Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Why is Shogun 2 considered better than Rome 2?

245

Comments

  • Tyer032392Tyer032392 Senior Member FloridaRegistered Users Posts: 4,787
    edited October 2013
    Shogun 2 is not the master piece that everyone is claiming, that honor is reserved for either Rome Total War, or Medieval 2 Total War, maybe even Empire as it was a huge game with many additions to the series.
    Ready for Three Kingdom's TW: I5-6600k, EVGA Geforce GTX 1070SC, 16Gigs RAM, WD Blue PC SSD @ 500GB
  • easytargeteasytarget Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,432
    edited October 2013
    Hey, not like I'm asking you to agree with me. I'm telling you what I think.

    As for your choices, ME2 and R1, that's nostalgia talking, and to even mention Empire as a possibility worth consideration for such a title suggests to me your just here for a bit of fun.
    This space intentionally left blank.
  • EllEzDeeEllEzDee Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 864
    edited October 2013
    easytarget wrote: »
    Hey, not like I'm asking you to agree with me. I'm telling you what I think.

    As for your choices, ME2 and R1, that's nostalgia talking, and to even mention Empire as a possibility worth consideration for such a title suggests to me your just here for a bit of fun.

    Look, the Shogun 2 fanboy has awoken!
    "Just nostalgia talking" isn't even an argument: all the Total War games have the exact same gameplay and AI (though in terms of naval and siege AI, Shogun 2 is hands down the worst of the series).

    The difference is that Rome and Medieval 2 were fleshed out and polished. The factions weren't as varied as Rome, but the units all felt appropriately different, and would all change as the game progressed. Traits were very much in-depth, there were proper objectives, varied maps, incredibly varied castles/cities, and the fact that battles didn't revolve around the exact same 5 units.
    And of course there wasn't an arbitrary tech tree locking you out of the already limited units and buildings.

    Rome, Empire and Napoleon had a mixture of these points (of course with M2 having all those features), and more, while Shogun 2 went in the opposite direction. That's why they stand head and shoulders above Shogun 2.

    The one place they actually improved Shogun 2 is in the multiplayer, but it's a sad fact that nobody actually buys TW games for the multiplayer.

    Of course, what's absolutely hilarious is how you make a bold statement while disregarding everyone else's, and then clain what you said "is only my opinion".
    [portable-ID]lsd[/portable-ID]
    Feel free to check out my Steam guide on naval combat in E:TW
  • Tyer032392Tyer032392 Senior Member FloridaRegistered Users Posts: 4,787
    edited October 2013
    easytarget wrote: »
    Hey, not like I'm asking you to agree with me. I'm telling you what I think.

    As for your choices, ME2 and R1, that's nostalgia talking, and to even mention Empire as a possibility worth consideration for such a title suggests to me your just here for a bit of fun.

    I am not saying Shogun 2 is not a good game, it is a **** good game. However, I feel that Shogun 2 does not have the replay value that Rome and Medieval 2 has, which this is not even including the mods like Roma Secturum or Barbarorum for Rome, or Stainless Steel and or Third Age for Medieval 2 which makes them nearly entirely different games. Shogun 2 does not have this, and is also the exact same game in terms of play-ability with militaries. In addition, Medieval 2 is far more polished than that of Shogun 2 with the exception of the graphics; however, the detailed traits, benefits and scenery makes all the difference.
    Ready for Three Kingdom's TW: I5-6600k, EVGA Geforce GTX 1070SC, 16Gigs RAM, WD Blue PC SSD @ 500GB
  • easytargeteasytarget Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,432
    edited October 2013
    Well, to be fair, the entire industry has moved away from making it easy for the mod community to do their thing because the developers, and more particularly their publishers, want to sell DLC.

