Shogun 2 Total War looks epic.

I'll let you gentlemen make your own decisions.

Looks decent, I may try it out.

It looks great but I'm not buying it. I already own all the total war games from Rome and up. I don't even play Napoleon or Rome and I only touch Empire on occasion. They're all good but I'm gonna let this one go by and wait for a game I'll love (Rome 2).

I'm going to let this one go.

PJsnaks wrote:

It looks great but I'm not buying it. I already own all the total war games from Rome and up. I don't even play Napoleon or Rome and I only touch Empire on occasion. They're all good but I'm gonna let this one go by and wait for a game I'll love (Rome 2).

They're simply never going to make the Total War game I really want them to make.

China.

RalphTheWonderLlama wrote:

China.

I'd play that. Warring states period ftw. Peasant uprisings, Mongol invasions, Korean and Vietnamese states!?!?! THAT would be fun.

And yea I just finished playing the Shogun Demo, so I guess I'll review it/rant about it/praise it.

I can't say much about the game but that was the WORST demo I've played in a while. They give you nothing to work with. Like, at all. Empire's was better and they only gave you two battles. At lest the game behind this demo was pretty good, or at least looks pretty good.

The game looks solid enough. The path finding is much better and Agents are used nicely. However I'm not a fan of the construction in this. I wasn't a fan of how they simplified it for Empire and Napoleon and unfortunately they kept it that way.

For this game though they took simplification to a whole other level (for construction)

But I loved the new diplomacy action that lets you ask your ally to join your war and lets you ask to join theirs. It allows for a little more strategy. Plus they give you the chances of diplomacy success so you don't have to waste a turn.

The new features for generals and family members is great.

The units didn't seem to have much variation but that may just be because they give you nothing to work with.

But yeah, the game is what I expected. Solid game, very good. However the demo was AWFUL. The longest most boring piece of shit ever. They don't even let you play out the battles in the tutorial (the two they let you play they give you random armies) and they don't even touch on naval battles.

PJsnaks wrote:

RalphTheWonderLlama wrote:

China.

I'd play that. Warring states period ftw. Peasant uprisings, Mongol invasions, Korean and Vietnamese states!?!?! THAT would be fun.

And yea I just finished playing the Shogun Demo, so I guess I'll review it/rant about it/praise it.

I can't say much about the game but that was the WORST demo I've played in a while. They give you nothing to work with. Like, at all. Empire's was better and they only gave you two battles. At lest the game behind this demo was pretty good, or at least looks pretty good.

The game looks solid enough. The path finding is much better and Agents are used nicely. However I'm not a fan of the construction in this. I wasn't a fan of how they simplified it for Empire and Napoleon and unfortunately they kept it that way.

For this game though they took simplification to a whole other level (for construction)

But I loved the new diplomacy action that lets you ask your ally to join your war and lets you ask to join theirs. It allows for a little more strategy. Plus they give you the chances of diplomacy success so you don't have to waste a turn.

The new features for generals and family members is great.

The units didn't seem to have much variation but that may just be because they give you nothing to work with.

But yeah, the game is what I expected. Solid game, very good. However the demo was AWFUL. The longest most boring piece of shit ever. They don't even let you play out the battles in the tutorial (the two they let you play they give you random armies) and they don't even touch on naval battles.

I don't play demos because I consider it self imposed torture.

As for the construction, you have to keep in mind the Japanese did not have the Romans to inspire them in terms of fortifications. Your biggest citadel in Shogun 1 was like your tier 3 out of 5 in Rome. And they also didn't have any Roman siege technology, so you'll see MUCH less city/castle fighting and much more open field battle. Which is frankly a relief to me.

I just can't wait till I get fully decked out warrior monks. Those be my homies.

Hope I can afford to play this too! I look forward to dominating Japan and my opponents.

RalphTheWonderLlama wrote:

PJsnaks wrote:

RalphTheWonderLlama wrote:

China.

I'd play that. Warring states period ftw. Peasant uprisings, Mongol invasions, Korean and Vietnamese states!?!?! THAT would be fun.

And yea I just finished playing the Shogun Demo, so I guess I'll review it/rant about it/praise it.

I can't say much about the game but that was the WORST demo I've played in a while. They give you nothing to work with. Like, at all. Empire's was better and they only gave you two battles. At lest the game behind this demo was pretty good, or at least looks pretty good.

The game looks solid enough. The path finding is much better and Agents are used nicely. However I'm not a fan of the construction in this. I wasn't a fan of how they simplified it for Empire and Napoleon and unfortunately they kept it that way.

