Anyone exctied about Empire: Total War???

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Bateluer

Lifer
Jun 23, 2001
27,730
8
0
Originally posted by: TehMac
yeah, just make a good rig, the 4870 will definitely help you along. Or, two 200 dollar Crossfire 4850s which is almost as good as one GTX 280. :D

I seriously doubt you'll need that kind of graphics power to enjoy ETW. A single 4850, or much more likely, any thing from the 8800 series or HD3000 series will likely be fine.
 

TehMac

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2006
9,979
3
71
Originally posted by: Bateluer
Originally posted by: TehMac
yeah, just make a good rig, the 4870 will definitely help you along. Or, two 200 dollar Crossfire 4850s which is almost as good as one GTX 280. :D

I seriously doubt you'll need that kind of graphics power to enjoy ETW. A single 4850, or much more likely, any thing from the 8800 series or HD3000 series will likely be fine.

Yeah, but I'm talking about "in all its glory!!!"


See what I'm saying? :D
 

Regs

Lifer
Aug 9, 2002
16,665
21
81
I've been waiting for a revolutionary war type game for awhile. Playable that is.

Creative Assembly are the only one in my mind that can pull it off since I played Rome TW and Medieval 2 for months without losing interest in them.

Just as long as they keep the battles epic!
 

TehMac

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2006
9,979
3
71
I think they're making them more so. Although, I wish they'd hurry up and get bigger armies, I'm tired of 20 cards to an army deck.

They need to make those bigger. Battles are hardly battles with only like...800 guys per team.
 

TehMac

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2006
9,979
3
71
Originally posted by: MrAK


If I read it right, you stated that the game will be out Q1 in 2009? I thought the release date was November 2008, correct me if I'm wrong.

Well, the game was slated for 2008, yes, but then it has been delayed by CA, as they needed more time for it. So it is now expected Q1 2009. I know, it's rather disappointing, but at least they're going to spend more time on it.

Another thing came to mind, would the game, basing on what it may require of a computer, run pretty ok on a laptop like this? ASUS laptop
sorry for the minor-off-topic question. Its just I plan to run this game on a laptop like this.
It would mean so much if you guys could help me regarding this question.

regards,
MrAK


Personally, I'm not much of a laptop guy, I run all my games on a desktop because I don't like the heating issues. I also don't like laptops because they have very limited moddability in comparison to a PC, and very little flexibility.

If possible, try to build a desktop, it's a rewarding experience, and ATPCG is here to help you.

I have built 2 rigs, and there is nothing like playing games max'd out on a machine you put your sweat into! :D
 

Netscorer

Member
Jan 27, 2002
83
0
0
Originally posted by: TehMac
http://i207.photobucket.com/al...Mac/EmpireTotalWar.jpg

There's a new screenshot from CA released this week. It looks mind bogglingly nice. :Q

Do I miss something here? Where are the bayonets in the picture? I sincerely hope these soldiers did not go into hand-to-hand fighting trying to pierce each other with muzzles alone?!

I love Napoleon era (have read many books about it) but it's going to be challenging as hell to implement it historically properly and at the same time exciting to play along. This was a beginning of a positional warfare - not as bad as WWI got but still, not much movement and few truly epic battles. Here's hoping though. Creative Assembly so far has been very good with delivering what fans of the Total War wanted. I also would like them to make this game as open as possible - then let the modders take over. And another wish - bring these series to consoles. This is the last game I am playing on my aging PC and I have little desire upgrading it for it alone. I think this style of play can be translated to console very well. Civilization has done it, so did C&C series. And to play these battles on big screen TV with surround sound would be mouthwatering. Not to mention huge online community available at your fingertips.

Netscorer
 

Bateluer

Lifer
Jun 23, 2001
27,730
8
0
Originally posted by: Netscorer
And another wish - bring these series to consoles. This is the last game I am playing on my aging PC and I have little desire upgrading it for it alone. I think this style of play can be translated to console very well. Civilization has done it, so did C&C series. And to play these battles on big screen TV with surround sound would be mouthwatering. Not to mention huge online community available at your fingertips.

Netscorer


Uh no. The console versions of C&C were terrible, as were all other RTS games on all consoles. That it not a generalization, the control scheme on the console is too limited to allow an RTS to be anything more than a headache. Consoles are great for fighting games, like DOA, or racing games, but everything else plays better on the PC.

