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?

124

Comments

  • dge1dge1 Moderator Arkansas, USARegistered Users, Moderators, Knights Posts: 21,690
    edited March 2014
    ranknfile wrote: »
    In any case, this is an interesting thread for the most part; many good points are made. To me each TW game has improved on previous ones; unfortunately each game also leaves something out from the previous one that I wished had been kept. Also most TW games need time for CA to fix the bugs and tweek things a bit. Still that "final product" is usually lacking in some respects but mods will make the game better.

    What is apparent reading people's complaints is that many people are so enamored of a period that they are more tolerant of a games shortcomings due to that preference. In any case while I loved Shogun 2 and played many hundreds of hours of it I still enjoy less immersive games like NTW (le Montee de le Empire being my favorite mod for this) and Rome II. As far as any one of these games being "better" than the other, to me that is pointless. I'll tire of one game and go back to play another. Each game has its flaws, either one can use mods to fix this, live with it or simply not play that particular game.

    Completely agree. :)
    "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.

  • easytargeteasytarget Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,432
    edited March 2014
    ranknfile wrote: »
    What is apparent reading people's complaints is that many people are so enamored of a period that they are more tolerant of a games shortcomings due to that preference.

    This is entirely not the case. Almost w/o exception the discussion of those I see who view S2 as better than R2 due so with reservations over the period and place it covers. They literally begrudgingly admit it's better. They wanted desparately for CA to deliver on R2 and what we see in the main R2 forum is bitter disappointment that did not happen.

    You may generalize this remark about TW games and I would concede the point, everyone who plays TW games seems to have periods of history they like better and it colors their opinion.

    But when it comes to the straight up comparison of S2 and R2, which is specifically what this thread is about, there is w/o a doubt a unified vision that imbued S2 resulting in a game head and shoulders above R2.
    This space intentionally left blank.
  • kkoopman3kkoopman3 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 22
    edited March 2014
    easytarget wrote: »
    This is entirely not the case. Almost w/o exception the discussion of those I see who view S2 as better than R2 due so with reservations over the period and place it covers. They literally begrudgingly admit it's better. They wanted desparately for CA to deliver on R2 and what we see in the main R2 forum is bitter disappointment that did not happen.

    You may generalize this remark about TW games and I would concede the point, everyone who plays TW games seems to have periods of history they like better and it colors their opinion.

    But when it comes to the straight up comparison of S2 and R2, which is specifically what this thread is about, there is w/o a doubt a unified vision that imbued S2 resulting in a game head and shoulders above R2.
    I am immensely enjoying this thread since, as in the quote above, it has become an intelligent conversation about the topic, rather than the ravings of enraged lunatics.
    昔の良い戦闘機は最初の敗北の可能性を超えて手に入れたし、次に敵を倒す機会を待った。
    Mukashi no yoi sentōki wa saisho no haiboku no kanōsei o koete teniireta shi, tsugini tekiwotaosu kikai o matta.
    "The good fighters of old first put themselves beyond the possibility of defeat, and then waited for an opportunity of defeating the enemy."
  • ranknfileranknfile Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 7,425
    edited March 2014
    easytarget wrote: »
    This is entirely not the case. ....

    Hence my use of the word "many" and not "all."
    easytarget wrote: »
    ...But when it comes to the straight up comparison of S2 and R2, which is specifically what this thread is about, there is w/o a doubt a unified vision that imbued S2 resulting in a game head and shoulders above R2.

    While I will concede that a majority of TW fans are disappointed with Rome II, I'm not quite certain about the "unified" part as many complaints express a desire for diametrically opposed changes (too easy/too hard or unit is OP/underpowered, etc.).
    easytarget wrote: »
    .... They literally begrudgingly admit it's better.....

    I "admit" (rather "believe") that S2 is more immersive; yet there are changes (limited armies/stronger garrison forces) that Rome II has introduced that I modded into Shogun 2 (limited units actually, which results in the same thing). I also think many facets of the game (I am speaking of the TW series' progression here) have been improved in CA's latest offering, and want them to remain in the next TW game (which I sincerely hope is set in Ancient China).

    I do find it odd that I have been referred to as a "Fan Boy" as there is one well known CA person (particularly at TWC) who has taken offense at my criticism of the inclusion of ahistorical units. He may remain offended as my opinion on this will not change. In any case once the siege AI is fixed I will prefer Rome II to Shogun 2 despite its less immersive features simply because playing as a different faction on Rome II provides one with a far different experience than playing as a different clan in Shogun 2.

