Their main diversion from previous games is that heroes and generals play a greater role in the combat. Three Kingdom’s battle simulations are just fine. Battles are always mini-dramas in which I feel like I’m in control, even as the calculating numbers of hit points and buffs, crunch their way through flesh and bone. I like to zoom high above the battlefield to take the broader view, and then zoom right into some copse, where a few hundred soldiers are fighting hand-to-hand at my direction. There’s always been something thrilling about these engagements and Three Kingdoms is no exception. Their main attraction is an ever-improving and always impressive war engine, in which I manage a battle in real time, pointing my squadrons of horse, range, artillery, and infantry in the right direction, while hoping that my tactics are better than the enemy’s. These are the basics of all Total War games. I build buildings and I learn learnings, all of which yield me more money, more food, and better soldiers. I take care to maintain a well-fed and well-behaved populace.
I use my new possessions as taxation pools, which fund more armies. If I win, my empire grows and my rival’s diminishes. I plot expansion and march my armies into neighboring domains. Like its predecessors, Three Kingdoms puts me in charge of a fiefdom, from which my grand aspirations take shape. Its constituent parts are in a state of chaotic intra-fighting. While other Total War games have focused on the Romans or the Shogunate or Napoleon, Three Kingdoms takes us to China, at the end of the Han dynasty. This game is the latest in a long line of interesting, flawed, occasionally dull historical simulations of superpower administration and warfare. Total War: Three Kingdoms Creative Assembly/Sega Calculating Numbersīefore it came out, I thought I might admire Three Kingdoms, but drooling adoration is not the reaction I had anticipated.
0 kommentar(er)