 

TehMac

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2006
9,979
3
71
Originally posted by: Netscorer
Here's hoping though. Creative Assembly so far has been very good with delivering what fans of the Total War wanted. I also would like them to make this game as open as possible - then let the modders take over. And another wish - bring these series to consoles. This is the last game I am playing on my aging PC and I have little desire upgrading it for it alone. I think this style of play can be translated to console very well. Civilization has done it, so did C&C series. And to play these battles on big screen TV with surround sound would be mouthwatering. Not to mention huge online community available at your fingertips.

Netscorer

Sorry, I don't want one of the last decent PC Game devs to dumb down their game for a bunch of illiterate, lazy, incompetent, unimaginative pieces of flesh who sit on their couch letting their brains rot in their skulls.

Civilization has sucked on the consoles, it's gotten 8/10s, compared to the 9 and 10 out of 10s it has received on the PC.


It's a different sort of audience, and CA's quality will suffer as a result.

They can make a total war for the consoles that will suck balls and all the retards can enjoy it, but make the two exclusive for either the gaming illiterate on one hand, or one for those who actually enjoy thinking while playing a game.

Now that ATi's cards are out, they're cheap, while prices drop significantly, the old "wahh wahh wahh I can't upgrade wahh wahh" excuse is no longer viable.

You're on a computer forum, there's at least 500 out of 5000 users who can help you put together a PC for cheap, use your resources and your brain, and that way you won't have to buy a piece of shit that contains two year old graphics cards and then complain that a thinking game (and graphically intensive) isn't coming to that load of junk because:

1) The audience doesn't appreciate that sort of game
and
2) The hunk of plastic can't run it without stuttering along anyway


I'm sorry, but the thought of soiling yet another great and viable game series by dumbing it down in a miserable port is truly aggravating.


FYI: You can you buy a fancy TV screen, a surround sound system, and a nice cheap graphics card that kicks ass and still get the same experience.
 

Netscorer

Member
Jan 27, 2002
83
0
0
Take it easy TehMac, and clean your manners before posting on these forums. I don't appreciate your edifying and boorish tone. I have built my own computers since 1990-ies, so I hope, I can live without some techno prick telling me what to do.
TW is a great series - I think we agree on this and if they release their game on both PC and console platforms I don't see how's anyone going to lose. Civilization just did it and your remark that they suck because they got 8/10 - wow that is childish. If every game getting 8/10 from some magazine in your opinion sucks then there are truly no games left to play. Oh, maybe GTA and Halo alone (two idiotic games IMHO).
 

TehMac

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2006
9,979
3
71
Originally posted by: Netscorer
Take it easy TehMac, and clean your manners before posting on these forums. I don't appreciate your edifying and boorish tone. I have built my own computers since 1990-ies, so I hope, I can live without some techno prick telling me what to do.
TW is a great series - I think we agree on this and if they release their game on both PC and console platforms I don't see how's anyone going to lose. Civilization just did it and your remark that they suck because they got 8/10 - wow that is childish. If every game getting 8/10 from some magazine in your opinion sucks then there are truly no games left to play. Oh, maybe GTA and Halo alone (two idiotic games IMHO).

I'll tell you whose going to lose. The same people who lost when Tom Clancy's crap became ported to the PC. The people who are losing when BF is being ported to the PC, the people who depended on some brilliant game designers for good, sophisticated games for the PC, but were sorely disapointed when those designers realized that designing games for 12 year olds was far more convenient because they could just stick tooth paste sweet visuals on their games, and that's all they need.


PS Halo sucks, but if GTA 4 comes out, I might pick it up. I hear its real choppy on the consoles.
 

MraK

Senior member
Oct 12, 2003
417
0
0
Speaking of CA games on consoles, have you guys seen Viking battle of Asgard, it was made by CA and it bombed, will not that low, but it still didn't get the attention from console gamers, it was released not too long ago and its already on sale for $30 at gamestop (PS3 version). Having the Total wars series on Consoles would not be a great idea, basing off of Viking. I mean it would take up alot of muscle from a console just to run a huge battle against someone, what more when it comes to multiplayer?
 

TehMac

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2006
9,979
3
71
They tried to get on consoles with Spartan Total Warrior, which went even worse. They realized that the audience for consoles and PCs are significantly different enough. And because CA isn't going to waste time dumbing down games anymore, I don't think they're going to ruin their best selling franchise by trying to make more money.

They'd only lose money because porting to consoles is expensive, and no console gamer really likes thinking, so yeah.
 