For this game though they took simplification to a whole other level (for construction)

But I loved the new diplomacy action that lets you ask your ally to join your war and lets you ask to join theirs. It allows for a little more strategy. Plus they give you the chances of diplomacy success so you don't have to waste a turn.

The new features for generals and family members is great.

The units didn't seem to have much variation but that may just be because they give you nothing to work with.

But yeah, the game is what I expected. Solid game, very good. However the demo was AWFUL. The longest most boring piece of shit ever. They don't even let you play out the battles in the tutorial (the two they let you play they give you random armies) and they don't even touch on naval battles.

I don't play demos because I consider it self imposed torture.

As for the construction, you have to keep in mind the Japanese did not have the Romans to inspire them in terms of fortifications. Your biggest citadel in Shogun 1 was like your tier 3 out of 5 in Rome. And they also didn't have any Roman siege technology, so you'll see MUCH less city/castle fighting and much more open field battle. Which is frankly a relief to me.

I just can't wait till I get fully decked out warrior monks. Those be my homies.

That's not what I mean. Play medieval 2. Their construction process is vastly different than post-Empire. Nowadays there is a dropdown menu and you don't have a choice what you build. It's sickening. IMO that's the only step backwards the series has taken.

PJsnaks wrote:

RalphTheWonderLlama wrote:

PJsnaks wrote:

I'd play that. Warring states period ftw. Peasant uprisings, Mongol invasions, Korean and Vietnamese states!?!?! THAT would be fun.

And yea I just finished playing the Shogun Demo, so I guess I'll review it/rant about it/praise it.

I can't say much about the game but that was the WORST demo I've played in a while. They give you nothing to work with. Like, at all. Empire's was better and they only gave you two battles. At lest the game behind this demo was pretty good, or at least looks pretty good.

The game looks solid enough. The path finding is much better and Agents are used nicely. However I'm not a fan of the construction in this. I wasn't a fan of how they simplified it for Empire and Napoleon and unfortunately they kept it that way.

For this game though they took simplification to a whole other level (for construction)

But I loved the new diplomacy action that lets you ask your ally to join your war and lets you ask to join theirs. It allows for a little more strategy. Plus they give you the chances of diplomacy success so you don't have to waste a turn.

The new features for generals and family members is great.

The units didn't seem to have much variation but that may just be because they give you nothing to work with.

But yeah, the game is what I expected. Solid game, very good. However the demo was AWFUL. The longest most boring piece of shit ever. They don't even let you play out the battles in the tutorial (the two they let you play they give you random armies) and they don't even touch on naval battles.

I don't play demos because I consider it self imposed torture.

As for the construction, you have to keep in mind the Japanese did not have the Romans to inspire them in terms of fortifications. Your biggest citadel in Shogun 1 was like your tier 3 out of 5 in Rome. And they also didn't have any Roman siege technology, so you'll see MUCH less city/castle fighting and much more open field battle. Which is frankly a relief to me.

I just can't wait till I get fully decked out warrior monks. Those be my homies.

That's not what I mean. Play medieval 2. Their construction process is vastly different than post-Empire. Nowadays there is a dropdown menu and you don't have a choice what you build. It's sickening. IMO that's the only step backwards the series has taken.

I never played past medieval 2 because I hate Napoleonic era stuff.
This is shocking and disturbing news to me.

RalphTheWonderLlama wrote:

PJsnaks wrote:

RalphTheWonderLlama wrote:

I don't play demos because I consider it self imposed torture.

As for the construction, you have to keep in mind the Japanese did not have the Romans to inspire them in terms of fortifications. Your biggest citadel in Shogun 1 was like your tier 3 out of 5 in Rome. And they also didn't have any Roman siege technology, so you'll see MUCH less city/castle fighting and much more open field battle. Which is frankly a relief to me.

I just can't wait till I get fully decked out warrior monks. Those be my homies.

That's not what I mean. Play medieval 2. Their construction process is vastly different than post-Empire. Nowadays there is a dropdown menu and you don't have a choice what you build. It's sickening. IMO that's the only step backwards the series has taken.

I never played past medieval 2 because I hate Napoleonic era stuff.
This is shocking and disturbing news to me.

Medieval Era is like 1100-1500. Napoleon was in 1800-1815. Lrn2history.