    That's just my take on things, admittedly my favorite TW game is always the latest (I felt this way with Empire even, but quickly left it when NTW came out and it is the one TW game I have not played even once since I stopped playing it).

    Whew .. sorry for being so long-winded.
    "Whoever desires is always poor" - Claudian
  • easytargeteasytarget Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,432
    edited March 2014
    While you may agree or disagree as to whether the TW franchise is, for lack of a better description, a bit tired, there does seem to me a point in any creative endeavor like game development, writing, cinema, where it would prove hard to sustain the passion necessary to carry the enterprise off successfully. And especially game development on this scale because it necessarily involves teams making it all the harder to keep a cohesive vision in the finished product.

    And the struggle w/ a franchise is one of relevance in the face of having "told your story". In this case, the story CA has told with TW is one of write your own history in a turn based strategy setting with real time battles.

    My answer to this conundrum might well be one CA has already answered themselves I suspect. They have a team working Aliens, one would wonder if perhaps those involved might not take turns on projects going forward so you can get a fresh creative perspective on TW rather than just grinding out one after another. And even flip teams or some members back and forth while at the same time hedging your bets by branching out on new IP rather than putting all your eggs in one basket betting the company with each release.

    I realize this response isn't exactly on point, I just got to thinking how hard a creative business is and how easy it is to be a critic and then just started thinking out loud in a post about what came to mind as to the challenges and how you might go about addressing them.
    This space intentionally left blank.
  • Tyer032392Tyer032392 Senior Member FloridaRegistered Users Posts: 4,787
    edited March 2014
    I like both games, but Shogun 2 did have some terrible BAI.

    Generals - the AI in an open field battle would use their general as a suicide unit to charge straight into my spear walls before the infantry even clashed. This usually caused the battle to be over within five or ten minutes, about the same length of time Rome 2 battles are. On the flip side, the Shogun 2 infantry were less likely to route, so were around for longer after their generals death than the Rome 2 infantry. Rome 2 on the other hand reserves its generals for the benefit of his leadership and we no longer see suicide generals, but the infantry moral is out of whack, and troops will route within minutes of melee.

    Sieges - as much as many people will say that Shogun 2 had better siege AI, in reality it did not. The only difference between Empire, Napoleon, Shogun 2 and Rome 2's sieges is in Rome 2 infantry can no longer scale the walls without siege equipment. Rome 2 had in a fact proven that Siege AI for Warscape is severely hampered by whatever is hampering it, and needs to be addressed as CA's original bandage is not applicable anymore.

    Agents - people say that Shogun 2 did not have the agent spam that Rome 2 did, but I remember getting hit by agent after agent in Shogun 2 as well. Mods fixed it, but it was there, and the more they had the worst it was.

    Replayability - I have to admit, even in its current state, Rome 2 vanilla is has far more replayability than Shogun 2 vanilla, as the differing factions will provide differing strengths and weaknesses. Shogun 2 on the other hand, all Clans were the same, and therefor all the units were the same, which is to be expected of a game set in a civil war. It was also because of its limited scope that Shogun 2 was far more refined than Rome 2.

    "Soul" - the most used argument that I find is that Shogun 2 has more "Soul" than Rome 2, and to a certain degree I can agree. However, I also find that Rome 2 has a lot of soul hidden beneath the problems with each faction being nearly unique to the others (playable) and each faction offers a differing play style.
    Ready for Three Kingdom's TW: I5-6600k, EVGA Geforce GTX 1070SC, 16Gigs RAM, WD Blue PC SSD @ 500GB
  • dark as silverdark as silver Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,510
    edited March 2014
    Tyer032392 wrote: »
    "Soul" - the most used argument that I find is that Shogun 2 has more "Soul" than Rome 2, and to a certain degree I can agree. However, I also find that Rome 2 has a lot of soul hidden beneath the problems with each faction being nearly unique to the others (playable) and each faction offers a differing play style.