HeXploiT

Diamond Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,359
1
76
From Wiki:
The naval battles features:

* Realistic damage model for ships. Tear sails and destroy masts with chain shots, cannon balls can kill men, destroy guns, smash through different parts of a ship's hull and sink it.[5]
* Realistic cannon fire.
* Round shots, chain shots, and grapeshots.[6]
* Boarding action.
* Dynamic weather that has a major impact on naval battles.

The battles on land have been given a makeover too:

* Music makes its way into the battlefield in the form of bagpipes, drums, flutes and trumpets[2].
* Weapons may jam and misfire, cannons can explode.[2]
* Generals shout orders at their troops as the regiment goes into combat or fires at enemies[2].
* The battlefield becomes strewn with dead, dying and dismembered bodies.[2]
* A new cover mechanic. Units can take cover inside buildings and behind walls.[4]
* When fighting in hand to hand combat characters will evade, parry and block attacks

Can't wait! This will be the game that finally prompts me to a quadcore & 4gb ram.
Currently still using an e6300 oc@3gz 2gb Ballisitx 8500 & 2x(SLI) 8800GTS 640mb oc@650/1000. With this setup I run COH @ 1920x1200(dx10) w/everything maxed & 4xAA and get about 40fps average. My video system will be sufficient for the game but those large battles are going to be extremely cpu dependent and 4x4 battle with units set to "huge" will probably kill even the fastest quadcores currently available.
I have faith that this will be done right. Creative Assembly have hit three home runs(or four if you include medieval II) and there is no reason to expect that they won't knock this one out of the park.
 

SPARTAN VI

Senior member
Oct 13, 2005
803
0
76
Totally stoked.. total Rome: TW junkie, favorite game of all time. Still feel it's better than M2:TW.

Has there been any word on a multiplayer campaign map? Hot seat is lame, don't like autocalcing battles. I realize that these games can take weeks or months to finish as is, but a MP campaign will add so much to TW in general. E:TW is already a must buy for me, but I'll seriously sport a pink tutu if they give me MP campaign.
 

HeXploiT

Diamond Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,359
1
76
Originally posted by: SPARTAN VI
Totally stoked.. total Rome: TW junkie, favorite game of all time. Still feel it's better than M2:TW.

Has there been any word on a multiplayer campaign map? Hot seat is lame, don't like autocalcing battles. I realize that these games can take weeks or months to finish as is, but a MP campaign will add so much to TW in general. E:TW is already a must buy for me, but I'll seriously sport a pink tutu if they give me MP campaign.

A...pink...tutu? I don't remember that faction.
Sorry no answer to your question but I agree that RTW is the best.
I think for most people it boils down to what era you prefer. I find the Roman/classical period much more interesting than the dark/middle ages or Japanese history. Aside from that all the Total War titles were equally superior titles with extensive command/control and tactics structures respective to their time of release.
Personally RTW2 interests me the most. I've never stopped playing RTW and I'll probably never get bored of it in much the same way I still play the original Age of Empires.
 

MraK

Senior member
Oct 12, 2003
417
0
0
Originally posted by: Perry404

Can't wait! This will be the game that finally prompts me to a quadcore & 4gb ram.
Currently still using an e6300 oc@3gz 2gb Ballisitx 8500 & 2x(SLI) 8800GTS 640mb oc@650/1000. With this setup I run COH @ 1920x1200(dx10) w/everything maxed & 4xAA and get about 40fps average. My video system will be sufficient for the game but those large battles are going to be extremely cpu dependent and 4x4 battle with units set to "huge" will probably kill even the fastest quadcores currently available.
I have faith that this will be done right. Creative Assembly have hit three home runs(or four if you include medieval II) and there is no reason to expect that they won't knock this one out of the park.


So in your personal opinion, based one what info you had gathered and read on sites dealing with this game, that a Quad core will be better used than a Dual core for this game?

I was thinking the same thing actually:laugh:

 

HeXploiT

Diamond Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,359
1
76
Originally posted by: MrAK
Originally posted by: Perry404

Can't wait! This will be the game that finally prompts me to a quadcore & 4gb ram.
Currently still using an e6300 oc@3gz 2gb Ballisitx 8500 & 2x(SLI) 8800GTS 640mb oc@650/1000. With this setup I run COH @ 1920x1200(dx10) w/everything maxed & 4xAA and get about 40fps average. My video system will be sufficient for the game but those large battles are going to be extremely cpu dependent and 4x4 battle with units set to "huge" will probably kill even the fastest quadcores currently available.
I have faith that this will be done right. Creative Assembly have hit three home runs(or four if you include medieval II) and there is no reason to expect that they won't knock this one out of the park.


