Rome II : Total War

[Darksoldierr]

The hell with the amount of DLCs nowdays

[Chrysia]

The hell with the amount of DLCs nowdays

Proven profitable business models get adopted by the rest of the industry. More at 11.

[Airlick]

They work like the yari walls from Shogun 2, which were actually very good but nobody ever used them.

Oda master race

Yeah, that's the phalanx... You know, that tactic the Greeks used 2000 years before Japs. And Rome 1's Greeks used 10 years before Shogun 2's yari ashigaru. :P

[serenka]

The hell with the amount of DLCs nowdays

i think it was Istaril actually explained it really well in this thread.

Yeah... because expansion packs didn't exist right?

Take it from someone in the industry (Sort of), they're not chopping bits off the game to make DLC. There's a gap of several months after the game has been made where artists and designers don't really have anything to do, as the game is being bug-tested etc. During this time they'd normally have to move onto other projects, but instead they get put on DLC to give them something to do and add a bit more content to the game. All the DLC you're getting is extra stuff they didn't have in the original scope of the project.

You may also be asking "Well why don't they just release the DLC for free, since I've already paid for the game, they're just being greedy right"?

No, for the most part, not really. It is INCREDIBLY risky to fund a game in this day and age. The market hasn't quite caught up with the industry so to speak. Games regularly come out with the same cost as big blockbuster films, but they don't have a market of anywhere NEAR the same size. Literally one mistake, one game that doesn't sell enough, one game that critics don't like, and boom, down goes your company. Let me highlight Guitar Hero for example. They were actually making a profit, but they got canned, why?

To quote Activision "They weren't making ENOUGH". Let's go more recent. THQ; pretty much all the companies under their umbrella were being profitable, but because of THQ's failed console venture, they were fucked, they couldn't recover and as such, they went under.

The industry is incredibly cut-throat, and as such, they need all the money they can get, otherwise their studio risks getting executed as it were. DLC is one of the ways to help them stay afloat; use your artists' and designers free time to get a bit more content into the game so players can buy it if they want it. Two birds with one stone, bit of extra income, and gives the team something to do during the downtime.

[mectus11]

Can't wait for RTW2 but it still sucks that you have to get the nation DLC's, it's the first time that they do that and it's quite odd from their part as they never did it before from what I know.
Anyway RTW2 is going to be 2013's holy grail.

[Airlick]

Anyway RTW2 is going to be 2013's holy grail.

Damn right it is.

[serenka]

question about co-op mode here (ive never played it)

what happens when one player starts a battle during the co-op campaign? can the other player spectate, can you give them control of a few units or anything?

[Deleted]

question about co-op mode here (ive never played it)

what happens when one player starts a battle during the co-op campaign? can the other player spectate, can you give them control of a few units or anything?

Yes and yes, if I'm remembering right.

[Bekra]

That looks just great ))

[Deleted]

Yes and yes, if I'm remembering right.

that's pretty awesome if you can give control of units to the other player if you're fighting the AI!

[theturn]

I don't have a problem with DLCs as long as its not something that was developed with the game then ripped out and held at ransom. You take time to develop something for x game after the games release then I might buy it from you otherwise probably not. Greek city packs obviously is an example of the ransom but they are giving it with the game if you preorder so I can give them a pass.

[serenka]

I don't have a problem with DLCs as long as its not something that was developed with the game then ripped out and held at ransom. You take time to develop something for x game after the games release then I might buy it from you otherwise probably not. Greek city packs obviously is an example of the ransom but they are giving it with the game if you preorder so I can give them a pass.

i don't mind pre-order bonus so much, i don't like it when theres a day 1 DLC that wasn't a pre-order bonus.

[Deathtanker]

i don't mind pre-order bonus so much, i don't like it when theres a day 1 DLC that wasn't a pre-order bonus.

The DLC you are talking about is the Pontus faction which is a free downloadable content pack. Its free.
Dont know why it isnt implemented in the game, but it is free at launch even for non-pre-order.
It might change later though.

(For this game I'll buy all DLCs, dont care about the price)

[Deleted]

that's pretty awesome if you can give control of units to the other player if you're fighting the AI!

You could do that and more in Sho gun 2 Fall of the Samurai so I dont see why they dont put this stuff in Rome 2.

One thing that Im a little upset is about the minor settlements in a region, I know they would not be as good as the capital cities in regions but I just hope that at some point you can cover them with at least a tiny wall. I mean, I´m like the only guy in the whole community who likes siege battles...

[SirRobin]

You could do that and more in Sho gun 2 Fall of the Samurai so I dont see why they dont put this stuff in Rome 2.

One thing that Im a little upset is about the minor settlements in a region, I know they would not be as good as the capital cities in regions but I just hope that at some point you can cover them with at least a tiny wall. I mean, I´m like the only guy in the whole community who likes siege battles...

Having most of the "cities" in the game only need one quick battle to capture? I suspect will make campaigns a lot shorter in Rome 2 than any previous major TW title. Either these wall-less settlements will get much larger auto garrisons than in any previous TW game? Or they will drop like flies.

[Deleted]

I dont know, its not like you are fighting these garrisons in an open field... from what I have seen these "new" type of settlements are more of a combination of a normal battle and a siege, where the defenders have control of an urban area and a capture point. The thing is that you can upgrade these cities so when you get in the battle you will see the settlement being bigger than it was at the beggining but it would never reach the final point of a capital region city settlement. That makes me wonder if maybe... just maybe we can have walls in these minor settlements. (only reffering to low tier walls)

[Airlick]

Having most of the "cities" in the game only need one quick battle to capture? I suspect will make campaigns a lot shorter in Rome 2 than any previous major TW title. Either these wall-less settlements will get much larger auto garrisons than in any previous TW game? Or they will drop like flies.

Well, all provinces consist of a number of small cities and a capital, it only makes sense that you don't have to get bogged down in prolonged sieges of every single town. Would be pretty impossible to finish campaigns on higher levels of difficulty.

I would actually love it if garrisons were even smaller than in Shogun 2. It would add another layer of depth to the game, players would actually have to choose which cities they can afford to possibly lose and how to position their armies. In Shogun 2 it was enough to leave 5 units at most and wait for even full armies to come, that's how big garrisons were in bigger cities.

[mmoas]

3rd September 2013

[Deleted]

It's pretty hard for garrisons to be smaller than they were in Shogun 2, they were already useless.

[fakaroonie]

One thing I want to know. In the first Rome, as well as in Shogun 2, when I was zooming in a battle, I always saw some soldiers fighting the air, not even touching the enemy.. will this be the same in Rome 2?