Game News Expeditions: Rome is officially a thing

[Elhoim]

Sweet! :D

I enjoyed their previous entries, and Roman style is just up my alley.

 

[just a newfag]

Can I gamble away my inheritance and freedom?

 

[LizardWizard]

So they pocketed Swen's money and made this? Sweet

Nobody wanted DOS2 tactics anyway. Supermassive Incline

 

[HoboForEternity]

das it mane

 

[Background Character]

Aw man, I was betting on samurais. Great trailer though

 

[Jrpgfan]

Aw man, I was betting on samurais. Great trailer though

Would not work. They never left Japan(well, they did once, but were wiped off so bad they shut themselves even more to the outside world).

A mongolian themed expeditions would make a lot more sense.

 

[Darkozric]

Why do Romans and Nazis always speak with a perfect British accent?

 

[rojay]

JRPGfan, that's brilliant. You could "explore" half the known world at the time, including Russia, the Levant, China and much of India.

 

[Feyd Rautha]

But it also sounds like they took the expedition out of the Expeditions series. Maybe I'm wrong but it doesn't sound like a major theme of the game is going to be about vastly different cultures meeting for the first time.

You are sent from Rome to Greece. In what way isn't that an expedition? It's at least a military expedition. Then you're off to Gaul and also northern Africa. Sound like travelling to me.

 

[Galdred]

wish they stopped after Expeditions Conquistador

It's the best one anyway.

Yes, but it is no reason to stop. E:Vikings was still better than a ton of other RPG made.
Roman Republc/Empire seems a weird choice of theme, given the emphasis on small scale combat of the serie.

 

[Dr Schultz]

How does Vikings compare to Conquistador?

I quite enjoyed the first game, despite some obvious limitations in its gameplay formula, but din't pick the second one.

Was it an improvement or a false step? Or both?

 

[Commissar Draco]

There is nigger and fighting wombyn in demo and you pick on wrong kind of Lorica? Would probably pick it anyways I that much fag for Rome. Conquistador was fun little game and this one looks even better so why not? Its not like we will get Nevergate or Age of Decadence 2.

 

[cvv]

How does Vikings compare to Conquistadores?

I quite enjoyed the first game, despite some obvious limitations in its gameplay formula, but din't pick the second one.

Was it a improvement or a false step? Or both?

Vikings is a traditional isometric, party based RPG. The world is a map with instanced locations like in most isometric RPGs - Fallout, PoE, Wasteland 2, that sort of thing. It has traditional structure with quests, factions etc. It's p. much Fallout 1/2 with Vikings.

I kindda liked Conquistadors but it's simpler, smaller and more repetitive. Vikings is an absolute classic, it should be rightfully the most beloved game here since Codex is obsessed with isometric TB RPGs. Not exactly sure why it isn't...I guess it came out p. borked and there wasn't much PR.

 

[Darth Roxor]

How does Vikings compare to Conquistadores?

I quite enjoyed the first game, despite some obvious limitations in its gameplay formula, but din't pick the second one.

Was it a improvement or a false step? Or both?

Viking is different in a number of ways, but I'd say it's "different" rather than better or worse. The only truly worse part is probably the camping. Otherwise, the game is p. cool, and I think you should give it a try if you liked Conquistador.

 

[PrettyDeadman]

How does Vikings compare to Conquistadores?

I quite enjoyed the first game, despite some obvious limitations in its gameplay formula, but din't pick the second one.

Was it a improvement or a false step? Or both?

Vikings is a traditional isometric, party based RPG. The world is a map with instanced locations like in most isometric RPGs - Fallout, PoE, Wasteland 2, that sort of thing. It has traditional structure with quests, factions etc. It's p. much Fallout 1/2 with Vikings.

I kindda liked Conquistadors but it's simpler, smaller and more repetitive. Vikings is an absolute classic, it should be rightfully the most beloved game here since Codex is obsessed with isometric TB RPGs. Not exactly sure why it isn't...I guess it came out p. borked and there wasn't much PR.

Long load times + tiny locations.

 

[felipepepe]

It should be rightfully the most beloved game here since Codex is obsessed with isometric TB RPGs. Not exactly sure why it isn't...I guess it came out p. borked and there wasn't much PR.