    So comparing a modded ME2 to Shogun 2 and complaining the latter is missing this is really just a commentary about the industry as a whole.
    This space intentionally left blank.
  • MemaiMemai Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1
    edited October 2013
    I agree with my fellow Shogun fans. I 've played Shogun, Rome ,Medieval, Medieval 2, Empire (even Shogun: battles:).I've spent most hours on MTW2 and discovered Shogun 2 not a long time ago.It has the greatest atmosphere and character.I'll explain what I mean by atmosphere here:

    1.The art style is gourgeous. It follows the traditional art and writing style of medieval Japan, because I happened to know people that don't actually know this.Every image in the game is in this great style that lets you live the epoch.
    2.The music rivals some of the best movie soundtracks.
    3.Wisdom.And I don't mean the quotes only. Bushido, Zen, etc. are a different (for many people in the west) view of the world and the forces behind it.They are well represented in the game and really show you "the way" :)
    4.Architecture. I know more about the traditional architecure from the game and its vast encyclopedia than from YouTube (although no source is redundant). Why the buldings are built this way - to protect the people from the harsh elements of the region (you know, earthquakes, volcanos, tsunami).
    5.Military details.How the battles are fought, types of weapons, armour.I especially like the silk protection against arrows on the back of the mounted warriors (the balloons).
  • Unhappy SamuraiUnhappy Samurai Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 231
    edited October 2013
    I used to find the opinions of Easytarget and LSD to often match my own in the past threads, however I feel like you've gone off the rails on this one LSD.. I didn't like Shogun2 that much in the beginning, partly because I wasn't that interested in the time-period. However, I gave the game an extra shot and after a while I realized it is hands down the best game in the series so far.

    As far as your point about limited unit variety LSD, one must of course agree.. but.. you can't just make up a boatload of magical units for a single-nation game.

    I'm with the Shogun fans on this one (obviously) go get it when it's on sale and you will find yourself spending a ton of hours on a cheap game :) Enjoy!
  • Jdlex79Jdlex79 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 111
    edited October 2013
    Because Rome 2 is simply shockingly bad.. Makes shogun 2 look good
    I7 930 (oclk 3.8ghz, HT disabled), MSI TwinFrozr II GTX 580, 12 Gb Ram 1600 DD3 GSkill NQ series
  • EllEzDeeEllEzDee Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 864
    edited October 2013
    However, I gave the game an extra shot and after a while I realized it is hands down the best game in the series so far.

    I've given the game numerous shots, but it can't hold my attention for even half as long as its predecessors. The only fun to be had is in the co-op campaign (which is hilarious fun).

    The next poster summed it up beautifully:
    Jdlex79 wrote: »
    Because Rome 2 is simply shockingly bad.. Makes shogun 2 look good
    [portable-ID]lsd[/portable-ID]
    Feel free to check out my Steam guide on naval combat in E:TW
  • RedfoxxRedfoxx Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 8
    edited October 2013
    Graphics are so much richer and the battle scenes allow you to get more involved (immersed). Makes it more realistic. The user interface is much easier to handle. I just feel that CA tried to do too much to differentiate this game from Rome-1 and ended up pleasing virtually no body. I have gone back to Shogun-2 which I consider the best of the series, interspersed with Rome -1.

    Sic volvere Parcas " So spin the Fates".
  • Man o' WarMan o' War Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 973
    edited October 2013
    Why is Shogun 2 considered better than Rome 2?

    For me personally it's because one is believable and the other is fantasy, generic and arcade.

    If you leave a general or a spy for too long in a province with a den of iniquity, he may well pick up an unwanted drunken trait (I forget the name). This is believable. R2 reduces these instances to a set of dice rolls based on nothing more than a set of dice rolls to try to introduce flavour. It fails pitifully.

    My only real complaint if complaint it be called is the fact that the game (S2) isn't epic in scale. That of course is not the fault of game design but one of geography. All other TW titles have felt epic and grand in scale.

    Rome 2 here surpasses Shogun 2 in its lack of epicness. It's so easy to master the map with magic boats and whatnot that despite its geographical scale it's easier to fight your way across the whole world in R2 than it is to fight your way across the islands of Japan in S2.

