I like most others, will not blindly purchase a game. im not 15 anymore. When they decide they want to let people try this game then maybe i will get it, if it doesn't suck balls!
Pretty fuckin annoying there's no info on where/how to get a demo.. or is there not one & the title of this is a lie? Sorry, but I can't afford to just buy every game I'm interested in/need to check this out via a demo first!
On a different note, I heard originally there was a campaign mode too, is that gone now?
This game is actually more like Mount & Blade combat system. If you like medieval combat, also check Chivalry: Medieval Warfare. This game is a lot more focused on melee combat, and it has the same medieval feel to it. I can't decide between the two, so I'm just gonna buy both
Oy.....AGAIN with this stupid president's advertisements!! Can I get ONE FUCKING SECOND away from this idiot??!!
Oh yeah....the game looks GREAT!!!
I am reluctant to get my hopes up, after so many disappointing game releases by various AAA publishers. But this game looks plain awesome and I can't wait to get my gauntlets on this.
Okay...the English Renaissance is not "ancient" history or warfare. Would WWII be called "ancient" as well?
I realize it's an early build but it needs way way more work. The animations looks just like they do in Mount&Blade and so I guess they will stay that way in the final build as well. Needs more variations in armor, and kill animations are way to long and shouldn't be something you'll have to do every time in order to kill someone when your ass is on the line while performing it. Also more features than just running around killing would be nice since that aspect alone is to weak to represent this game as a full worthy experience (imo), like adrianomar kind of pointed out allready.
If it's just battles, I'm not too interested. However, if it's got politics, strategy, and some building aspects, I'll get it for sure (i.e. M&B)
this is exactly like Mount and Blade Warband except it doesn't look as fun in terms of combat or scale of the battles... sorry, looks kinda bleh
I'm pretty sure M&B2 will have Multiplayer. To be perfectly honest, M&B has a better MP combat system than what they show here. But I guess I like realism and they surely lack it here. Medieval Battlefield? Yeah, not hopeful.
@krazyxazn actualy mikail announced mount and blade 2 when he worked for taleworlds but then he switched over to fatshark to make war of the roses, fat shark made lead and gold. gordon van dyck used to work on battlefield games. enough to tell you that this game is a mix of mount and blade and battlefield. paradox are producers of this game and also produce m&b. my guess is that m&b 2 will be more focused on singleplayer and possibly co-op, while war of the roses is a sequel of sorts to warbands multiplayer. they have said battles will have alot of player but no specifics. However since we see there are 8 in a squad and 8 squads, my money is that this game will be aiming for 128 player. you may think thats alot if your a console player, however this is a pretty standard about on mod servers (ie crpg mod for warband).
@dinosaur-123 No this isn't the new Mount & Blade. It a different game. One of the devs for War of the Roses was a member of the original M&B however. Mount and Blade 2 was announced last year by Mikail Yazbeck, designer and producer of Taleworlds Entertainment.
This looks like a casualized version of Mount and Blade that they came up with in a month. rlly cool executionz lol!
looks good for pre-alpha. Hope the attacks will be more fluid, as if a person was to come at me with a sword held in that stance so early i would know exactly where to hit them.
@charlesdao Its actually made by Fatshark not Paradox.....
@Joe295159 Its not the same nothing like mount and blade just the attack animations and walk animations XD
@Santasquid2 the games they publish... Not develop