Sweet Jesus

[spacemoose]

http://www.totalwar.com/community/medieval2.htm

Fucking yes, I was afraid Creative Assembly would change to cater to a broader market (read: console maroons) after their success with Rome. This however removes all doubt that CA are still one of THE best developers out there. Creative Assembly, my penis salutes you!

 

[Naked_Lunch]

Hmm, an original game would've be nicer than a sequel but hey, a Total War game's a Total War game.

 

[Jason]

Hopefully, the religious aspects get fleshed out a bit. I want to bow down to the Pope and slaughter the unbelievers.

 

[spacemoose]

This is now my most anticipated game, displacing Age of Decadence and more recently, Eschalon.

Look at this:

Individual units are equipped slightly differently and have different faces.

There will also apparently be 'combos' of attacks and 'finishing moves' that units can perform while fighting. Not mission critical, but you've got to admit that sounds awesome.

One thing I wish CA would do is make more techs or even tech branches exclusive, so you can only build them in one, or a few towns that you choose. That way the towns would have more character, as opposed to the earlier games, where I'd end up having three types of identical towns - infantry, cavalry and cash generating. It would bring more character to the game.

 

[Naked_Lunch]

Individual units are equipped slightly differently and have different faces.

Yeah? And?

There will also apparently be 'combos' of attacks and 'finishing moves' that units can perform while fighting. Not mission critical, but you've got to admit that sounds awesome.

That's Sega's console influence creeping in right there. HADDOOOUUKEN!

 

[spacemoose]

Individual units are equipped slightly differently and have different faces.

Yeah? And?

There will also apparently be 'combos' of attacks and 'finishing moves' that units can perform while fighting. Not mission critical, but you've got to admit that sounds awesome.

That's Sega's console influence creeping in right there. HADDOOOUUKEN!

Well, this is not an RPG, graphics and realism are important to a game that attempts to simulate real combat. Individualized units is a step towards greater realism. And why would the combos/finishing moves be a bad thing? I imagine that higher experienced units will perform more and more complicated combat animations.

What, would you rather they 'fleshed out the story' or improved the dialogue system? Tactical combat on a large scale is why I play Total War games, and so far it looks like CA is improving it even further.

While seeing the fear in the orc's eyes is not important in an RPG, in a Total War game, seeing the fear in the eyes of the Muslim infidels is certainly a step forward.

 

[spacemoose]

More screenshots here:

http://www.worthplaying.com/article.php?sid=31257

 

[Balor]

Well, as I understand (and it's GOOD) that those 'blocks and combos' would be automatically performed by your warriors on the battlefield, not you'll be running around, hacking and slashing stuff.
Now, if they'll add blood and dismemberment, I'll be extatic.

 

[fizzelopeguss]

Multiplayer campaign.

 

[Frau Bishop]

Baby Jesus hates you, better get some cover!

 

[LCJr.]

Well, this is not an RPG, graphics and realism are important to a game that attempts to simulate real combat. Individualized units is a step towards greater realism. And why would the combos/finishing moves be a bad thing? I imagine that higher experienced units will perform more and more complicated combat animations.

What, would you rather they 'fleshed out the story' or improved the dialogue system? Laughing Tactical combat on a large scale is why I play Total War games, and so far it looks like CA is improving it even further.

I'd rather they work on the AI.

 

[spacemoose]

better AI

That would be nice, and I'm hoping that they will adress it, but can you show me a tactical combat game with better AI than Medieval:TW? I'm not saying its stellar, but it is the best in its class.

 

[callehe]

Medieval 2: Total War will allow gamers to lead their armies across the battlefields of Europe and the Holy Land before discovering the Americas and doing battle with the fearsome Aztecs.

What the...?

 

[Trash]

Medieval TW was the best one of the tw games because of it's feel and polish. I hope they'll keep what was great and enhance it a bit further. Can't say I'm that stoked about them azteks......

 

[LlamaGod]

Laaaaaaaaame.

Creative Assembly have become such big money whores. I bet the gameplay will be total ass like Rome was when it came out.

Instead of doing a new setting they just make a sequel to a Medieval setting with kewl graphixx.

