original rome total war as far as i remember, so the similarity of the names (byzantine empire vs byzantium) makes the mistake understandable.

as wrong as this likely is, it is not so important a fact that it is worth arguing over. so lets all let it go

senordesol:
Eghhh...I love Total War...I really do, but can we...you know...kick it up another era. Seriously is there going to be a Total World War?

i feel this is inappropriate for total war because of 2 things. 1, the combat would have to be completely different, except for ww1 maybe, but that was a big stalemate so it wouldnt be that fun.

and 2, the world wars have been done to death. the only ww2 games i play anymore are company of heroes, which would be difficult to beat as an rts.

besides, where else can you get this kind of quality and freedom in a turn based/rts game, for the rich historical periods it has covered? why should they stop what they do best now?

Hookah:

JerrytheBullfrog:

Hookah:

Then you also have an awful grasp of Ancient History.

The only facts discussed in the article are that the Eastern Roman Empire was Byzantium, and that the first Rome: Total War had a campaign involving Alexander. Both of these are true. Then all the latin at the end which seems to me to be a joke.

So, what are you harping on?

Edit: Maybe you're reading it as the author saying that Alexander was Roman? That's not what I get from the text at all. He's just saying that there was an Alexander campaign in the original Rome: Total War. Which is true.

What and where is Byzantium, dear genius?

Byzantium was the original name (well, the latinized name of its original Greek name Byzantion) of the city that was renamed Nova Roma by the emperor Constantine, which led to its popular and later formal name Constantinople. It was the eastern jewel of the Roman Empire, and after the fall of Rome in the West, became the capital of the Byzantine empire, also known as the Eastern Roman Empire.

Any questions?

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here