    Polish, attention to detail, time and pride have gone into S2, these, along with many other things have been stripped from R2.
  • skoomamuchskoomamuch Member Registered Users Posts: 92
    edited October 2013
    Shogun 2 TW is a THEMATIC game, where ROME 2 TW lack
    No White Flags, Only White Smoke
  • Hannibal BarcaHannibal Barca Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 812
    edited November 2013
    Shogun 2 has far more depth to it, i feel The issue with Rome 2 is that every thing is streamlined. Shogun 2 has family trees, skill trees, general loyalty and honor, and that were generals not so easily replaced. All these were great features, and rome 2 removed all of them(or substituted wth a downgraded version). Shogun 2 for me is easily among the best games in the tw series, Rome 2 has far to many unfinished features, and lack of polish to come close to shogun in my opinion
  • jupstojupsto Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 327
    edited November 2013
    balance, polish, performance. rome2 will beat it eventually
  • easytargeteasytarget Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,432
    edited November 2013
    I like your optimism.
    This space intentionally left blank.
  • feelfree2diefeelfree2die Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 321
    edited November 2013
    stw2 better than twr2? give rome 2 a couple years and then ask this question.

    amazing how people forget the release of shogun. it was a disaster, just as bad as rome2 is now. dx11 was not working, game only used one core, same stupid passive ai that never attacked during siege battle, forever end turn times, etc. etc. etc. just go back and read all the posts during first week of release for shogun2.

    took a good 6 months or so for shogun2 to come around and be what it is today but by then most players had shelved it. i will start it up every 6 months and try to finish a campaign, just too boring for me. i actually went back and played the original shogun, that was more fun for me.

    total war games are for the new generation of kids today that have never experienced the older versions. they are the ones that will fall in love with how the game is played today.
  • easytargeteasytarget Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,432
    edited November 2013
    1. I was here when Shogun 2 released, I don't forget anything about it. It worked flawlessly for me from the day it launched. I played through an entire Date campaign straight off with not a single crash or issue. Amazing how your suggestion about forgetting doesn't jive with reality. The rest of your complaints are just the idle blather you could apply to all TW games.

    2. It took a good 6 months for nothing to change whatsoever. Other than the release of ROTS.

    3. You insult "kids today" by suggesting they are too stupid to know quality game design when they see it, or that they aren't aware when poor game design decisions have been made. Both are in abundance in Rome 2.

    P.S. Just looked at your posts, should of done that before responding, welcome to my ignore list.
    This space intentionally left blank.
  • EllEzDeeEllEzDee Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 864
    edited November 2013
    easytarget wrote: »
    1. I was here when Shogun 2 released, I don't forget anything about it.

    Just because you yourself didn't run into any issues, it doesn't mean they didn't exist. Claiming Shogun 2 is a masterpiece is bad enough, but claiming it was even at launch is more hilarious than anything you've said previously.

    As for "welcome to my ignore list": is there a way you could come off as less of a fanboy in future? Every time someone disagrees with the tripe you spout, you dismiss whatever they say and pretend to ignore them, rather than, you know, coming up with some kind of meaningful response.
    [portable-ID]lsd[/portable-ID]
    Feel free to check out my Steam guide on naval combat in E:TW
  • easytargeteasytarget Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,432
    edited November 2013
    One day, hopefully soon for LSD's sake, it will dawn on him what the word "ignore" means. While we wait for that epiphany, I'll assume he's just said something pithy back to me, tragically his message is doomed to wither into the ether unloved by the one it was meant for because I'll never see it, but I will attempt to soldier on.

    Meanwhile dear readers, all 36 of you currently. take a peek at the dear boy's profile page, you owe it to yourselves to witness it in all its glory, but put some glasses on first to protect your eyes from the glare. At first I viewing I thought my monitor had broken.
    This space intentionally left blank.
  • EllEzDeeEllEzDee Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 864
    edited November 2013
    Heeeeeeeey...
    Did you just make fun of my profile? Jealousy is one thing, but making fun is completely uncalled for.

    My mum said it looked wonderful.
    [portable-ID]lsd[/portable-ID]
    Feel free to check out my Steam guide on naval combat in E:TW
  • Green JacketGreen Jacket Senior Member Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire, EnglandRegistered Users Posts: 1,513
    edited November 2013
    easytarget wrote: »
    Shogun 2 is a masterpiece, makes no difference what LSD says, he's one guy, confused as to why he hangs out in a forum for a game he appears to spend only time hating on two years after its release.