So in your personal opinion, based one what info you had gathered and read on sites dealing with this game, that a Quad core will be better used than a Dual core for this game?

I was thinking the same thing actually:laugh:

Merely my experience with the previous versions of TW. The amount of AI going on in those large battles is ludicrous. You can see the difference by running RTW with everything maxed and two small armies vs 8 large armies. Even with an 8800gtx you might be getting 80fps with the small armies but with the large you'll be choking on 10fps whenever you move the camera. I've often wondered what all that IA looks like mathematically.
On second thought...I have no idea how far out the release is for this game. For all I know it's two years down the road in which case we may all need Oct-Cores.:Q
 

acheron

Diamond Member
May 27, 2008
3,171
2
81
Rome:TW is the only one from the series I played, but I loved it. Empire sounds awesome and is one of the reasons I'm planning a computer upgrade soon. :)
 

TehMac

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2006
9,979
3
71
I plan on getting a Quad Core, I might get the new Newhalm that are rumored to come out this year, but I don't know if that's worth it, I might just get one of the older Quad cores and just suck it up and get an older mobo s775.

But I do plan on getting a mobo with PCI-e 2.0 and a 4870x2. :Q

And I want a 24" monitor :(
 

TehMac

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2006
9,979
3
71
Originally posted by: Perry404
I think for most people it boils down to what era you prefer. I find the Roman/classical period much more interesting than the dark/middle ages or Japanese history. Aside from that all the Total War titles were equally superior titles with extensive command/control and tactics structures respective to their time of release.
Personally RTW2 interests me the most. I've never stopped playing RTW and I'll probably never get bored of it in much the same way I still play the original Age of Empires.

I think any of the historical eras are immensely exciting and satisfying to study, if the study is presented in a right manner, and I find the Total War games great as well.

So I was a bit skeptical about Empire Total War, but I hope they get it this time.


Because, guys, I'm ashamed to say this, but I find the total war games kind of boring, medieval 2 especially, but the music kinda sucks, and I end up using cheats because I'm tired of having to deal with more fucking money problems because it takes 6 fucking turns to get anything done. And then I get even more bored.

I'm going to try again, playing Barbarian Invasion, this is one of my favorite eras in history.
 

HeXploiT

Diamond Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,359
1
76
Originally posted by: TehMac
Originally posted by: Perry404
I think for most people it boils down to what era you prefer. I find the Roman/classical period much more interesting than the dark/middle ages or Japanese history. Aside from that all the Total War titles were equally superior titles with extensive command/control and tactics structures respective to their time of release.
Personally RTW2 interests me the most. I've never stopped playing RTW and I'll probably never get bored of it in much the same way I still play the original Age of Empires.

I think any of the historical eras are immensely exciting and satisfying to study, if the study is presented in a right manner, and I find the Total War games great as well.

So I was a bit skeptical about Empire Total War, but I hope they get it this time.


Because, guys, I'm ashamed to say this, but I find the total war games kind of boring, medieval 2 especially, but the music kinda sucks, and I end up using cheats because I'm tired of having to deal with more fucking money problems because it takes 6 fucking turns to get anything done. And then I get even more bored.

I'm going to try again, playing Barbarian Invasion, this is one of my favorite eras in history.

I played the first two Total War games and RTW for an entire year before I ever played the campaign. Let's face it the battles are what make the game great. The map campaign is merely mediocre and without the battles it would be just another board game like risk.
If you don't like the campaigns stick with the battles. There's more than enough there to satisfy.
 

TehMac

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2006
9,979
3
71
Originally posted by: Perry404
I played the first two Total War games and RTW for an entire year before I ever played the campaign. Let's face it the battles are what make the game great. The map campaign is merely mediocre and without the battles it would be just another board game like risk.
If you don't like the campaigns stick with the battles. There's more than enough there to satisfy.

I suppose, but I am a real stickler for historical accuracy in regards to unit modeling, and that's why I think the Total War series is rather boring, in some respects it's too accurate, and in others, not so enough. :(


But I have high hopes for Empire Total War changing all that around. For one thing, a lot more total war did take place during this era, and another, I plan on making no mistakes, and getting a shitload of RAM, a 4870x2, and a quad core. I'm going to run this bitch max'd out with highly decent FPS.
 

roguerower

Diamond Member
Nov 18, 2004
4,564
0
76
I'm ready for this to come out. I'm really, really, really hoping that the naval warfare part of the game is going to be as good as the land warfare. Maybe they'll take a feather out of Supcom and WIC's book and utilize two monitors. I've got 2 x 19" that would make it look awesome.