Shogun 2 Reviews

[Narnia]

Ok, the game has been released and I know that because ever sense Civ 5 came out, no one trusts the professional reviewers I thought that we could have our own reviews.
There is basically going to be a thread for a poll and a bunch reviews. Please try not to post anything unless it is either a review of the game or a question that hasn't been addressed yet as this is meant to be a series of reviews for people who are still on the fence about whether or not to buy the game and there are already 2 or 3 other shogun 2 threads. Thanks.

PS: it should go without saying but there are actually two threads there, one for overall rating and one for recommendation, please pick one option from each poll (please don't select both the Total Failure and Perfect ratings)

 

[Maniacal]

Angry Joe did his review and he really likes it, though he is still bitter about paying full price for Empire xD

- Multiplayer campaign apparently has changeable goals to make it shorter or longer (days or weeks long)

- Focus on melee combat and bringing the series back to tis roots after the gunpowder ages

- Apparently alliances actually work now (I think)

- Agents are improved, new videos with some pretty funny fails (like the target ducks and the ninja flies over him and off a balcony)

- Naval combat less complex and more fun (but less common, it is Japan)

- AI better and improved but not perfect

- Siege battles improved

- Diplomacy has less ridiculous demands and less flip-flopping but AI allies still do little to help

Excellent and gets Joes' Bad Ass Seal of Approval and recommended buy.

===
EDIT: The other thing I've heard about the game and noticed in the demo (when using a custom battle mod tool) is that the units are somewhat rock < paper < scissors unlike previous games.

 

[Dodge_272]

what do you mean "unlike previous games"?

Shogun 1 was exactly like you described, this is it's sequal.

I bought this yesterday and I like it, obviously it needs little fixes from patches as all complex games do.

I played shogun 1 back in the day, I think this game is on the right track. People who didn't play the original might not "get it" however.

 

[Maniacal]

I don't know about the first shogun (it crashes after ~10 minutes) but Rome, medieval II, Empire and Napoleon are not entirely rock paper scissors, there are some units that use a spear but aren't completely destroyed by the average swordsman unit or whatever. There's a lot more variation in the units and their strengths and weaknesses in previous titles (which added to the complexity and CA said they were reducing that for this game to make it clearer to players what unit should be used against what. In Shogun's case this isn't necessarily a bad thing).

 

[Moff Jerjerrod]

I voted for great game with minor flaws.

Diplomacy actually works now in this game compared to previous Total War games. Case in point, on turn 70 of my current campaign, the Date clan who was my military equal but lagged slightly economically sued for peace when I defeated his field army and a naval task force all in one turn. He begged for peace and paid me 1000 koku for it.

Trade with other clans as well as alliances work great. You must engage in diplomacy in this game or the AI will gang up on the human player.

My take on the game thus far, and yes I realize every new game has it's honeymoon phase, is this:

Sid Meier and your sanitised PC happy Civ games failed miserably while insulting its hardcore civ fans.

Creative Assembly produces a winner with Total War: Shogun 2 and it's extensive encyclopaedia, atmosphere, and battle AI.

 

[Dodge_272]

Sid Meier and your sanitised PC happy Civ games failed miserably while insulting its hardcore civ fans.

Creative Assembly produces a winner with Total War: Shogun 2 and it's extensive encyclopaedia, atmosphere, and battle AI.

You were doing well until this part, that's just pathetic fanboyism.

 

[Moff Jerjerrod]

Well, as a long time player of Civ I've seen all the iterations coming out of Sid's brain. You might like 4 and 5, I don't however. He has strayed away from the original ideas by trying to appeal to the masses with 3D graphics and a real time strategy game approach in a turn based strategy game. Why on earth has Civ V been watered down? Where are the governments? Where are the fanatics from Civ2? And finally where are the 'builder' elements in the game?

Now I admit perhaps I'm on honeymoon with Total War right now, but I'm impressed with this title when compared to the fiasco of Empire Total War.

In closing: "When the chimes end, pick up your gun. Go ahead and shoot me colonel, just try."

Plus why insult me as a fanboi when you yourself are a TW fan? Clicky

 

[sophie]

Well, as a long time player of Civ I've seen all the iterations coming out of Sid's brain. You might like 4 and 5, I don't however. He has strayed away from the original ideas by trying to appeal to the masses with 3D graphics and a real time strategy game approach in a turn based strategy game. Why on earth has Civ V been watered down? Where are the governments? Where are the fanatics from Civ2? And finally where are the 'builder' elements in the game?

Coincidentally, this is exactly what some "hardcore TW fans" say about their series ever since RTW came out

 

[Hornblower]

Well, as a long time player of Civ I've seen all the iterations coming out of Sid's brain. You might like 4 and 5, I don't however. He has strayed away from the original ideas by trying to appeal to the masses with 3D graphics and a real time strategy game approach in a turn based strategy game. Why on earth has Civ V been watered down? Where are the governments? Where are the fanatics from Civ2? And finally where are the 'builder' elements in the game?

Now I admit perhaps I'm on honeymoon with Total War right now, but I'm impressed with this title when compared to the fiasco of Empire Total War.

Clicky

I'm with you Moff. I'm both a fan of Civ and TW but found more recent sequels were going for 'style over substance'. Not since Civ III has the series been a truely immersive experience. I've been a fan of TW since Shogun and whilst I've loved elements of all the TW series I've found that the latest had me lock, stock and two smoking barrels from the opening sequence. I've burnt many hours on this one to the point that NTW (my previous fave) is reconciled to the bargain bin.

