[Combat Realism] Total War: Rome Remastered vs Rome 2

Comment for the algorithm

It still annoys me how troops in Rome II slide around. Particularly when they get hit with the cavalry charge it’s like they’re being pushed back on ice skates.

Hoi4 world battle royale but everyone have random strengthening

You need playlists organized in categories bro.

ROME TOTAL WARS REMASTERED PIKEMEN VS THE SPARTANS IS ABSOLUTLEY MORE INTENSE AND FASTER PACED! IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT ROME 2'S PACE ITS MUCH MORE SLOWER AND TAKES MORE TIME WITH THE CINEMATIC FIGHTS. I PERSONALLY PREFER ROME REMASTERD

I like more realism and better presentation of the army and map campaigns graphically than better battle system and campaign system , that's why I prefer rome 2 than this remastered of rome 1

Please do ultra tech puppets in hoi4

Excellent video!

Ultra Tech Argentina

I don't get the focus so many people have on the drawings. I played Rome total war (not the remastered) and Rome 2 and imo the gameplay on the original Rome was much better.

Forget about the drawings, focus on gameplay.

Although i prefer the old total wars battle system and calculations, to me they felt grittier and more grounded, nothing will top those MAGNIFICENT cav charges from the modern games. So satisfying seeing enemies getting trampled and thrown in the air

Damn i wished they added some battle animations to Rome1

In the Rome 2 clip most of the men didnt brace against the cavalry charge. They just stand there looking bored..

Rome 2 battle animations with Rome 1 campaign would be ideal

This showed up in my Google News feed :)

Dont be nostalgic ignorant. Rome 2 is better in all ways.

Rome 2 should only be played with the Divide et Impera mod.

I played both Rome and Rome II. Rome II with Dei as a mod is far far ahead of Rome remastered.

I hate how they just go into 1v1s. Ruins the immersion

the rome 2 in the right is still good

Um, which is which?

What an underrated comparison.

Spartans....depicted not wearing armor. They wore armor and they were not super soldiers in reality. In fact they were just little above average at times and average mostly or below average at times.
Spartan myth - research it.

Why is it so different in Rome Remastered? I own both but it seems the animations and movement are just flat out better in Rome 2

The new Rome remastered 1 its a scam

I was fucking scammed with Rome remastered...

What's annoying for me about Rome 2 is that units tend to make one massive clusterfck and I can't see what's happening nor can I enjoy the combat animations

Rome 1>rome 2. Unit collision just makes such a big difference.

Can we have a Rome 3 now please? I'm tired of the current trend of remasters. If I want to replay Rome 1, I will install it. Rome 2 was shite for years until Divide Et Impera and some other mods and now it is finally approaching the game it should've been in 2013. However, the formulae needs updating and more immersion. Rome 3 should 1. Feature blood at the get go. None of this waiting months for a DLC just give it at the start. 2. Diplomacy and campaign map AI. These need overhauling. Too often diplomatic moves and discussions would have little effect on the campaign. I want to be able to select responses in meetings with faction leaders that hold weight and cause them to actually react. If I forge an alliance and ask for military help, I want them to actually turn up to the fight. If I upset a faction, I want that to have actual consequences that hold more weight. This time I want proper CGI actors not a cartoon animation amd simple text in diplomatic encounters. Taking and planning strategy with allies should also be possible with them actually following the strategy you set. 3. I want PVP online campaigns 4. Most controversial of all.....I want arcade combat elements built in that can affect a battles outcome. We started seeing elements of this with 1st person cannon fire in Shogun 2. I want to be able to take over a troop type or general and partake in the combat myself if I choose. There are plenty of possible mechanics for this combat - Assassins Creed, For Honour etc. I want tonbe able to develop a general's combat abilities and fight my way through to kill the other general or even better, faction leader if they are on the battlefield. Same with assassinations - these should be difficult but achievable as AC type missions.

Rome 2 👍Rome Remastered 👎Wish they make a Medieval 2 Remastered

Rome II DEI mod is the best.

I love the Rome II animations but I'd still take Rome I anyday of the week over Rome II

I wouldn't necessarily call the fancy 1v1 animations in R2 a sign of 'combat realism'. Personally I would love to see units which are 'in formation' almost pushing against an opposing unit when face to face and for there to be very few casualties. But when attacking from the side, rear or chasing down a retreating enemy - then you could see some cool animations and more casualties.

Problem is that there will always be a trade off between arcade style gameplay and 'real' combat.

Soul vs soulless

Yo prefiero el rome 2 total war en vez de rome reamaster

What is waht

Wich side is wich

Remastered versions was more of an "Age of Empires" combat animation

Thanks for showing me why I shouldn't purchase either game...

A big thing my brother pointed out. That LITERALLY, NO ONE IN THE COMMENT SECTION IS POINTING OUT! Is, the reason Rome 2 is better than Rome 1. Was because Rome 1 was painfully easy. Routing armies could be down by anyone who could operate a mouse and keyboard. And, battles lacked much skill outside of, "Watch for pikemen", and "missiles".

This is coming from my brother who can beat any Total war game on any difficulty. And my self who is really garbage at the game. But can easily beat Rome 1's grand campaign. Because it's THAT easy.

Rome 2

They should have made total war Rome Remake

I think rome total war 2 calvary charge should be paired side by side with divide and conquers silver swan knights of dol amroths charge lol very similar.

Is the battles as clean and as good looking as say attila and thronnes of Britannia?

Rome 1: Cavalry charges and immediately takes out a good number of men. Rome 2: Cavalry charges, sends men flying and most of them get up because of the HP system.

I think what makes Rome 2's animations so ethereal is that there's no clear connection between cause and effect. In Rome 1, when somebody dies it's clearly the result of getting stabbed, whereas when looking at two phalanx formations engaged in melee, characters will spontaneously die while stabbing is going on. It's unreal.

in rome 1 a strike kills a man, or it doesn't. In rome 2 there's a more complex health point system to allow for matched combat animations.

Rome2's graphics better than Rome Remastered but Rome Remastered takes up more space than Rome2 :D

shogun 2 has the best animations when compared to any other total war games. i stil play shogun 2 rome 2 cav charges are alos very bad

I get that there are underlying differences between Rome 2's warscape engine and the one used by Rome 1/Remastered, and I acknowledge there are some advantages with the legacy title. But I really don't agree with the sentiment that Rome 1's combat was inherently better than Rome 2's in all aspects. Rome 1 had horrible pathfinding and robotic-looking animations - good for its time, but certainly not comparable to more modern games.

The hitpoint system in Rome 2 was poorly implemented, but the combat functions well enough on normal difficulty (without the insane stat buffs applied at higher difficulty levels). That issue aside, I don't see anything glaringly wrong with Rome 2's combat in the side-by-side video. Rome 2 certainly doesn't "look" worse than Rome 1.