Yes, that was my experience - played it on launch, was so buggy that I decided to wait for patches and ended up never going back. I think that's part of why so many companies are now doing director's cut releases... and why I rarely play RPGs on release anymore. First impressions count a lot, it's hard to give a second chance after you already burned yourself with frustrating bugs or dumb design choices, like Wasteland 2 had.

Same with another "hidden gem" people were discussing this week, Dark Sun: Wake of the Ravager. It's easier to play a stable mediocre game than a good game that's full of frustrating crashes & bugs.

 

[Dr Schultz]

Vikings is a traditional isometric, party based RPG. The world is a map with instanced locations like in most isometric RPGs - Fallout, PoE, Wasteland 2, that sort of thing. It has traditional structure with quests, factions etc. It's p. much Fallout 1/2 with Vikings.

I kindda liked Conquistadors but it's simpler, smaller and more repetitive. Vikings is an absolute classic, it should be rightfully the most beloved game here since Codex is obsessed with isometric TB RPGs. Not exactly sure why it isn't...I guess it came out p. borked and there wasn't much PR.

Viking is different in a number of ways, but I'd say it's "different" rather than better or worse. The only truly worse part is probably the camping. Otherwise, the game is p. cool, and I think you should give it a try if you liked Conquistador.

Nice pitch. I think I'll give it a try in a week or so (after beating Phoenix Point, which - speaking of buggy and unbalanced games at the release - ended up so low in my priority list that I've almost forgot I was a backer).

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Why do Romans and Nazis always speak with a perfect British accent?

Because they're speaking the Queen's English, I mean that's obvious innit?

 

[Saduj]

But it also sounds like they took the expedition out of the Expeditions series. Maybe I'm wrong but it doesn't sound like a major theme of the game is going to be about vastly different cultures meeting for the first time.

You are sent from Rome to Greece. In what way isn't that an expedition? It's at least a military expedition. Then you're off to Gaul and also northern Africa. Sound like travelling to me.

I mentioned what I was referring to in the post you quoted. Sure any trip that has a purpose can be called an expedition. In that sense, every RPG has many "expeditions" in it. In this series, the first two games were about exploring unknown areas and coming into contact with previously unknown cultures. I liked that aspect of those games. Greece, Gaul and North Africa were well known to the Romans.

I'm glad the game is being made and I expect it to be good. But it seems like they dropped a major theme from the 1st two games. Not that I really blame them. I was surprised anyone would make a game about Conquistadors back in 2013. I can only imagine the social media screeching that would result from something like "Expeditions: Congo" today.

 

[Darkozric]

Why do Romans and Nazis always speak with a perfect British accent?

Because they're speaking the Queen's English, I mean that's obvious innit?

Damn straight they are!

 

[oscar]

I've tried Vikings twice for several hours each and it just never clicked. Loved the first one however.

Hopefully they take some cues from the truly excellent and well-researched A Legionary's Life for realism (though undoubtedly this one will have female legionaries etc). The devs penchant for overpowered ranged combat will also feel a bit strange in this era (as did the machine gun archers from Viking).

 

[cvv]

I've tried Vikings twice for several hours each and it just never clicked. Loved the first one however.

A few comments like that in the dedicated Vikings thread. Maybe non-fantasy games aren't you jam?

 

[oscar]

If you read my post I greatly enjoyed the far more strictly historical than anything this studio has done A Legionary's Life.. Teudogar and the Alliance with Rome was fantastic too.

I do wonder if the studio itself might at some point be happier making their own fantasy setting then having to weave within the walls of history. Especially since they seem to be dropping the expedition aspect of the series and focusing on safer source material (Vikings, Romans etc).

Saduj's post has made me curious for a Heart of Darkness-style Victorian-era game but I doubt any sizeable developer would have the balls for it.

 

[Malamert]

That trailer is fucking disgusting. Simple vile.

 

[cvv]

I do wonder if the studio itself might at some point be happier making their own fantasy setting then having to weave within the walls of history. Especially since they seem to be dropping the expedition aspect of the series and focusing on safer source material (Vikings, Romans etc).

I don't quite get this comment. Why would they be happier with fantasy? You make it sound like Ex:Vikings is a discount AssCreed: Valhalla or the Vikings TV show or some other silly popamole crowdpleaser. Now it's been a few years since I played it but I don't remember Vikings being silly. I remember it being p. dark, raw and authentic with portraying early Medieval NW Europe.

EDIT: I do remember in Conquistadors you could recruit female conquistadors but that's the only concession to modern day silliness I could detect.