Dynasty Tactics: Discussion Thread

[James]

Official discussion thread for discussion of Koei’s Dynasty Tactics.

KMA Home Page: http://kongming.net/dt/
English Home Page: http://koei.com/launch/Dynasty_Tactics/
Japanese Home Page: http://www.gamecity.ne.jp/products/prod ... /sansenki/

[Duncan]

I'll kick this off.

In terms of pure gameplay, I think it was better than it's sequel.

[Mei Zhen]

I recommend the game for people who are not necessarily new to the Three Kingdoms, but folks who are somewhere between DW and RoTK in terms of involvement. The RoTK series is excellent and extremely demanding in terms of management, whereas Dynasty Warriors is light-hearted fare which you can play without any knowledge of the period and still enjoy. DT is somewhere between the two in that you get some backstory, but the crux of the game is the chess-like battle system.

There is a lot of replay value in the game, though it's not exactly something you might want to spend five straight hours on - it is a tad repetitive if you play that way. But there are so many storylines to unlock depending on what decisions that you make, so you really feel like your decisions make a difference. This alone sets it apart from its sequel, and is a great strength of the title.

I'll get into specifics if anyone is interested, so if you are, let me know.

[Duncan]

What she said!

Plus its the only game (apart from Final Fantasy VII) I've picked up and replayed through to the end with such joy at rediscovering an old friend. Currently replaying DT2, RO3K8, DW4, LMA Manager, PoP and others and while these are all fun, I still get more pleasure from DT1.

[Callum]

I must say, it will last alot longer and is more challenging than it's sequel, however it can at sometimes get a little to frustrating, with you on a victory streak with one good army, that army looses, the enemy push you back with hordes of armies with officers all on high levels and gameover. Good fun to play mind you......

[MarvelousLingTong!!!!!!]

I play the second one more because i owned it first and when i got the first one i didnt like the system of leveling up based on what unit you used.

[SlickSlicer]

I play the second one more because i owned it first and when i got the first one i didnt like the system of leveling up based on what unit you used.

I liked the second one a lot better as well. There were graphical improvements and the game seemed to be overall less tedious than the first one. I thought the stories were better as well.

[Mei Zhen]

I don't know, I personally found DT2's storylines to be much weaker than DT1's: though the epilogues kept things interesting by giving a bonus to players who'd been there, done that. I just think that a lot of the scenarios were too limited, forcing you along a linear path to a certain end, rather than allowing your decisions to make a difference in terms of outcome. It's sort of the same difference as DW3 to DW4: open-ended missions with tons of freedom to narrow, path-oriented missions with one possible outcome. For example, you could form alliances with forces that are not actively involved in the storyline in DT1. You could also determine your opponent in the final battles based on your decisions (and, if you're Cao Cao, you can choose to fight everyone!). In DT2, there isn't a huge array of choices in terms of storyline, and the "Xiahou Dun Rebels" mission just left a very bad taste in my mouth.

That said, however, I absolutely love the ratings system. It gives a nice added incentive to do well, or just to play differently, which by itself is already rewarding, not to mention prize items the first few times you play the game. I also love the fact that you can train officers in different tactics, removing those useless guys with five ambushes that you had in DT1. The friendship system is nice, and I enjoy playing with armies full of friendly officers for their added tactics and occasional dialogue.

Overall, though, I'm mixed about which I like better. 1 is better in terms of choices and replay, while 2 is better in gameplay and customizability. Different strokes, I suppose.

[MarvelousLingTong!!!!!!]

I don't know, I personally found DT2's storylines to be much weaker than DT1's: though the epilogues kept things interesting by giving a bonus to players who'd been there, done that. I just think that a lot of the scenarios were too limited, forcing you along a linear path to a certain end, rather than allowing your decisions to make a difference in terms of outcome. It's sort of the same difference as DW3 to DW4: open-ended missions with tons of freedom to narrow, path-oriented missions with one possible outcome. For example, you could form alliances with forces that are not actively involved in the storyline in DT1. You could also determine your opponent in the final battles based on your decisions (and, if you're Cao Cao, you can choose to fight everyone!). In DT2, there isn't a huge array of choices in terms of storyline, and the "Xiahou Dun Rebels" mission just left a very bad taste in my mouth.

That said, however, I absolutely love the ratings system. It gives a nice added incentive to do well, or just to play differently, which by itself is already rewarding, not to mention prize items the first few times you play the game. I also love the fact that you can train officers in different tactics, removing those useless guys with five ambushes that you had in DT1. The friendship system is nice, and I enjoy playing with armies full of friendly officers for their added tactics and occasional dialogue.

Overall, though, I'm mixed about which I like better. 1 is better in terms of choices and replay, while 2 is better in gameplay and customizability. Different strokes, I suppose.

I hate the Xiahou Dun rebels one because he is usually my most powerful officer and since he is a computer he has more troops my god i had to constantly confuse him.

[LiuBeiwasGreat]

My favorite thing about Dynasty Tactics was the branching storyline. The fact that i could choose to go the the historical path or modify things to suit myself really gave the game more replay value i felt. I could mix and match my choices and see if i could get something diffrent to happen. Plus i felt that the consequences of your actions actually went with the personality of the character that you had chosen. The only scenerio where i felt the computer acted in a way that the actual character wouldn't have is when Yuan Shao takes over the capital at Liu Bei's request after you decide to give Xu to Yuan Shao. I think he would have been too indecisive to do that and would have consolidated his holdings instead. Other wise things happened like i thought they would and i really enjoyed this.
As Mei Zhen said i also felt that DT2 was too linear. While i enjoy a good linear storyline (hell one of my favorite games is Final Fantasy 4) when DT1 gave me so much control and then DT took it away from me i was quite upset. Plus i felt that the characters didn't act like they would in the novel anymore. Xiahou Dun would never betray Cao Cao no matter what he did (Sima Yi maybe but not Xiahou Dun) Even with Sun Ce rising to power and making gains in the central plains Liu Bei would never ally with Cao Cao. (I did like the part in Cao Cao's story when Liu Bei leaves you to "fight" Ma Teng but instead allies with him to fight you)
Also Cao Cao's eplogue where Liu Bei is the leader of every single rebellion against you gets kinda annoying.

If they combine the enhancements of DT2's gameplay with the branching storylines of DT1 and make some further enhacements to gameplay for the third one then the next one will be fantastic (perhaps they can add Yuan Shao to the characters since he is the only one with unique looking soldiers who is not playable)