Empire Earth II

 PC
User Score
7.1

Mixed or average reviews- based on 119 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 64 out of 119
  2. Mixed: 36 out of 119
  3. Negative: 19 out of 119
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. Jackie_Jackson
    May 26, 2022
    8
    Мои вертолёты были сбиты камнями и палками но Я смог отомстить ядерной боеголовкой потому что Я здесь главный альфа сомец
  2. FRIST_008
    Jun 23, 2021
    8
    после идеальной первой части,изменения в этой части я воспринял негативно, не в штыки так как игра всё ещё хорошая
  3. Nikitosss95
    Feb 13, 2021
    10
    I have never played EE1, however I grew up playing this game and I loved it, especially the campaign; EE3 is pure garbage though
  4. FidelGastro
    May 16, 2020
    9
    One of the best RTS i played years ago as a child.

    This game is simply a masterpiece. I love the huge amount of "epochs" - each has different units and building types.
    To be honest graphics could be better even for 2005 game.
    This game is simply one of the greatest.

    If i had to desribe it in one sentence its a unknown brother of W3,AoE and SC.
    9/10
  5. Wiebe
    Feb 26, 2020
    6
    Watered down more simple version that gets boring very quickly after some time
  6. Genek13
    Nov 20, 2019
    9
    Sequel to one of the best RTS in history, which improves everything comparing to the first one.
    Visuals and sound design was very good back then.
    MP fun to play as hell - especially with friends.
  7. Lapinas
    Oct 21, 2019
    7
    While the original game plays it very safe with the actual gameplay, the sequel is much more interesting in terms of concept.

    Graphics are improved, but not very markedly - the textures are still bland, units still move around by floating. The gameplay, however, has multiple elements that are more common in 4X or Grand Strategy games rather than RTS ones. The map is divided into    While the original game plays it very safe with the actual gameplay, the sequel is much more interesting in terms of concept.

    Graphics are improved, but not very markedly - the textures are still bland, units still move around by floating.

    The gameplay, however, has multiple elements that are more common in 4X or Grand Strategy games rather than RTS ones. The map is divided into terittories, which are claimed by building a City Center in them, which is important for your population cap since you can only build a few houses (further, buildings are built much slower in unclaimed teritory). Diplomacy involves making possibly quite complicated alliance agreements (to the point of determining a specific period of real time during which players are allies). To aid team play, a feature called "War Plans" was introduced, where one can lay out specific routes on the map to help coordinate players' army movements. Periodically, "crowns" are given out to players for achieving top scores in a certain category (Military, Economic, etc.), which allows players to activate special bonuses related to the field (for instance, Military crown allows you to boost your infantry units). However, the most interesting feature by far is having a second screen. Along with your primary display that takes up most of the screen, you can also set a smaller screen to keep watch on a certain location at the bottom of your screen, essentially acting as a second pair of eyes on you, which is a feature I've personally haven't seen in other many other strategy games - certainly not RTS games.

    However, the game still has issues. While the era bloat has been reduced, it's been replaced with resource bloat, because along with the four classic resources (Food, wood, stone and gold), you now also have Tin, Iron, Saltpeter, Oil and Uranium, resources that also rotate in and out depending on the age you're in (for instance, Tin only appears in eras 1-6) - an unnecessary complication to say the least. Combat is still uninteresting, mostly revolving around direct counters, and techs are mostly just stats bonuses, which are also era-locked - you can't get techs from era 1 if you're from era 2.

    Overall, it's an RTS with novel concepts that's worth checking out for the curious, at least in the numerous campaigns, though it hasn't aged very well, much like the other EE games.    … Expand
  8. babaganush
    Apr 24, 2014
    8
    i felt the game was insanely difficult to take out 1-2 computers fighting against you and i would normally have 2-3 allies, so a full blown 8 person match i can imagine would take forever, but i enjoyed the game and still have it, others complain its too slow and hard but i seen reviews for empire earth 3 which i have never played and all the reviews claim its too easy and dumbed down, soi felt the game was insanely difficult to take out 1-2 computers fighting against you and i would normally have 2-3 allies, so a full blown 8 person match i can imagine would take forever, but i enjoyed the game and still have it, others complain its too slow and hard but i seen reviews for empire earth 3 which i have never played and all the reviews claim its too easy and dumbed down, so you cant please everyone.… Expand
  9. llamayarmybar
    Sep 16, 2013
    4
    One sentence: "Way to miss the point."

    You know Empire Earth as a whole was a great game and Steel Studios progressed far beyond it, even simplifying their games as they went along. Whoever was behind the pseudo sequel went all out, they nauseated players with a barbaric and ancient bloated resource system that did not make things simpler, it did not make things more fun and along with    One sentence: "Way to miss the point."

