I think to be fair there's a few things working against IP:R no matter what:
1. Classical education has been labeled as outdated or in many western nations as racist. I myself wasn't event aware a classicist was literally a professor in Rome and Greek history back in 2019. There's an appetite for the classical era but not as much as there used to be in western nations.
2. A lot of the sexier events in Rome's history is during the empire BUT there's some events shortly after Julius Caesar that are a tad controversial for a game nowadays with the woke running around trying to screw everyone over. The life of Christ and the expulsion of the Jews from the Holy land would be very hot topics for a game to go near and I get not wanting to touch it since PDX games are all about alt-history and dodging certain paths. I assume it's the same reason there is not Dark Ages game as the conversion of Rome or the birth of Islam are not topics conducive to keeping everyone happy.
3. While the Enlightenment pays a lot of homage to the Roman Republic a historical game about it certainly sets up the reality that you are working towards the Empire and all the corruption and downsides of democracy/republics that were likely less apparent to those of the Enlightenment become apparent in game. One of the neat features of PDX games is they bring history to life in ways you never think. I used to believe in Manifest Destiny, then you play Vic 2 or less so Vic 3 and you realize the American desire to expand West is more out of necessity since the mother country is significantly stronger and still wants Uncle Sam under her bootheel. In other words Manifest Destiny is a quaint excuse to mask a need to secure the Pacific coast ASAP. But back to Roman Republic, it's less idealistic when you are playing the birth of republics realizing the inherent corruption of the system is undercutting your game.
4. IP:R is likely the most complex economy of the EU/CK type game other than maybe Vic 2. It's easy once you get the hang of it but daunting initially. I like this aspect but is it off-putting initially compared to the almost painfully easy EU4 economy? No doubt.
5. Of the Roman Republic the bigger events are the Punic Wars, conquering Greece, and the wars with the Gaul. Of those most of us only know of the Punic Wars really.
6. As far as playing anyone other than Rome who is there really? Greece is busy waiting to get taken over by Rome. Carthage is shown in a friendlier light than they are historically. I think even Oversimplified History dodged their whole child sacrifice thing. As for the Celts/Gaul we only know about them mostly from sources other than themselves. Plus I have enough issues with pretending Turkey could take over the world in HOI4 or the natives of the Americas could just magically find a path to firearms before colonization like EU4. I do think in retrospect the start date should be pushed back to perhaps Alexander's time. That would offer an Alexander DLC playthrough and you'd still have a Rome/Carthage game.
7. Comparisons to Rome: Total War and so forth are like comparing COD to HOI4, PDX titles are not really RTS games.
8. The whole families thing makes sense for Rome it just might have faired better with the 3D sprites of CK.
Overall gun to my head of the PDX titles that I'd call a failure I'd still put Empire of Sin and Vic 3 higher than IP:R. IP:R still does Rome right it's just mostly the republic. Empire of Sin was more like a Michael Jackson Smooth Criminal interpretation of the Prohibition Era in the style of X Com and Vic 3 was I think an attempt to make Victoria more a stand alone economic game but fails in the historical aspects likely because the woke focus so heavily on that time.
- 3
- 1