    Do yourself a favor like I did and put him on ignore.

    Problem solved.

    It's hardly a masterpiece... weirdly enough peoples opinions of previous games in the series changes with each game.

    The last game I would say to be a masterpiece would be the original Medieval total war.

    Now listen me out, but this is what I've noticed about peoples opinion, of the series, over the years after each game.

    The original Medieval comes out, everything is expanded, the RP aspect of generals, civil wars, difference between factions, internal politics, better sieges etc (the list goes on).

    Rome comes out, it breaks new ground for the series, aka finally real 3D battles (aka getting rid of sprites which where only used for long distance views) and a great new style of campaign map. However criticism for lack of historical accuracy and path-finding in sieges. Hardcore Fans seen Medieval as the "best" TW seeing some features went (being blamed on new engine) but universally agree rome was a step in the right direction, especially in modernizing the series..

    Medieval 2 comes out. Breaks ground for getting rid of clone armies and generally improving "most" aspects of rome and returning a few features that went missing between the original medieval and rome. However due to siege path-finding issues the game is slated by the forum community on release for being "unpolished" even though it had better siege path finding than rome. However people start to notice the battle AI in Medieval 2 started doing the same thing each time and no longer taking advantage of changes in battles (This to this day had hardly been fixed in later games). The original Rome now replaces fans view of the best total war game due to criticisms of Medieval 2 for some weird reason.

    Empire comes out... a mess to say the least. Fans to this day have a kind of "split" opinion due to the lack of optimization of the newer warscape engine compared to the older one used in rtw and m2tw. Pretty much everything apart from scope of the idea of three continents and more user friendly tech system seems a step back. The RP aspect of generals effectively disappears and has many steps back in terms of the campaign map, especially the UI. Most likely due to Rome looking dated Medieval 2 crops up as being the "best" total war.

    Napoleon comes out, leaps and bounds better over Empire, but due to only being Europe people complain of the lack of scope. Depending on warscape or old engine allegiance, players claim Med2 or empire are the best.

    Shogun 2 comes out, general improvements, however due to even smaller scale than Napoleon and all factions being clones, most of the community view empire as a masterpiece due to its massive scale (albeit admitting it teething issues). General RP returns but in shape of a MMO or RPG like skill tree, random or context sensitive traits still do not return in major way like prior to empire. Only the old guard really remember the older games now.

    Rome 2 comes out and all hell breaks loose. Many people where expecting a return to the RTW, M2TW style for some reason (I presume to many leaving the series after empires release). The game improves many thing but like empire was not polished. Also like empire, it has many flawed campaign UI decisions. Shogun 2 shines out, most likely to do with it never pretended to be what it was not like some previous titles and relative moderness compared to older games. Some of the old guard stick with RTW and M2TW.

    SKIP TO THIS IF YOU CBA TO READ THE ABOVE.

    Basically after every release, there's a favorite game people like to refer to in the past. It "generally" is the previous game as the following of the series grows with each game.

    However I honestly believe the original Medieval total war was nearest to a masterpiece based on the fact it improved on its predecessor, only added features and didn't remove "any" features at all. This is ignoring the graphical "bells and whistles" as you could say, but you have to also compare other games of the times.

    I still find it funny when you see all the "new" features such as civil wars, internal politics, trading nodes, tech systems etc in the older games. Medieval total war which had them all in some way shape or form.

    I still have my Medieval total war tech tree poster :P
    "Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum"
    "Sometimes I get this urge to conquer large parts of Europe"
  • easytargeteasytarget Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,432
    edited November 2013
    Believe it or not, I read your wall of text, fine points being made, but I'll stick with my assessment. And respectfully disagree with your ME1 call as just a fine example of nostalgia, just like the one applied to Rome 1.