    Wat? You none autistics baffle me.
  • Maximus ThraxMaximus Thrax Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,946
    edited March 2014
    Shogun 2 > Rome 2
    Don't go Ad Hominem
  • kkoopman3kkoopman3 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 22
    edited March 2014
    Shogun 2 > Rome 2
    Case and point.
    昔の良い戦闘機は最初の敗北の可能性を超えて手に入れたし、次に敵を倒す機会を待った。
    Mukashi no yoi sentōki wa saisho no haiboku no kanōsei o koete teniireta shi, tsugini tekiwotaosu kikai o matta.
    "The good fighters of old first put themselves beyond the possibility of defeat, and then waited for an opportunity of defeating the enemy."
  • pigspigs76pigspigs76 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 190
    edited March 2014
    i don't know if i have a definitive answer ... however, if i lost both games ... and was then given one or the other with a similarly active community ... i would prolly go shogun 2 ... the current map editor alone in shogun provides it with more longevity (potentially)
  • skoomamuchskoomamuch Member Registered Users Posts: 92
    edited March 2014
    what do like in Rome 2 than Shogun 2...

    1. Line of Sight
    2. Ambush Battles Mechanics
    3. nothing more
    No White Flags, Only White Smoke
  • princereaperprincereaper Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 184
    edited March 2014
    Shogun got everything right. rome total war didn't
  • Tyer032392Tyer032392 Senior Member FloridaRegistered Users Posts: 4,787
    edited April 2014
    Shogun got everything right. rome total war didn't

    Eh, what do you mean "got everything right"? If I recall correctly, Shogun 2 had just as much fantasy things in it like Rome 2.
    Ready for Three Kingdom's TW: I5-6600k, EVGA Geforce GTX 1070SC, 16Gigs RAM, WD Blue PC SSD @ 500GB
  • feelfree2diefeelfree2die Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 321
    edited April 2014
    i really dont understand why so many people like TWS2. for me, whatever clan you played, it was basically the same game over and over on legendary. to date i still have less than 400 hrs played. the original shogun was a better game. you could play every clan differently on the hardest level. past two years i have spent more hours playing the original shogun.

    until ca fixes siege battles in twr2, it can never be a better game than tws2. total war games are all about the battles, since it cannot be fixed with warscape engine its a lost cause.
  • SystemSystem Posts: 7,159
    edited April 2014
    I don't particularly like Shogun 2 because my preferred historical period is the ancient world however Shogun 2 is a much better game than Rome 2 simply because it is at least a complete game rather than one that's still in pieces like an Ikea computer desk waiting to be put together.

    Putting siege battles to one side because S2 uses a workaround (Spiderman ability) to avoid having to programme proper siege AI.

    S2's campaign AI is far superior in that it's nowhere near as passive as Rome's, Rome 2's family and political system are still not finished yet and neither is the civil war mechanic, they haven't even gotten around yet to adding in the civil war rewards and effects, in S2 when you become Shogun (which is it's version of the civil war) you gain appropriate rewards and the game changes to reflect that you are now Shogun.

    In Rome 2 when you win the civil war and select how your Empire/Republic will be run from then on not one single thing changes you don't get any rewards and you don't even get simple things like a boost in citizen happiness to reflect that you chose to remain a Republican state rather than an Empire etc.

    I have never seen such an appalling apathetic/lack of enthusiasm attitude to fixing a game in all my time as a gamer.
  • Shiningpotato16Shiningpotato16 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 569
    edited April 2014
    I don't particularly like Shogun 2 because my preferred historical period is the ancient world however Shogun 2 is a much better game than Rome 2 simply because it is at least a complete game rather than one that's still in pieces like an Ikea computer desk waiting to be put together.

    Putting siege battles to one side because S2 uses a workaround (Spiderman ability) to avoid having to programme proper siege AI.

    S2's campaign AI is far superior in that it's nowhere near as passive as Rome's, Rome 2's family and political system are still not finished yet and neither is the civil war mechanic, they haven't even gotten around yet to adding in the civil war rewards and effects, in S2 when you become Shogun (which is it's version of the civil war) you gain appropriate rewards and the game changes to reflect that you are now Shogun.

    In Rome 2 when you win the civil war and select how your Empire/Republic will be run from then on not one single thing changes you don't get any rewards and you don't even get simple things like a boost in citizen happiness to reflect that you chose to remain a Republican state rather than an Empire etc.

    I have never seen such an appalling apathetic/lack of enthusiasm attitude to fixing a game in all my time as a gamer.

    And yet your avatar is Rome II's logo :P

    Jokes aside, I believe that Rome II is, after half a year, the better game. This is because the scope, a factor which cannot feasibly be changed by modding, was originally great. The historical accuracy, pathfinding etc, not so much. With the help of a half-year of patching, coupled with DeI, Rome II's inherently awesome framework has been improved immensly.

