bit-gamer.net

Rome II Review

Comments 1 to 25 of 49

Reply
Ergath 2nd September 2013, 18:00 Quote
Quelling a Roman? Sounds like an ace tutorial.

Nipicking/constructive criticism aside, this looks amazing - I'm very excited for this game.
will_123 2nd September 2013, 18:48 Quote
How much more demanding is in comparison to Shogun 2?
jimmyjj 2nd September 2013, 19:24 Quote
Great written review.

However the screenshots look like they were taken at the lowest graphics settings before being reduced in resolution and horribly compressed.

I am sure you used to be able to click on screen shots to open a high res version?

If you can not afford the bandwidth how about hosting them on a third party site or making high res screenshots available only to those with forum accounts?
Meanmotion 2nd September 2013, 19:32 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmyjj

I am sure you used to be able to click on screen shots to open a high res version?

Yup, just didn't have time to add them earlier. Added now.
vampalan 2nd September 2013, 19:41 Quote
3 pages, and 96 percent. That's quite something for bit-tech.
jimmyjj 2nd September 2013, 19:44 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meanmotion
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmyjj

I am sure you used to be able to click on screen shots to open a high res version?

Yup, just didn't have time to add them earlier. Added now.

Nice one, high res images look brilliant.
Greentrident 2nd September 2013, 22:50 Quote
Convinced me - pre-loading now!
m0ngy 3rd September 2013, 03:38 Quote
Would like to have known how it runs. Needless to say, it's a hungry beast, but some description of the specs required for various settings would be really handy. Also, is it significantly multi-threaded, should I upgrade to hex core?
Eiffie 3rd September 2013, 04:15 Quote
I have a question, in the review it's stated that ships can land troops as long as a city has a port but in one of the screenshots it looks almost like the ships are just landing on the beach, does a beach count as a port? Are there different ways to land troops by sea?
m0ngy 3rd September 2013, 04:24 Quote
The article specifically said you could land on a beach. You always could in TW, Rome II is no different.
Lockinvar 3rd September 2013, 05:32 Quote
Preloaded and ready to go .. just a few more hours! I feel this review could have been twice as long.
m0ngy 3rd September 2013, 09:54 Quote
OK, so I bought it on Steam, it's important to contribute to studios like Creative Assembly for all the fine work they do.

My specs are;
i7 920 @ 2.66 (USB issue with the H80i, won't allow me to overclock, really need to warranty it)
8Gb 1333Mhz
6990
256Gb SSD
2560x1600 display

I'm playing the prologue on High preset (middle settings) and getting an average of about 35-40 FPS, which doesn't sound like a lot but it feels smooth, and looks pretty good at 1600p (always does). I can't see that the individual animations or movement of the troops is vastly better than Shogun II. Maybe I'm missing out by not having it at max detail, not sure. They're a bit better, but nothing really noticeably awesome, as this review would suggest. It's early days yet, I'll have to play some more and see if I can pick anything that blows my mind.

In the very first engagement I noticed the enemy storming forward and then being repelled by missile troops and retreating, only to move forward and retreat again a moment later, a very unrealistic behavior which was repeated several times until I attacked with melee troops. You can probably tune out this sort of thing by upping the difficulty settings, not sure what it says about the AI...

Suddenly getting horrific texture problems!! The ground tiles are on the blink, downloading 13.8 beta drivers now...
impar 3rd September 2013, 10:23 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by m0ngy
Suddenly getting horrific texture problems!! The ground tiles are on the blink, downloading 13.8 beta drivers now...
http://support.amd.com/us/kbarticles/Pages/AMDCatalyst13-8WINBetaDriver.aspx

Usaully on TW you get some FPS decreasing shadow quality.
rollo 3rd September 2013, 11:13 Quote
not a game where you need 30 fps though. Most people can make do with 15-20 on map screen as long as the engagements are in the 30s you would be ok.
m0ngy 3rd September 2013, 11:58 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rollo
not a game where you need 30 fps though. Most people can make do with 15-20 on map screen as long as the engagements are in the 30s you would be ok.

Still, nothing's worse than a choppy battle. The strategic map is still really choppy while the AI is 'thinking'. Not sure how many cores this engine utilizes, probably just one, as I've read that's all Direct X can handle. Don't quote me on that though, lol.

The 13.8 beta drivers seem to have fixed the (very bad) texture problems. I got the serious artifacts after alt+tabbing in and out of TWR2, so maybe it's still a bit glitchy.

The prologue is pretty much for noobs, experienced TW players need not apply. As the article said, some of the mechanics are slightly different (not much), but the gameplay is the same as ever, and that's pretty damn good.
Panos 3rd September 2013, 12:24 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by m0ngy
Would like to have known how it runs. Needless to say, it's a hungry beast, but some description of the specs required for various settings would be really handy. Also, is it significantly multi-threaded, should I upgrade to hex core?

If you plan to play X:Rebirth in two months, then hex core should be mandatory :)
Or else a 2-3 core one will do the job.

Either way, plays well on my XPS laptop (lunch break 4TW), see how it goes tonight when I go to my home PC (AMD 1090T, Nvidia GTX580)
RickLane 3rd September 2013, 12:56 Quote
A couple of notes RE: comments above.

