Rome 2: Opinions/Rating

[Lizard_man]

It seems they removed many aspects of the game, or just never got round to finishing them. The start up menu initially showed the factions leader or general, upon clicking that faction, which for some reason, was swapped for the simple background we have now. The majority of the ancient wonders of the world which were meant to be in game, are nothing but empty squares on the battle map. Upon clicking units, an avatar of the units commander popped up in the corner, which was also removed (not that I like these animated avatars, I fucking hate them). It seems they've only just added fire to damaged buildings, which is clearly seen in the Carthage demo. Wasn't the game meant to be around 35 GB or so, it's not even 20 GB, makes you wonder what else they ripped out of the game...

[Lt_Anders]

It seems they removed many aspects of the game, or just never got round to finishing them. The start up menu initially showed the factions leader or general, upon clicking that faction, which for some reason, was swapped for the simple background we have now. The majority of the ancient wonders of the world which were meant to be in game, are nothing but empty squares on the battle map. Upon clicking units, an avatar of the units commander popped up in the corner, which was also removed (not that I like these animated avatars, I fucking hate them). It seems they've only just added fire to damaged buildings, which is clearly seen in the Carthage demo. Wasn't the game meant to be around 35 GB or so, it's not even 20 GB, makes you wonder what else they ripped out of the game...

Anyone bothered looking at Patch 3 Notes?

Not the full list, but some interesting points:

(click to show/hide)

All armies that are forced to retreat, and then are attacked, no longer have a *Baggage Train battle. It is a normal open field battle with any campaign generated penalties applied as before.
When an army in forced march is attacked on the Campaign Map, an ambush battle is now triggered, rather than a baggage train Victory Point battle .
Combined battles where there is no navy in the defending alliance do not have *Victory Points/Baggage Trains.
Victory Points have had their capture time increased by 3x their previous length.
Attacking AI is now more likely to prioritise taking Victory Points in Siege Battles / City Assault Battles.
Substantially reduced free hits from enemies in battles, when moving a unit through enemy units (without attacking them), so units can disengage with less penalty.
Units that charge while in formation (e.g. block formation) stop sooner on contact with the enemy, to reduce "blobbing" where units converge into a disorganised brawl.
Hit points for all units have been increased in combat.
Reduced melee weapon damage in battles, and increased melee defence from shields.
Various trait effects are now working as intended.
Squalor and food consumption have been rebalanced (reduction for higher-level buildings) in Campaign modes.

They are removing flags, except for like 1-2 instances now. Slowing down combat and the blobing mentality. Rebalancing the rather shitty squalor/food consumption.

But the most intersting are the 3 bolded ones: 2 are related to not fixing AI, but making the AI kill you when they bum rush your flags....

And, the last one: Traits working as intended: THEY FORGOT TO GIVE SPEARS BONUS VERSUS CAVALRY. How the HELL do you do that?

[Bittersteel]

dont tell me you believe anything that they show in trailers. remember dragon age origins?

Did you watch the trailer? It certainly looked like a battle from the game (Except the grapichs).

[Nightmare798]

Did you watch the trailer? It certainly looked like a battle from the game (Except the grapichs).

no, just no.

trailer shows an epic action with awesome looking spells and stuff.

in game, however it is a sorry shallow excuse for combat system, running on extremely outdated modified aurora engine, littered with bugs.
combat in dragon age origins is a snore fest. story telling was good however, and characters were very well done. graphics and music were also nice.

imo dao didnt deserve 9/10, id give it like 7/10.

this is how it should have looked like:

and this is how it really looks.

NEVER EVER TRUST TRAILERS.

[Xant]

The former is a cinematic trailer. Obviously (only to some it seems) that isn't what the gameplay looks like....

imo dao didnt deserve 9/10, id give it like 7/10.

Yeah, and evidently most people disagree with you.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-origins

[Ninja_Khorin]

You really looked at a CGI trailer and believed it?

Anyway, I quite enjoyed Dragon Age: Origins combat, comboing different spell effects and levelling up all the characters to fulfill a role in the party. It was reminiscient of Infinity Engine games, in that it was semi-isometric strategic combat. If you were expecting anything else you should've read even their marketing pitch when they said it's a modern version of Baldur's Gate.

For me DA:O is a 8 or 8.5, never tried DA2 due to Origins and general bad reception. For a CGI trailer it was actually relatively accurate in showing it's a party based RPG with a few different classes. But obviously CGI trailers are completely different from the actual gameplay.

I remember the Dragon Age crew releasing some actual gameplay videos prior to release and if my memory serves it did represent the game fairly accurately, but some things may have changed since it was like a year prior to release.

In related news look at this awesome gameplay from Cyberpunk 2077:

(click to show/hide)

[Nightmare798]

The former is a cinematic trailer. Obviously (only to some it seems) that isn't what the gameplay looks like....

Yeah, and evidently most people disagree with you.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-origins

metacritic is know to give great scores to about any game, as long as devs or publishers fork out the cash to cover it. dragon age origins is a good game, but not that super awesome quality-defining rpg they tell us it is.

[Xant]

I wasn't aware devs and publishers were forking out the cash to the 500 user reviewers.

[Turboflex]

Empire Total War came out at 90+ score too. CA really knows how to work over reviewers.

[Ninja_Khorin]

metacritic is know to give great scores to about any game, as long as devs or publishers fork out the cash to cover it. dragon age origins is a good game, but not that super awesome quality-defining rpg they tell us it is.

Empire Total War came out at 90+ score too. CA really knows how to work over reviewers.

Shame neither forked out any cash for the sequels, which are both honestly worse games:
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-ii
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/total-war-rome-ii

And yeah, professional reviewers practically always give good scores if it's a high budget title. User scores give very low if the game is an unworthy successor. The true score is usually found right between the two.

[Nightmare798]

I wasn't aware devs and publishers were forking out the cash to the 500 user reviewers.

those are the sheep that find this game s combat good, because the dont know any better.

[Ninja_Khorin]

those are the sheep that find this game s combat good, because the dont know any better.

Out of curiosity, how do you find Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale?

(click to show/hide)

Not really implying that Dragon Age has better or as good combat, but they are comparable.

[Nightmare798]

Out of curiosity, how do you find Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale?

those are old classics, revolutionary in their time. at that time, point and click combat was not so overused.

its 2009 ffs. sorry that my standarts are not low enough to enjoy combat in this game, because i would expect better.
maybe they should stop pumping graphics, and look at things from a gameplay perspective.

the only newer game with great combat system was risen, and two worlds II.

[Bittersteel]

I meant the rome total war trailer -.- Not that game whatever it is.

[Xant]

those are the sheep that find this game s combat good, because the dont know any better.

So the definition of sheep is that they don't know much about RPG combat. I also wasn't aware that metacritic was for rating combat.