    You know Empire Earth as a whole was a great game and Steel Studios progressed far beyond it, even simplifying their games as they went along. Whoever was behind the pseudo sequel went all out, they nauseated players with a barbaric and ancient bloated resource system that did not make things simpler, it did not make things more fun and along with a brutally unfair or completely stupid AI, the game is hardly playable. First off, its visuals are very good, even considering its age, second off, this has nothing to do with the core gameplay mechanics being a chore, even for RTS genre standards. It gets nothing right in the economic aspects, it tacks on several new resources that absolutely HAVE to be used to construct different units. It does away with a simple Epoch upgrade system as well. Instead you must now send villagers into a building to gather "tech points" to upgrade different facets of your civilization before actually progressing to the next age. I've never even bothered trying to play that long, you know, the end game when you've tech'd all the way up? Nope. Not even gonna bother. The game moves at a snails pace, half the time you are simply waiting to have the resources to do something. Did I mention the wood gathering? Do I really need thirty villagers gathering wood? Why would you choose to emulate such a tedious thing from the original game developer? Why? The combat is horrid, even goofy, you can build up an army, but somehow the AI knows what you're up to and usually out builds whatever force you've been desperately trying to build up. Combat is not the focus here, its resource management and micro resource management and it is a chore. The whole game is a chore. Who cares if it rains or snows? Those weather cycles are simply eye-candy, icing on the games engine and they don't cover up the terrifyingly bad dialogue or sound effects. The music isn't memorable, the ambiance is just what it is, "ambient" and has no bearing on anything your doing. Even I liked the background music in Empire Earth. I guess between the really weird ideas, like building "roads" or "pathways" to facilitate faster unit movement, the naval combat is kind of lax as well, and how about the territories? Oh yeah, those are just great. Be the first one to build a settlement there and its yours. Guess what the AI does in most matches? If you're answer was A. Make muffins and twiddle their thumbs while you enjoy their delicious sugary treat you were unfortunately wrong. It was B. Out build your sorry ass and take territories faster than you could even get your piddly "economy" going. The game has niche appeal in the worst way, it travels to the lands of "slow paced" RTS genre, it takes the boring things from Empire Earth and just tosses them back in to be made even more tedious. Not one thing has ever made it out of this game and into another RTS title since. The miniature camera, you know the one that took up way too much of the interface, which was also a goddamn mess of a UI, has never been seen outside of this game. It lacks scope, it claims to have it in spades, but who wants to sit around waiting for a war? When I think of games like Age of Empires, though it has aged a bit, I recall never having to wait for too long before a skirmish would break out. Either over a gold mine, or a forage patch and yet, in Empire Earth II, you are literally waiting forever just to assemble some kind of an army. And even though their are some great features in the actual game, they add NOTHING to it. Walls in my territories? Pretty cool. Oh they just get knocked down pretty quick and are kind of useless. Citizen manager? Oh hey that's not really that useful as their is still a mini map and its pretty easy to figure out what's going on even on some of the larger maps. But that user interface should get the most flack out of any "feature" here. Its just a mess, an utter incoherent and tedious mess. Their is not that much to worry about here, this is an RTS, not a grand strategy game. Last time I checked, this wasn't Crusader Kings, or Port Royale, or Rome Total War. It does a lousy job of letting you know what you can do, it merely hints that it must have some higher purpose somewhere far from your keyboard and mouse. What surprises me the most, is that even "Empires: Dawn of the Modern World," is an improvement over this game and most aspects of its predecessor. What's even worse is that games like Steel Studios swan song, Rise and Fall, a game that they WENT OUT OF BUSINESS WHILE MAKING and was handed over to Midway for completion, turned out better than this game.    … Expand
  10. SoulSurgeon
    Feb 5, 2012
    9
    One of the bets game I have ever played. Played 6 hours a day for a long time...I got my life back.