Combos sound mega lame too

It disappoints me they've become as lame as they have, i'd normally be pretty excited over this.

 

[spacemoose]

Laaaaaaaaame.

Creative Assembly have become such big money whores. I bet the gameplay will be total ass like Rome was when it came out.

What. Rome was an improvement in almost every way. The only thing wrong was that the killing/breaking was a bit too fast, which was easily fixed.

Instead of doing a new setting they just make a sequel to a Medieval setting with kewl graphixx.

What setting would you suggest?

Combos sound mega lame too

So you'd rather have the soldiers stand there repeating the same attack animation over and over? How is that better than having elite/experienced troops demonstrate their eliteness by stringing several attack animations together as they chop up the opposition?

It disappoints me they've become as lame as they have, i'd normally be pretty excited over this.

oh ok.

 

[LCJr.]

What setting would you suggest?

As for original settings I can't think of any that have covered ancient China outside of KOEI and those are strategic not tactical games. Or the "cradle of civilization" plenty variety with Egyptians, Hittites, Assyrians, etc...

So you'd rather have the soldiers stand there repeating the same attack animation over and over? How is that better than having elite/experienced troops demonstrate their eliteness by stringing several attack animations together as they chop up the opposition?

Doesn't matter how good the eyecandy is if the gameplay sucks. If all your interested in is eyecandy save your money and just dl the trailers.

Fucking yes, I was afraid Creative Assembly would change to cater to a broader market (read: console maroons) after their success with Rome.

Instead they're catering to graphics whores and the companies that produce video cards.

 

[spacemoose]

Doesn't matter how good the eyecandy is if the gameplay sucks. If all your interested in is eyecandy save your money and just dl the trailers.

I've never seen the hive mind before, but now I'm starting to think there might be something to it. You don't like the game because it has better graphics, but I bet that if it was just more of the same content, with the old M:TW engine, it would be applauded.

You seem to be implying that the 'gameplay' of Rome:TW was bad. I happen to like it. What was wrong with it and how would you improve it?

 

[LCJr.]

You're either intentionally missing the point or really dumb.

 

[spacemoose]

You're either intentionally missing the point or really dumb.

You have not played Medieval 2, but I bet you're basing your expectations of it on Rome:TW, therefore you think Rome had bad gameplay. Enlighten me then why it was bad.

 

[kingcomrade]

I never much liked these games. They always seemed really "okay march your guys into battle, then watch for a bit, ok they won, now order them to attack another squadron."

 

[LlamaGod]

You seem to be implying that the 'gameplay' of Rome:TW was bad. I happen to like it. What was wrong with it and how would you improve it?

the formations were basically non-exsistant, mounted units could route fucking phalaxes and there was a ton of misbalanced units.

They spent more time on Rome's graphics and flashy shit then the gameplay, and managed to remove things that were in Medieval too.

Not to mention the really really fucking annoying bugs they flat out refused to fix.

And surprise, they put them in the expansion. Also even put the bug fixes in there. So you had to pay $30 more to finish up your game.

They are going for prettier and more arcade based games, love holding out features for expansions, making stupid console action games and now they are only 'doing sequels to well known settings and properties' instead of actually taking a risk and trying something new and original.

I never much liked these games. They always seemed really "okay march your guys into battle, then watch for a bit, ok they won, now order them to attack another squadron."

we know you're retarded, it's okay.

 

[kingcomrade]

How's Tacticular Cancer coming? I see you have all of 6 topics in your strategy forum, 5 of which were started by Naked Lunch. Impressive.

Anyone care to give me an actual response about the Total War games? Explain why they are more than just, "Okay order your spearmen to attack the horsies, and your archers to attack their spearmen, and your horsies to attack their archers."

 

[LlamaGod]

tacticular cancer is at a level you will never attain in your life

 

[kingcomrade]

I can't understand either why nobody seems interested in a site that seems almost specifically designed for the spaztastic 14 year old strategy gamers out there, llama.

 

[LlamaGod]

I can't understand either why nobody seems interested in a site that seems almost specifically designed for the spaztastic 14 year old strategy gamers out there, llama.

you're the one who plays C&C, sir