PJsnaks wrote:

RalphTheWonderLlama wrote:

PJsnaks wrote:

That's not what I mean. Play medieval 2. Their construction process is vastly different than post-Empire. Nowadays there is a dropdown menu and you don't have a choice what you build. It's sickening. IMO that's the only step backwards the series has taken.

I never played past medieval 2 because I hate Napoleonic era stuff.
This is shocking and disturbing news to me.

Medieval Era is like 1100-1500. Napoleon was in 1800-1815. Lrn2history.

I didn't say I never played medieval 2, I'm saying I never played a Total War game that came out AFTER medieval 2. Hence the comment about the Napoleonic era.

Never dug the whole "everybody line up and shoot each other with muskets" type stuff.

RalphTheWonderLlama wrote:

PJsnaks wrote:

RalphTheWonderLlama wrote:

I never played past medieval 2 because I hate Napoleonic era stuff.
This is shocking and disturbing news to me.

Medieval Era is like 1100-1500. Napoleon was in 1800-1815. Lrn2history.

I didn't say I never played medieval 2, I'm saying I never played a Total War game that came out AFTER medieval 2. Hence the comment about the Napoleonic era.

Never dug the whole "everybody line up and shoot each other with muskets" type stuff.

Looks like I have to lrn2read. But yeah, if you play Shogun you'll notice the change they took.

PJsnaks wrote:

RalphTheWonderLlama wrote:

PJsnaks wrote:

Medieval Era is like 1100-1500. Napoleon was in 1800-1815. Lrn2history.

I didn't say I never played medieval 2, I'm saying I never played a Total War game that came out AFTER medieval 2. Hence the comment about the Napoleonic era.

Never dug the whole "everybody line up and shoot each other with muskets" type stuff.

Looks like I have to lrn2read. But yeah, if you play Shogun you'll notice the change they took.

As I said earlier, shocking and disturbing news.

I'll still buy it.

RalphTheWonderLlama wrote:

PJsnaks wrote:

RalphTheWonderLlama wrote:

I didn't say I never played medieval 2, I'm saying I never played a Total War game that came out AFTER medieval 2. Hence the comment about the Napoleonic era.

Never dug the whole "everybody line up and shoot each other with muskets" type stuff.

Looks like I have to lrn2read. But yeah, if you play Shogun you'll notice the change they took.

As I said earlier, shocking and disturbing news.

I'll still buy it.

It's a good game and you'll enjoy it. Total War games never fail to satisfy gamers. Their marketing and PR are awful, but the games are solid.

If I didn't already have 5 of their games I'd buy this one as well :P

I like games that involve more strategy but Total War can be fun.

PJsnaks wrote:

RalphTheWonderLlama wrote:

PJsnaks wrote:

Medieval Era is like 1100-1500. Napoleon was in 1800-1815. Lrn2history.

I didn't say I never played medieval 2, I'm saying I never played a Total War game that came out AFTER medieval 2. Hence the comment about the Napoleonic era.

Never dug the whole "everybody line up and shoot each other with muskets" type stuff.

Looks like I have to lrn2read. But yeah, if you play Shogun you'll notice the change they took.

You also need to lrn2history. Medieval times began in 476, at the fall of the Roman
Empire.

jedibantha wrote:

PJsnaks wrote:

RalphTheWonderLlama wrote:

I didn't say I never played medieval 2, I'm saying I never played a Total War game that came out AFTER medieval 2. Hence the comment about the Napoleonic era.

Never dug the whole "everybody line up and shoot each other with muskets" type stuff.

Looks like I have to lrn2read. But yeah, if you play Shogun you'll notice the change they took.

You also need to lrn2history. Medieval times began in 476, at the fall of the Roman
Empire.

1) I was talking about the Era of the game. Not of history.

2) The medieval times from 476-850 or 1099 (end of the first crusade) is generally called the Dark Ages while the high medieval period (the remainder of time until the renaissance) can be called the middle ages.

I'm not an RTS fan.

Shogun 2 is getting the best reviews of a Total War game since Rome. Worth checking out.

Anyone play it yet?

PJsnaks wrote:

Shogun 2 is getting the best reviews of a Total War game since Rome. Worth checking out.

Anyone play it yet?

I <3 it this much: <33333333333333333333333333

My Uesugi Clan Warrior Monks are PWNING way harder than in Shogun 1.
And the visuals, campaign map AND battlefield; are both fucking utterly stunning.

Sadly the multiplayer campaign seems a bit buggy, as the battles when I tried to play with my guild always caused both of us to crash.
Hopefully that will be fixed in patches, as the multiplayer campaign mode is what I was really after with the purchase.