    And while I agree with your conclusion different people are going to like different works TW has made, I also believe in the test of time, and I'm fine with putting some distance behind us and we'll see down the road a decade or two which of these is remembered as a masterpiece and what is considered the high water mark of CA's work. My money is on Shogun 2 as I've already stated.
    This space intentionally left blank.
  • EllEzDeeEllEzDee Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 864
    edited November 2013
    easytarget wrote: »
    Believe it or not, I read your wall of text, fine points being made, but I'll stick with my assessment. And respectfully disagree with your ME1 call as just a fine example of nostalgia, just like the one applied to Rome 1.

    So, what, you didn't read it then? He called it a masterpiece for doing something no other TW game has done to date: make improvements without compromise.
    I know you like to throw the word nostalgia around, but you can't feel "nostalgic" about a factual observation.
    [portable-ID]lsd[/portable-ID]
    Feel free to check out my Steam guide on naval combat in E:TW
  • Green JacketGreen Jacket Senior Member Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire, EnglandRegistered Users Posts: 1,513
    edited November 2013
    easytarget wrote: »
    Believe it or not, I read your wall of text, fine points being made, but I'll stick with my assessment. And respectfully disagree with your ME1 call as just a fine example of nostalgia, just like the one applied to Rome 1.

    And while I agree with your conclusion different people are going to like different works TW has made, I also believe in the test of time, and I'm fine with putting some distance behind us and we'll see down the road a decade or two which of these is remembered as a masterpiece and what is considered the high water mark of CA's work. My money is on Shogun 2 as I've already stated.

    Main point was no-one called shogun 2 a masterpiece when it came out :P it was only after rome 2....

    It's scale defiantly let it down mixed with a lack of unit diversity.

    Whether a game stands up to the test of time is a hard one to judge. Personally to date Medieval 2 holds up to the test of time the best even compared to games like empire.

    You will have to wait until about 10 years time.

    Sadly for the original medieval it has graphics going against it. This is most likely to do with the 3d revolution in graphics especially in RTS games which at the time pretty much fully relied on sprites (AOE2, C&CTS etc being examples).

    Also you have no idea how graphics will change in the next 10 years. You never know, in 10 years time shogun 2 may look primative.

    You have to look at the games features, which medieval had, before and after the release. Medieval built on the series and had so many features. Some of these features have been added into later games as "new features". The only thing holding it back are its old graphics (though at the time where seen as great), which as a gamer you have to try and look past.
    "Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum"
    "Sometimes I get this urge to conquer large parts of Europe"
  • easytargeteasytarget Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,432
    edited November 2013
    Yeah, well, that is where we will just have disagree then. I thought Shogun 2 was fantastic from release day. No if, and or buts about it. And in point in fact, you can go look up the reviews and find a game that was indeed reviewed highly by critics and players alike from day one.

    And as for the test of time, I'm patient, I've been playing PC games since 1981 the year the IBM PC came out, nearly 20 years before CA even released Shogun 1. I've got a long PC gaming history against which to compare how good a game is.

    And btw don't get me wrong, I particularly like ME2, I'd have to say its just behind Shogun 2 in my book, and as you say, that's really at least partially on personal taste, but not entirely in my opinion because I still firmly believe that Shogun 2 shows greater polish, a more cohesively completed vision down to the smallest detail than any other TW game.
    This space intentionally left blank.
  • Green JacketGreen Jacket Senior Member Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire, EnglandRegistered Users Posts: 1,513
    edited November 2013
    easytarget wrote: »
    And btw don't get me wrong, I particularly like ME2, I'd have to say its just behind Shogun 2 in my book, and as you say, that's really at least partially on personal taste, but not entirely in my opinion because I still firmly believe that Shogun 2 shows greater polish, a more cohesively completed vision down to the smallest detail than any other TW game.

    ME2? Mass effect 2? I was talking about the original Medieval total war (not Medieval 2 total war if thats what you meant? :P ). Medieval 2 does stend the test of time best compared to previous games due to their age. Shogun 2 is simply too new to comment on how it will age.

    However due to the range of units, cultures, abilities, traits, civil wars, realistic trade, religious systems, events, historical accuracy, Role playing system and many other features the original medieval added to the total war series i'n my opinion made the game the epitome of what total war is.

