Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Champions of Atlantis
verdantrex
Member UncommonPosts: 100
Here's the URL for a new MMO called "Champions of Atlantis" in development from a Australian company called Epiphany:
http://www.championsofatlantis.com/
From there you can read about the game and see concept art... it sort of looks like a Greek version of Gods and Heroes, except it's not as instanced, not heavy on group tactics, and emphasizes PvP mostly. Which I guess means it's not really like G&H at all. Still, given the more-or-less similarities between Greek and Roman mythology, I thought it might be of interest here.
V
Comments
"Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves." ~ Ronald Reagan
id rather play IN a greek world than a roman world since most of the stuff is Greek ...
( the gods, medusa, the villains, creatures, demons ect.. even the architecture .. everything really, romans just copied it all .. so its like a second hand wannabe kinda thing ...)
plus the Greek generals were cooler... ( xenephon the mad stranger, pericles, Leonidas the guy who fought off 1 million persians with 300 men)
but honestly this game looks like vapoerware .. EXTREME vaporware
I do fail to understand why Perpetual made Gods & Heroes a Roman game considering The Romans stole their mythology from the Greeks. Why not go to the original source?
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/77967
The primary
reason we chose to go with a Rome-based game over a Greek one lies in the fact
that Rome was a far greater empire and as such invoked conflict with the
nations around it--all while maintaining the mythology and lore that people
have come to love. No matter how we feel about the Romans and their
"acquisition" of other culture's ideologies and religions, they were
one of the most influential and powerful cultures to have ever existed in
history.
By tapping into a culture that is so rich we are afforded a timeframe that
people are not only familiar with, but also fascinated by. We are able to also utilize the nations that
were at war with Rome
for future expansions, content, and story ideas! By going with the Greek culture we feel that
we would not have been able to expand as richly. The other bonus to using Rome, circa 300 BC, is the fact that we can
utilize the Greeks in a future expansion, giving players the opportunity to
experience that race!
I hope that
helps!
well that depends on your take of history lol ... alexanders empire which was short lived had about just as much square mileage as romes, but it stretched to the absolute far end of the known earth, where as rome encapsulated only the known areas ...
also ... the true fall of rome happened in the 400's with the dividing of the empire ... for the next thousand years, power was once again placed in the east ( with the capitol being moved to constantinople ) and the entire east was greek speaking and of Greek ancestry, in fact more people within the empire of rome spoke greek than latin, its why the language survived today ...
this eastern empire which schools group under "roman" was not roman at all but Byzantine, which encapsulated more land than the western "fallen" half, and also rose to be a much greater military and economic power then the west was, at that adjacent time...
the " dark ages" never applied to the east ....... they were able to preserve the knowledge, rational logical thinking, and scholarly culture of the ancient greeks and romans behind them ... where as the west fell into a period of great intellectual darkness, the churches in the west burned books and burned people ( italian and spanish inquisitions) ect, people were poor, it fell into an obsolete archaic political structure ( feudalism) and 95% of the people were illterate...
the byzantine empire thrived from 400 ad to 1400 ad, and ive never understood fully the lazyness or reluctance to seperate the two firmly within scholastic studies .. could be political motivation ... could just be lazyness ... or combining the two out of likeness .. but they were very different empires, with a very different pool of nobility ...
so taking away the last thousand years of " rome" and rightfully placing it within the byzantine " Greek" empire and culture, realising that rome's original conception, ideology, politics, military strategy ect, was an extention of the Greek model, and then seeing their mythology and literature as well were an exact replica of the greek model , and last but not least seeing that latin in fact died with the fall of the west, where as greek is still spoken today ( in a very close form) ...
( not to mention very few of the roman scholars every achieved the notoriety of the Greek ones )
it is very arguable that the romans were " greater" heh ...its really opinion and frame of mind fragmented by historical unaccuracy
but that doesnt mean i dont think the choice to choose a Roman background is bad ...i love all history, all cultures ect ...
Actually, I was going to say, it depends on what your definition of "great" is. Rome was clearly greater than Greece in terms of longevity and engineering an empire. Yes Alexander, who was Macedonian, conquered most of the known and much of the "unknown" world, but his unified empire died with him. If you accept the traditional date of Rome's founding, 753 B.C., and consider that the last remnants of its empire survived until the fall of Constantinople in 1453 A.D., that's a continuous lifespan of over 2000 years, longer than any empire with the possible exception of Egypt.
And not only did Rome gain an empire through conquest, they also unified it with an unparalleled infrastructure in antiquity. Their road and aqueduct systems were amazing feats of engineering.
However, culturally, I don't think there's any question that Rome was inferior to Greece, and the Romans knew it. When their soldiers entered Greece and destroyed the city of Corinth in 149 B.C., they were astounded the superiority of Greek architecture, literature, philosophy, etc. And that was the primary factor as to why the Romans adopted so much of the Greek culture even though they had conquered Greece militarily. Thus the old saying, "First Rome conquered Greece, then Greece conquered Rome."
Not only did Rome adopt Greek culture, but Virgil's Aeneid was written as a direct response to Rome's encounter with Greece. The Romans were ashamed that the Greeks had a national epic in The Illiad and The Odyssey, and The Aeneid was Rome's answer to these great poems.
I am like you NeuroXI, history is a passion of mine.