Rome 2 Total War

DO IT! LEAVE CONSOLES! DO ET DO ET do et do et! do et do et!


but in all seriousness, being able to be on a far more open plat form, having much more power, being less restricted by programs, having the ability to mod, having the awesome extra of a large amount of indies, and more is why I choose pc!

 

better, save up for a few months, spend 2.5-3x that, and get a very powerful pc! the advantage to spending this means, that when it gets slower or you want to upgrade, you can spend FAR less to get it to still run games very nicely! also make sure you build your own pc to save money, and because companies tend to use bad quality parts!

 

Rome 2 Total War looks good. Haven't played the first one though; BUT I do read all of Rome 2's articles when they come out in PC Gamer magazine.

 

Can not wait for it, time to go too work mastur laptop (Consoles 4 whenever MGS5 comes out, dont forget PC little DRM problem stalker)

 

cough* consoles aren't much better any more* cough .


But ya, Pc is often screwed over by publishers and their god dang DRM!

 

see for me it comes too this

spend god knows how much for a computer (you lucky forighn fucks, we cant import unless you pay a crap ton of money)

tweak it update it optimise fix updeate ....

or on a ps3

insert game- update -play

 

How come everyone has a ton of RAM except me?!:twitch:

 

IS Rome is good

 

ok i have had the bloody displeasure of finaly playing rome 2 total war after 9 thats right 9 patches

First off i will start with the graphics.

Whoever was in charge of the asthetics for this game has done a magnificint job the visualls are stunning seeing 100+ legionarys land on a greek beach as arrows and rocks rain on them in a thunderstorm in winter is AMAZING and thats on medium!, the battle visuals for sieges are another plus with massive fleets and thousands of soldiers ducking it out in the viscinity of say the capital of carthage.

Also the modeling of the individual soldier is "okay" abit of a let down from Shogun 2s rain splattered armour but i digress

Part 2- the voice acting/sound effects/music

Voice acting is what you would expect hammy cheesy dumb and over the top and everyone yells constantly even when the other dudz are on the other side of the map they will yell

The music is well its horrible compared to its predesecer listion too these tracks for comaprison

1st we have the Rome 2 song "roma invicta"

[YOUTUBE]YemA9nE0CEY[/YOUTUBE]

Compared too rome 1s "soldier chant"

[YOUTUBE]watch?v=a6EIv9GULJU&list=PL60EA75B9FA0CD1F8&feature=share&index=8[/YOUTUBE]

Even the campaign maps music is weaker but i suppose its hard to beat the instant classic divintius

[YOUTUBE]watch?v=5cvHGoC45w4&list=PL60EA75B9FA0CD1F8&feature=share&index=12[/YOUTUBE]

Now that the asthectics are out of the way lets talk about the two slices of meat that make up a total war sandwich.

the first slice of meat being the battles, i had high hopes for improvements to them since shogun 2s near perfect mix of melee and ranged battles i was thorughly disapointed.

my biggest nit pick is they are still using the bloody warscape engine which is perfect for ranged combat but near useless for melee since it has NO unit collision men will run through each other to preform the nice looking but stupid "kill moves" a pre programed set of animations that trigger when a two models reach the right criteria for them too activate sounds good in theory till one realises this means hundreds of troops staring blankfaced at eachother while the computer struggles to keep up with the tsunami of information

Its also very very VERY fast gone are the epic battles as troops surge over the dead and dying as shields crash swords hit swords as the mass of men push and shove until the calvery attack from the rear breaking their morale allowing for a costly victory

now units just fall over i am serious if a kill move fails to trigger the guy just falls over and dies which is funny when there is a tree between two units :lol:,.

i will update as i start a proper campaign as a roman asshole bent on world domination (like my bunny)

 

Unless you're doing some hardcore rendering or using other extremely hardware intensive multi-threaded programs like editing software, you're not going to need more than 8 gigs for some time.

Also I know I'm a bit late to the party Darkness, but as for the PC:

RAM is on the lower end in terms of frequency, and you're never going to use more than 8 unless, like I said, you have like 50+ edited clips running in the background in Vegas while running multiple browser tabs and miscellaneous programs at the same time. You can even get by with 4 GB (my laptop has 4, and has to sacrifice at least around half a gig for the Windows Kernel and Integrated GPU VRAM), 8's just a good, safe number. Always go for 2 sticks running in dual channel if you can; tends to be right around the same price as one, and just like picking a higher frequency, it's not gonna make that big of a difference but stuff will just be slightly snappier.

As for the CPU, here's the thing:
AMD CPU's offer great bang-for-your-buck, but they're also significantly less powerful than the majority of major Intel offerings. A single core on an Intel CPU tends to be ~60% more powerful than a modern AMD core running at the same clock rate, but AMD usually throws in twice as many cores at slightly higher clock rates for less money. For an introductory, budget CPU, AMD's a great choice, just be aware of its limitations; programs have to specifically be built to use multiple cores, and even a good number of modern, CPU-intensive games only take advantage of up to four CPU cores.

As for the GPU:
If you're just looking to get into PC gaming and enjoy the games for what they are, not really caring about any of the eye candy, then a $100 card will serve you just fine. But if there's one part of your machine that you'll want to put money into before almost anything else (provided your power supply is adequate, which in this case, it is), it's your video card. Your GPU is pretty much almost always going to be your system's bottleneck, especially if your card is half as powerful as the Xbox One's GPU (which is 2/3 as powerful as the PS4's). If you're building a well balanced PC build, for every dollar you put into your CPU, you're typically gonna want to put two into the video card, as it's the one place where you can put money into a system and really see a direct improvement.

But overall, I mean, it'll work as a gaming PC. CPU will play just about anything and likely last you at least some time, since games are being programmed to take advantage of more and more cores as time goes on.

Video card is definitely the weaker part of the build, but should be sufficient to play just about anything on low-medium settings at a decent resolution.

RAM of that frequency is good enough for just about anything, but if you're trying to future proof with more than you'll need for years to come, you might as well get a decent frequency, at least 1600 mHz, otherwise I'd just go with 8 gigs.

Hard Drive is a good choice, just make sure you're buying from a reputable brand.

Motherboard is fine, I see now why you only went with 1333 mHz. Looks like you have a tad bit of voltage headroom if you really want to overclock, but I'd stay away from that to be honest unless you're really having issues with CPU load and really know what you're doing.

Case is larger than you need for a motherboard that tiny, but it'll still work.

PSU is a bit overkill, but that's not always a bad thing, as having a rig short on power can cripple the entire thing. You could grab just about any video card you want and still have some headroom for this thing.

Judging by the date, I figure you either already bought the thing or have since revised it, but I mean fuck it, I'm bored and you seemed curious and never got an answer.