The game ran pretty well for me, on an intel core i5 and nvidia 660ti. The only time I got any severe slowdown was during a battle with lots of weather effects (fog and heavy rain) and a large amount of foliage (forests etc).
It also loads pretty quickly for a TW game, both initially and for battles. The AI takes forever to take its turn however.

With regard to the boats thing. When I was talkign about boats only being able to land on beaches, I was referring specifically to the campaign map. Battles are a little more flexible, although you can't land a mass of units on a cliff-face, obviously.

Cheers!
Hovis 3rd September 2013, 14:38 Quote
Getting absolutely horrible performance with it here. Even in low settings for everything getting 18FPS on the built in benchmark using a i5 CPU @3.8GHz and a 760GTX graphics card. Something rotten here. :(
Digi 3rd September 2013, 16:01 Quote
As far as I heard there's a severe graphic glitch they're working on a emergency patch for? I heard from a friend - will try and dig the article out.

EDIT: http://forums.totalwar.com/showthread.php/76672-Low-Resolution-Texture-when-running-on-Extreme

Lots of people reporting this. I believe this is what they're working a patch up for. Lots of other graphics issues are easy fixes. Check the forums above.
m0ngy 3rd September 2013, 17:09 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovis
Getting absolutely horrible performance with it here. Even in low settings for everything getting 18FPS on the built in benchmark using a i5 CPU @3.8GHz and a 760GTX graphics card. Something rotten here. :(

Yeah, that's too low, something's wrong, especially if it's only at 1080p. I got worse frames in the prologue (~35) than the actual game (~50) for some reason, and that's at 1600p (twice the res). Using 'high' preset with i7-920@2.66GHz/6990/1600p.

I'm liking it, it's another TW game, more or less like the others. Man, it's pretty epic, with so many factions, takes the AI a while to get through them all. I've always found the economy a bit frustrating with TW, it's more mysterious to me than the only other strategy game you can really compare it too, Civ. I totally understand the Civ5 economy, I know if I build this it's gonna effect that, and by how much. To me, TW isn't an exact science like Civ, it's much harder to work out in advance exactly what effects which buildings are gonna have, you just sort of build things as they're needed, it's very reactionary. In Civ5 you can plan well in advance, which I like, whereas in TW it seems like you're forever putting out spot fires, so to speak.
Eiffie 3rd September 2013, 18:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by m0ngy
The article specifically said you could land on a beach. You always could in TW, Rome II is no different.

Sorry, I think I was just a bit confused with what it said on the first and last page about that. Re-reading it makes a bit more sense, thanks for clarification. I mistook "as long as a city has a port" for "you need a port to land." Thanks :D
amirkomet 4th September 2013, 09:49 Quote
I don’t agree with this review at all. Personally I’m disappointed at Rome 2, I have come across a lot of unpolished bullshit, just playing a few hours of Rome 2 here is my experience.

- Troops and individual units are missing ambient sound after loading into combat.

- Random crashes in the middle of combat.

- Guarantied crash 9 out of 10 times when trying to exchange unites on campaign map.

- IA transport unable to disembark onto shore, stuck because of poor path finding.

- Popup textures even on extreme settings, missing quality that defines a polished game, no matter what the excuse is.
- Poorly designed ui icons, over simplistic and hard to read function or building type.

- Ugly ui, no coherency to the overall theme of the period, it looks like something out of steam “greenlight game”
- Units that have disembarked onto beach get frozen, unable to attack or move or be attacked.

- Rome 2 is a step backwards when it comes to competitive multiplayer, where is the ability to customize your general or army like in shogun 2. Where is the competitive ability to battle for supremacy over regions, like in Shogun 2… where you are able to pick clans and capture areas on the campaign map?
m0ngy 4th September 2013, 16:00 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirkomet
I don’t agree with this review at all. Personally I’m disappointed at Rome 2, I have come across a lot of unpolished bullshit, just playing a few hours of Rome 2 here is my experience.

Dude, I totally agree with you 100%, another POS article from the in-crowd at Bit-tech. Why do they even bother?

I've been playing Rome II for a day and a night, and it's shite. It's been dumbed down **A LOT**, and is missing much of what made the previous games great. Instead of adding upon previous iterations of TW, they've tried to re-invent the wheel, and it's bit them in the ass, badly.
amirkomet 5th September 2013, 08:43 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by m0ngy
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirkomet
I don’t agree with this review at all. Personally I’m disappointed at Rome 2, I have come across a lot of unpolished bullshit, just playing a few hours of Rome 2 here is my experience.

Dude, I totally agree with you 100%, another POS article from the in-crowd at Bit-tech. Why do they even bother?

I've been playing Rome II for a day and a night, and it's shite. It's been dumbed down **A LOT**, and is missing much of what made the previous games great. Instead of adding upon previous iterations of TW, they've tried to re-invent the wheel, and it's bit them in the ass, badly.

check this review out its more balanced ;) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdpIENG0Y2k
Redbeaver 6th September 2013, 18:18 Quote
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums