Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
WH3 = be same engine with improvements shipped into it from TK3 and Troy, engine wise. In ideal world may even run better than 2, and look better across wider range of systems but...yeah, wouldn't hold your breathe on that, prob be same relative graphics fidelity and performance as WH2, as first poster said.
Ultimately comes down to preference imo.
Do you want a more classic style RTS game set in historical setting?
Or do you want Warhammer fantasy battles with daemons etc with combo of real time and 4x gameplay?
Want a simpler or more complex strategy game is how that comparison forms in my brain, as don't think performance of either game be much of a deciding factor in the long run for your rig.
I have hopes for AoE, but it's no WH3.
Edit: Just wait for closer to release reviews about performance.