 

[shadowplay]

[fixed]

 

[Birdjaguar]

I like Shogun 2 a lot. All of its various aspects work pretty well. I like the increased value of trade and sea power and the improved diplo.

I'm running just fine on an I5, windows 7, 4 GB ram and an invidia graphics board of some sort that allows Hi res details. Never crashes.

 

[aronnax]

Does anyone feel that Shogun 2 Total War, although fun and entertaining, is a little too similar to Medieval Total War 2 and even then, a little bit repetitive?

The game was great, but after a while, I felt like I was fighting the same battles again and again and although the game became much more difficult, it's also more difficult because you seem to be fighting more armies rather than harder armies.

I think it's because the Castles and troops are almost always the same.

All the different factions have almost the same troops and many of them usually send in the vanilla soldiers. It gets repetitive after awhile. MTW2 had many different types of armies with different types of units, which makes me alter my tactics differently. But in Shogun 2, they seem to only send in Ashigaru spears and bowman with one-two elite samurai units.

And with every stack of elite samurais are 3 more stacks of basic troops. The castles too. I enjoyed fighting/sieging the many different sized cities or Forts/Castles in MTWII, especially the changes in architecture. In Shogun 2, it's always the same castle map. I also realised that the AI do not upgrade the castles as much as one would hope.

Overall, it's a great game, especially for a newbie to Total War games. But it seems rather repetitive to me.

 

[Yeekim]

I agree: while they gained a lot of depth and immersion by narrowing their focus, they also lost quite a bit variety and replayability.

Still a great game and I still love "legendary" mode.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

So the game is now about half a year old and and I recently saw it in a store for 20€ but I still didn't buy it (it was the day I was getting Deus Ex : Human Revolution ).
Now that the first impression has worn off and it has probably been patched a couple of times I'd like to know what y'all think about the diplomatic AI.
Cunning ? Reliable ? Erratic ? It's a pretty big dealbreaker for me. I like Rome, but I really hate when Egypt makes a trade agreement, declares war the next turn, sues for peace two turns later and then attacks again.
We already had Civ5 bashing in this thread, and I'm not inclined to get another strategy game where I'm constantly and ineptly backstapped by weaker allies who have nothing to gain and everything to lose from their betrayal. I don't mind smart backstabbing as in switching alliances, it's just the "we'll now commit suicides but if it pisses you off it's worth it" that pisses me off.
I read in reviews diplomatic AI in Shogun 2 is much better than in other TW games, but they promised the same for Empire and I'd like to hear it from people who have been playing it for several months now.

 

[aronnax]

So the game is now about half a year old and and I recently saw it in a store for 20€ but I still didn't buy it (it was the day I was getting Deus Ex : Human Revolution ).
Now that the first impression has worn off and it has probably been patched a couple of times I'd like to know what y'all think about the diplomatic AI.
Cunning ? Reliable ? Erratic ? It's a pretty big dealbreaker for me. I like Rome, but I really hate when Egypt makes a trade agreement, declares war the next turn, sues for peace two turns later and then attacks again.
We already had Civ5 bashing in this thread, and I'm not inclined to get another strategy game where I'm constantly and ineptly backstapped by weaker allies who have nothing to gain and everything to lose from their betrayal. I don't mind smart backstabbing as in switching alliances, it's just the "we'll now commit suicides but if it pisses you off it's worth it" that pisses me off.
I read in reviews diplomatic AI in Shogun 2 is much better than in other TW games, but they promised the same for Empire and I'd like to hear it from people who have been playing it for several months now.

It's tough. I tried playing the Tokugawa Daimyo the first time, I got wiped out quickly because the AI is really good at sensing weakness and danger.

 

[Yeekim]

I like Rome, but I really hate when Egypt makes a trade agreement, declares war the next turn, sues for peace two turns later and then attacks again.
We already had Civ5 bashing in this thread, and I'm not inclined to get another strategy game where I'm constantly and ineptly backstapped by weaker allies who have nothing to gain and everything to lose from their betrayal. I don't mind smart backstabbing as in switching alliances, it's just the "we'll now commit suicides but if it pisses you off it's worth it" that pisses me off.

I can feel your pain there. But they have indeed fixed it this time. Diplo AI is both reasonably smart and consistent in this game.
Also, you can at all times follow what factors are contributing to your relations with other daimyos and in which way. It is reasonably alike to diplomatic system in Civ4.

 

[kibbles]

First post in a year I believe But I played Shogun 2, haven't bought it. The single player campaign was totally lack luster to me. The units were too similar. Special units were only differentiated by their name. I miss the diversity of the previous total war games. I'm just not sure whether to blame the game itself, or the era and location. I've heard multilayer is it's main redeeming factor however, so maybe I'm just biased. Basically, some of the same complaints I'm reading from arronax and Maniacal.

 

[scheva007]

SP is a bit boring, cause every faction is almost the same. also Realm divide (where everybody declares war on you halfway), makes campaigns very similar. you wont be likely to replay a faction a second time

Mp is very promising, but has a few issues: Ashigaru units are very cheap and weak, but vetted up they are strong,... and still cheap. somehow it defies the point of unlocking new units. especially matchlock ashigaru's are overpowered

because there is more at stake than ranking (xlan tokens); this tend to bring out the worst in people: camping, ashigaru spam, cavalry spam...

i havent played it in a while. but its still a good game. im gonna play it again when the dlc comes out

 

[shadowplay]

Steam is offering 50% off Shogun 2 until the 27th of this month!

 

[LightSpectra]

Are the DLC worth getting? I'm assuming the two clan things are pointless; is Rise of the Samurai worth $10?