    After playing three clans in Shogun 2, I had just about seen it all. I'm currently still on my first Roman campaign, though I've variously hopped between other factions, and I can already tell that Rome II ultimately has much more to offer.
    If the water is up to your neck: chin up
  • TheCrazyHeadGamerTheCrazyHeadGamer Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,036
    edited April 2014
    Shogun 2 is much more polished and have a very hard challenge. Legendary is a nightmare.
    I love Rome 2 but when i want some challenge, i go back to Shogun 2 ;)
    TheCrazyHeadGamer have spoken !

    My Youtube Channel
  • JowenJowen Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 409
    edited April 2014
    So I started up Shogun 2 with fond memories and loaded my old save game.

    I could see I was around mid game, being one of the four biggest clans. I check my armies and cities and everything looks great. Press end turn... Then my old ally with who I have a very friendly status, military and trade alliance and who is weaker both military and economical than me decides to declare war on me! And he already has 4 outstanding wars.

    A enemy fleet attacks me and I enter the battle map. I order my ship into range to bombard the enemy with arrows. My ships stop just out of range of the enemy ships and do nothing. The enemy, having a numerical superiority, decides to split in all directions and hug the outskirts of the map.

    I then terminate the Shogun2.exe process.
  • easytargeteasytarget Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,432
    edited April 2014
    I'll admit I rarely play naval battles in any TW game, so doesn't prove much of an issue for me no matter which of their games I'm playing.

    Tell me, which game do you think naval battles "work" in TW games?

    I always considered Empire the most fun to play, could be that the ships for me were the coolest.
    This space intentionally left blank.
  • EllEzDeeEllEzDee Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 864
    edited April 2014
    Empire's naval combat was the best so far.
    Napoleon tried to re-balance it for no particular reason and failed miserably, and added absolutely awful features that made it incredibly unfun to play -- the repairs system was pointless, the way broadsides worked looked really underwhelming, and the damage was MASSIVELY reduced on all ships, making all battles last 10x too long.

    Shogun 2's naval battles are undoubtedly the worst so far, though. Besides the AI being downright broken, there's also the fact that all the same bugs from Empire are still present (most notably that melee actions result in troops jumping into the ocean or otherwise standing around/clustering into a huge bunch and doing nothing).

    I haven't tried Rome 2, but judging from the "rave reviews" and the fact that all the bugs from Empire are still present in Shogun 2, i'm going to go ahead and assume i'm missing absolutely nothing.

    Fall of the Samurai gets special mention for having the least user interaction of all the naval battles in any Total War game -- even less so than the games which didn't even have naval combat, since in those the player could at least mix and match different ships to create a good auto-resolve fleet.
    AI just as broken as Shogun 2's naval AI, but instead of getting up close, you stick your ships at massive range and leave them there until someone's ship arbitrarily explodes.
    [portable-ID]lsd[/portable-ID]
    Feel free to check out my Steam guide on naval combat in E:TW
  • SystemSystem Posts: 7,159
    edited April 2014
    And yet your avatar is Rome II's logo :P

    Yeah I chose it before the game was released -I guess the joke was on me huh :o
  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 10,986
    edited April 2014
    Just take a look at UI. Its minimized and not obstructive.
  • LiamK2167LiamK2167 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1
    edited April 2014
    jamreal18 wrote: »
    Just take a look at UI. Its minimized and not obstructive.

