The Historical Accuracy of History Great Empires Rome.
Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 6:20 am
Hey, everyone. Just thought I'd put in my two (American) cents. I have a Master's Degree in History, and of course studied some Roman History getting it. About two and a half to three years ago I picked up the game title for the NDS mentioned in the subject line. The guy at GameStop evidently had not played it because he indicated that I would beat it in a few hours.
Well, I brought this beauty home, popped it in the DS and promply got STOMPED! And stomped. And stomped. Wash, rinse, repeat... For two and one-half years I got STOMPED.
Why was this happening? I'm normally good at games like this, you know, like Civilization Revolution DS, and such-like. It simplly made no sense that a strat game set on Easy should do this to me.
One day I was reading a college text on the History of Rome, by Tenney Frank, copyright 1923. He was well respected in his day. Anyway, I was reading about the Roman conquest and unification of Italy.
I decided to relax and on a whim, broke out the DS and tried the Italian campaign playing the Romans, historical setting, Easy level. I had always played in England before.
As I played, I began to notice how accurate the maps were. As I thought about what I had read in Frank's book, I began to realise that the game was playing exactly as the history did. For example, feeding the City of Rome was never easy, and neither is it here. Other cities have their own troubles.
I began to realise that the people who made this game knew A LOT about Roman History, and brought as much of it to the game as they could. THAT is why I had been getting stomped. In Civ Rev DS, you make your own history. In this game (Great Empires Rome) you play according to the broad dictates of history.
Its basically just a port of Legion Gold to the DS in many ways. And I know a lot of DS gamers didn't like it. I think that is because the learning curve on the game is too high for most DS players, who are young persons. And even adults using a DS don't expect strat games originally designed for a computer.
I discovered that, playing the Romans trying to unite Italy in the historic setting, if I think like an Ancient Roman, I can possibly win. Well, I started with two or three cities, and now have fourteen.
But the accuracy amazes me. They had some brilliant minds there. I mean, they even got it right as to which cities produce more of one resource than another.
I know most Americans didn't take to the game. Americans are dumb that way. They usually do NOT like strats on the DS.
And the attention to history details is just like, WOW! How many troops can a city make, feed, garrisoned, or active? How much food v. metal v. wood does a city produce?l And the game knows this all. Given that, you have to know what a city should be producing in order to optimise national strength.
Ultimately, this is a game such that it deserves the highest accolades. I would explain gameplay. But I'm exhausted and need sleep. But to be able to BE an Emperor out of my pocket, that is just awesome. If anyone wants to know more, post here or PM me.
There is one weakness to the game, viz, its save feature , which can only hold ONE game at a time. I reesoved cthis problem yesterday by buying a second copy of the game card. Normally I would not own two of a game. But being able to hold two games in Save is good. I might even buy a third in order to have the standard Three Save function. But two will do for the moment.
Well, I brought this beauty home, popped it in the DS and promply got STOMPED! And stomped. And stomped. Wash, rinse, repeat... For two and one-half years I got STOMPED.
Why was this happening? I'm normally good at games like this, you know, like Civilization Revolution DS, and such-like. It simplly made no sense that a strat game set on Easy should do this to me.
One day I was reading a college text on the History of Rome, by Tenney Frank, copyright 1923. He was well respected in his day. Anyway, I was reading about the Roman conquest and unification of Italy.
I decided to relax and on a whim, broke out the DS and tried the Italian campaign playing the Romans, historical setting, Easy level. I had always played in England before.
As I played, I began to notice how accurate the maps were. As I thought about what I had read in Frank's book, I began to realise that the game was playing exactly as the history did. For example, feeding the City of Rome was never easy, and neither is it here. Other cities have their own troubles.
I began to realise that the people who made this game knew A LOT about Roman History, and brought as much of it to the game as they could. THAT is why I had been getting stomped. In Civ Rev DS, you make your own history. In this game (Great Empires Rome) you play according to the broad dictates of history.
Its basically just a port of Legion Gold to the DS in many ways. And I know a lot of DS gamers didn't like it. I think that is because the learning curve on the game is too high for most DS players, who are young persons. And even adults using a DS don't expect strat games originally designed for a computer.
I discovered that, playing the Romans trying to unite Italy in the historic setting, if I think like an Ancient Roman, I can possibly win. Well, I started with two or three cities, and now have fourteen.
But the accuracy amazes me. They had some brilliant minds there. I mean, they even got it right as to which cities produce more of one resource than another.
I know most Americans didn't take to the game. Americans are dumb that way. They usually do NOT like strats on the DS.
And the attention to history details is just like, WOW! How many troops can a city make, feed, garrisoned, or active? How much food v. metal v. wood does a city produce?l And the game knows this all. Given that, you have to know what a city should be producing in order to optimise national strength.
Ultimately, this is a game such that it deserves the highest accolades. I would explain gameplay. But I'm exhausted and need sleep. But to be able to BE an Emperor out of my pocket, that is just awesome. If anyone wants to know more, post here or PM me.
There is one weakness to the game, viz, its save feature , which can only hold ONE game at a time. I reesoved cthis problem yesterday by buying a second copy of the game card. Normally I would not own two of a game. But being able to hold two games in Save is good. I might even buy a third in order to have the standard Three Save function. But two will do for the moment.