    Shogun 2 for example drew criticism for it's dummed down campaign and arcade style battles, both of which many people, myself included don't see as being in total war's style.
    "Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum"
    "Sometimes I get this urge to conquer large parts of Europe"
  • easytargeteasytarget Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,432
    edited November 2013
    Right, by ME2 I of course mean Medieval 2. lol

    As for the battle "dumbing" down complaint, I consider it misplaced. The "dumbing" down is chiefly due to the Warscape engine, which I'll grant you is a design choice error by CA, either that or they should have figured out a way to use an enhanced engine that didn't fail to maintain unit cohesion properly because it was too focused on creating screenshot worthy individual 1x1 battle snapshots. Secondarily I consider most gamers viewing the older battle style as using rose color glasses as they look backwards at battles in M2 equating battle length as somehow better, and battles that took less time to resolve in Shogun 2 therefore inferior. As if to suggest time spent watching guys standing around hacking at each other was a value determination.


    Your second paragraph confuses favoring a setting as a reason for equating how good a game is. You may, as some do, favor the medieval setting or the rome setting over japan, that's a personal taste choice not to be confused with reviewing the quality of the respective games themselves.


    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

    [/FONT]
    This space intentionally left blank.
  • dge1dge1 Moderator Arkansas, USARegistered Users, Moderators, Knights Posts: 21,690
    edited November 2013
    Shogun II did look nice. The only problem I had with running it was what I felt to be excessively high fan noise on the main page. In game it ran fine.

    It was OK starting out but by the third or fourth faction the play had become too repetitive for my taste. After starting my 10th or 12th faction and stopping sooner each time I just quit playing it.

    Same thing for Napoleon. Played everything through twice on normal and hard. Third or fourth turn I stopped and never went back. It was a beautiful game but I preferred Empire - warts, bugs and incomplete programming.
    "The two most common things in the universe are Hydrogen and Stupidity." - Harlan Ellison
    "The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." - Hubert H. Humphrey
    "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin/Mark Twain
    “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”–George Santayana, The Life of Reason, 1905.

  • Green JacketGreen Jacket Senior Member Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire, EnglandRegistered Users Posts: 1,513
    edited November 2013
    easytarget wrote: »
    Your second paragraph confuses favoring a setting as a reason for equating how good a game is. You may, as some do, favor the medieval setting or the rome setting over japan, that's a personal taste choice not to be confused with reviewing the quality of the respective games themselves.[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT]

    In the second para I was on about features not the setting :P

    These features being
    range of units, cultures, abilities, traits, civil wars, realistic trade, religious systems, events, historical accuracy, Role playing system and many other features

    Shogun 2 for example "could" of had all the features seen in previous games, even medieval total war, it could of had a larger scope, but I feel shogun 2 was a safeoption for CA. Due to the setting nothing really could go wrong in terms of unit balancing or the AI seeing it was basically identical to the origional shogun in terms of units but with graphical updates. Shogun 2 in many ways actually had less features than the original shogun, only the skill tree, ship battles and tech tree where new from the original title, but even then had been in previous games.

    Don't get me wrong, shogun 2 is a great game, just it seemed a safe option, it didn't really pushed the series or add anything new. All it really did was give the warscape engine a polish it finally deserved and showed CA could return to a close quartered centered game using that engine.

    The reason I would say medieval was the masterpeice of the series in that it pushed it, was a great game (even by todays standards), didn't really annoy the community by getting rid of much liked features, built a foundation for the series to aspire to and arguably the most polished total war title to date. Shogun 2 didn't add much, just polished an engine that is buggy to hell.
    "Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum"
    "Sometimes I get this urge to conquer large parts of Europe"
  • Man o' WarMan o' War Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 973
    edited November 2013
    I always find it mildly amusing when the argument of look how bad past releases have been is used.

    Maybe they did have problems and subsequently you wouldn't expect them repeated.

    The fact that the games have had problems is one thing, but to have swathes of things physically removed from what made the essence of a TW game is another thing entirely.

    You start Rome 2 playing a family. You have no idea who is in that family and no decision of yours affects that family.

    That's just turn 1.
Sign In or Register to comment.