Preview: Rome II looks bigger, better and bolder than the last Total War outing

• Battlefield graphics and new features are excellent
• There is a focus on internal politics and dilemmas

By Rik Sharma

Published: 10:00 EDT, 1 August 2013 | Updated: 10:00 EDT, 1 August 2013

If you know a lot about the Total War series, it's likely you already play the games and will be eagerly anticipating the release of Rome II on September 3.

Having been lucky enough to head to the city itself to play a preview of the game's 'Prologue', Daily Mail Games can confirm it's been worth the wait.

That wait might only have been two years, when Shogun 2 was released, but for some players Rome itself is the only setting for an empire building game.

Rome: Total War, a classic of its time, was released in September 2004 and Creative Assembly have finally returned 'home'.

As you would expect, the game builds on a decade of development and as such is the most in-depth output yet, with several intriguing new features.

The game's new graphics engine and unit cameras gives you the option to look at battles from any vantage point, meaning you can get down and dirty as spears smash through shields clash in countries from Scotland to Egypt.

Bone-splintering: Battles can be seen from any angle or height, to look at the bigger picture or the nitty gritty

It certainly feels grand. Watching arrows reign down from above on huge armies, men demoralised by the deaths of their allies turn and flee.

The soldiers feel more real, they have facial expressions, and this works across thousands of troops.

And the level of control is frightening; you tell your men exactly what to do, organise their battle formations and so on and so forth.

But where the game has really progressed is on the empire-building front. There is a new system of internal politics and the choices you face will be tougher than ever.

Creative director Mike Simpson told us at the preview event:

He said: 'The politics is interesting and different from anything we’ve done before. There are internal politics going on in Rome and depending on how you deal with them, it could make you more or less popular, and it affects your campaign gameplay.

'We’re doing more with the system of dilemmas that we’ve had in previous games. This is where there’ll be an event where you get a choice. It gives you the kind of choices they actually had to face - and you get the consequences!

'Here’s an example… I don’t want to give anything away, so it's something that probably isn’t in the game.

'You’ll get a dilemma where your advisor tells you that your wife is having an affair with the captain of the Praetorian guard. You have a choice. You can execute the advisor, you can execute your wife, you can execute the captain of the guard, or you can do nothing and say it’s probably just a rumour.

'Depending on what you do, there’ll be consequences. If you take on the captain you may end up with a revolt because the rest of the Praetorians rise up against you, and so on.

'The Romans were great for that kind of thing. Whatever you imagine might have happened, the reality is more bizarre.'

And yet, despite there being greater depth to the empire building side of the game, players might not need to spend as long conducting administrative tasks.

Mike explained: 'We’ve done a lot to make the management burden fairly light. We talk a lot about the choices we put in front of the player. Are they actually real choices, or are they just giving them a chore to do?

'Early in the series you used to have to go round cities and adjust the tax rates individually – you don’t have to do that anymore. You can just do it for the province. There’s less red tape!'

Indeed, although the games are lauded for being careful with historical detail - moreso than other titles at least - they do not bow to it at the cost of the gameplay experience.

'One of our rules is – we are always historically accurate where we can be. But if there’s ever a conflict between historical accuracy and gameplay, gameplay wins,' said Mike.

Raring to go: A shot of the overview screen when preparing for battle (above) and lining up to fight (below)

'That doesn’t mean we’ll take huge liberties. We’ll take small liberties. I mean, we’ve had arguments about the length of a Carthaginian spear!

'It doesn’t really matter that much, but we try our best to get that right because it affects how the game plays out - did the Carthaginians fight in the Phalanx formation with long spears? Or were they shorter, like the Barbarians?

'One of the cool things about history is that if you follow it closely, you always end up with a balanced game, because history itself, at any particular point in time, it was balanced.

'The borders were where they were because the forces were equal on either side of them.

'History helps us out - we don’t have to invent anything. If you invent stuff you end up inventing uber units that kill everything.

'There’s no real conflict between history and gameplay. One of our core principles is that we’re not repeating what actually happened, we’re taking a starting point in history and letting the player decide.'

This sentiment was echoed firmly by lead designer James Russell.

He said: 'We’re not making a history lesson. Our goal is to immerse the player in an authentic setting and part of what historical authenticity does is deliver immersion.

'It’s not about historical detail that a person might not get, but it all creates a sense of authenticity.

'It makes the setting feel real for players, even if they don’t know much about the era.'

This time around there is a focus on human tales - even though the game operates around how you play it, rather than a scripted story.

James explanined: 'What we want is to introduce story fragments that really bind you to different characters, interesting plot lines. To create a sense of political rivalry, where, you know, "this guy, he’s from this other family but he’s one of my best generals. If he has another victory he’s going to get too big for his boots and decide to march on Rome!"

'But the key thing is to make it respond to how you’re playing the game and not a rigid storyline.

'So each time you play the game you’re getting a different experience – there’s an incredible amount of replay value I think. That’s what we strive to achieve. We want to make it about human beings and not just colouring the map.'

But colouring the map is quite fun too. Especially given the game's greater visual aesthetics and new battle ideas.

There are plenty of new battle features, including an army being able to fight against a navy in the same battlefield over a port.

Essentially the game is bigger and bolder than ever before - from the battlefield to the boardroom (or the Roman equivalent).

But what if you're new to the series? Is it too late to get involved? It does seem a lot to take in.

Mike disagreed. He said: 'The size of the game might seem quite daunting but it doesn’t need to be. You can go in and play for a few hours and have a great time.

'Yes, you might well get engaged and end up spending tens of hours on it, maybe even 100 or so… that could happen. But that’s up to you.

'Enjoy the spectacle and the gameplay, it’s fun. It’s not hard to get into but there’s a lot there if you want to find it all.'