    I agree the Rome UI takes up like half the screen and is always in the way.
  • seienchinseienchin Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,572
    edited May 2014
    Whats with all the naval rant? I love shogun 2s. I mean I like rome 2s too and empires was alright (looked the best but oh box... Smallest ship biggest range? A Broadside from close range doing like no damage, Pirates having stronger Fleets than anyone else...)
    Of course shogun2 is not realistic in any way but that is not the Point. It is the representation of a boardgame Mixed with samurai Movie charme
  • fluffersfluffers Member Registered Users Posts: 53
    edited August 2014
    I finally got Shogun 2. I don't get the hype and the claims that it was 1000x better than Rome 2. Taking a look at what's better or worse...
    +Family tree and general management system. Although Rome 2 kinda fixes this with the TTT mod which makes generals extremely customizable.
    +Cool little agent videos. Really entertaining the first few times.
    +Battle maps that aren't generic fields or forests 99% of the time. Actually see hills and stuff that are useable.
    +Naval units that aren't simple platforms for a select few land units.
    +Slightly better province management system. Less of the generic 1 farm 1 temple thing you see in Rome 2.
    -Campaign map is too linear. Literally. Although it's no one's fault but geography's.
    -Low unit variety.
    -Annoying rock paper scissors system. Katana samurai flat out dominate any infantry no matter what, yari ashigaru slaughter cavalry even if rear-charged, and etc.
    -Really slow. It takes me at least 10 turns to muster an army and move it to the front. And that's after the early game when i have an established economy.
    -Really low amount of battles. I defeat a single full stack, then capture the next few provinces with no resistance.
    -Tying into the previous two points, the slow and expensive army recruitment makes defeats catastrophic. I conquered all of Kyushu after fighting I think 2 full stack battles and 1 small battle at the very beginning. There were some other battles but it was basically my full stack stomping 2-3 squad armies that were in the process of forming up.
    -Smaller scope than Rome 2.
  • BlessBless Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 449
    edited August 2014
    fluffers wrote: »
    -Annoying rock paper scissors system. Katana samurai flat out dominate any infantry no matter what, yari ashigaru slaughter cavalry even if rear-charged, and etc.
    -Really slow. It takes me at least 10 turns to muster an army and move it to the front. And that's after the early game when i have an established economy.
    -Really low amount of battles. I defeat a single full stack, then capture the next few provinces with no resistance.
    -Tying into the previous two points, the slow and expensive army recruitment makes defeats catastrophic. I conquered all of Kyushu after fighting I think 2 full stack battles and 1 small battle at the very beginning. There were some other battles but it was basically my full stack stomping 2-3 squad armies that were in the process of forming up.
    I consider this ones good things rather than bad things, so i think that it's a matter of taste whether or not Shogun 2 is better than Rome 2. But what none can deny is that S2 is much more polished and was given a lot of attention to the little details.
  • Sillius SoddusSillius Soddus Banned Banned Users Posts: 392
    edited September 2014
    I start a Rome 2 campaign. The music is so bland that right from the start I feel nothing drawing me in to the game. I'd like to see who the big players are in my faction, who is the leader, where are his family? He's a non-entity and he has no family because every general is identical and there is no family tree. I look at my provinces... they're identical. The building cards look like **** and I can't even build roads. For some reason my citizens in one city are unhappy because my citizens in a completely different city are of a different culture. I can't exempt one problematic city from taxes, I have to exempt an entire region. I fight a battle. Again the music is so bland that I'm bored before I've even deployed my troops. The unit cards are bizarre and I can't tell which of my units are which because they all look the same.

    I start a game in Shogun 2. There's a beautiful intro video that explains the age and also my chosen faction's role and situation in it. The game begins, the music is beautiful and draws me in to the era that is being portrayed. I open my clan information panel and I see that my clan is ruled by a family. It has a head, the head has a wife and siblings and children and generals. I can make that general more loyal to my clan by letting him marry my daughter. I can give him a role in governing my clan by making him commissioner for warfare, economy, etcetera. I open my technology tree and it's an actual tree. I send a spy to infiltrate an enemy city and I see a beautifully made video showing the spy trying to sneak in. If my general dies he isn't simply replaced by an identical one - he's bloody dead. Same goes for the head of my family. He's dead, all his traits and army bonuses died with him. I am much more immersed, I want to keep playing.

    These are just a few of the reasons I'm playing Shogun 2 right now but have only played Rome 2 for 25 hours in over a year.
  • TheSuebiBerserkerTheSuebiBerserker Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 412
    edited September 2014
    Hated Shogun 2, personally.
    All of my posts in the Rome 2 forums are satire unless I say otherwise.
    Add me on Steam! Ultimate Baconator
    SeeInnS wrote: »
    40 euro was my present to american economic.glhf
    My countdown of top Total War games:
    1) Rome 2/Napoleon
    2) Empire
    3) Medieval 2
    4) Rome 1
    5) Shogun 2
  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 10,986
    edited September 2014
    Realm divide is nonsense. It doesnt apply to AI.
    Battles are so fast.
  • easytargeteasytarget Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,432
    edited September 2014
    RD is nonsense only because you apparently are in capable of dealing with it and planning for it. And it shouldn't apply to the AI as the objective is to pit the AI against the human who already has an easy enough time beating the AI as it is.

    Battle speed however I'll grant you is just a matter of taste, you find it too fast, I'm not bothered by it.
    This space intentionally left blank.
Sign In or Register to comment.