    It lagged a lot..old machines couldn't handle the unit masses. Multiplayer was sooo good. Learned about history from this game....loved the expansion of it Art of Supremacy.
  11. RicH.
    Jan 27, 2009
    10
    This game is a masterpiece. The unit response times are beautiful, there's a huge range of epochs - each home to different units and building types - even in the year 2009 the graphics are still sturdy and quite impressive. This game is simply great. No flaws what-so-ever. The online mode makes this game so great.
  12. Maslab
    May 21, 2008
    7
    I do especially like dropping nukes and other various bombs on fledgling civilizations, but there isn't that much strategy required. Build a bunch of units and charge. That's about it. However, it is very fun if you just want to blow up stuff on a massive scale.
  13. JamesK.
    May 4, 2008
    10
    Best Game Ever
  14. aa
    Oct 22, 2007
    10
    One of the best RTS's of all time
  15. FredB.
    Dec 11, 2006
    8
    Much shiner than its predecessor with a better interface and some awesome new features like territories and capturing buidlings. I must say, however, that I preferred EE1's complex array of specialized counter-units to EE2's simple rock-paper-scissors system. Also, the campaigns are bland, incorporating few cinematics and no dialogue. Still, a fun and challenging game with Much shiner than its predecessor with a better interface and some awesome new features like territories and capturing buidlings. I must say, however, that I preferred EE1's complex array of specialized counter-units to EE2's simple rock-paper-scissors system. Also, the campaigns are bland, incorporating few cinematics and no dialogue. Still, a fun and challenging game with visible crews for unenclosed vehicles and artillery.… Expand
  16. DanielM.
    May 25, 2006
    10
    I thought this was a brialliant and very stratigical game.
  17. mriguy
    May 9, 2006
    7
    I loved the original EE and keep hoping that Sierra finds a better developer or Mad Dog improves. EE could be the ultimate stategy platform. By bigest complaint is the sound. EE1's charactors evolved. It was cool to hear the cavemen grunt. Germans should speak German, Italy, Italian etc.. There are a lot of nice features but I HATE the oversized leaders. Stainless Steels EE1 was I loved the original EE and keep hoping that Sierra finds a better developer or Mad Dog improves. EE could be the ultimate stategy platform. By bigest complaint is the sound. EE1's charactors evolved. It was cool to hear the cavemen grunt. Germans should speak German, Italy, Italian etc.. There are a lot of nice features but I HATE the oversized leaders. Stainless Steels EE1 was cleaner but Mad Dog could still make this the best RTS if theye just cleaned up some items and listen to all the community feedback, maybe EE3. There are a lot of good ideas in the forums. It's the commuunity that makes the RTS. If the customer's support and feedback dies so does the product. I like the addition of spies and the elimination of magical charactors. I could write a 5 page report about all the features that could be improved. I rate it an "Almost, but you need to fix this this and this.."… Expand
  18. BJ
    Nov 9, 2005
    2
    Major step down from the original Empire Earth. Big disappointment.
  19. StephenP.
    Oct 2, 2005
    3
    This game is much easier than its predecessor. Its game play is only but a fraction of the time as EE was. Despite all of the new buildings and epochs, there seems to be less to choose from once you make your initial choice of a race. Furthermore, awesome graphics do not insure an awesome game, when will designers realize this.
  20. Bonedoc
    Sep 27, 2005
    7
    I'd give it a higher rateing if it didn't freeze while loading saves so often on my Falcon Mach V. Honestly, you would think it would run without a problem on a puter that runs Doom and Half-life on the highest possible settings.
  21. Samaritan
    Sep 22, 2005
    9
    I am the Age of Empires series expert and this game is cool.
  22. Goobers
    Sep 1, 2005
    9
    Awesome Strategy game. As good as Civ or AOE. Great detail and depth.
  23. WilliamG.
    Aug 1, 2005
    3
    I agree fully with Scott L. There are much much better RTS games (like Empires: Dawn of the Modern World -- which is 2 years older and a lot better).
  24. ScottL.
    Jul 31, 2005
    2
    Could be a great game. But, the citizen manager needs work, unit movement is terrible, slow unit response, lots and lots of bugs. I could live with the bugs for now if there was any word of progress from the developers. Huge patch two months ago and not a peep from them since. Have to say I am really disappointed with every review I've seen about this game. Not a one of them was Could be a great game. But, the citizen manager needs work, unit movement is terrible, slow unit response, lots and lots of bugs. I could live with the bugs for now if there was any word of progress from the developers. Huge patch two months ago and not a peep from them since. Have to say I am really disappointed with every review I've seen about this game. Not a one of them was thorough AND honest. My first time on this site.....just checked the reviews here, Computer Games Magazines is the only one I recognize that handed out the rating the game deserves. The others must be using advertising $$ as their guide for rating the game.… Expand
  25. TroyM.
    Jul 30, 2005
    10
    Best game ever!!! u cant miss it.
  26. TJWendle
    Jul 30, 2005
    10
    The best game ever!!! you have to buy this game.
  27. GeorgeH.
    Jul 27, 2005
    1
    It is one of the worst games i have ever played, however the first game is one of hte best games ive played.
  28. LuisV.
    Jul 21, 2005
    7
    Cool game.
  29. KateR.
    Jul 13, 2005
    9
    Great Game. Still addicted.
  30. BradC.
    Jun 24, 2005
    8
    While not outstanding a good edition to the Empire Earth Series.
  31. OriaB.
    Jun 7, 2005
    4
    This game is worse by far than the first game.
  32. DanD.
    Jun 4, 2005
    10
    I liked it.
  33. ScottS
    May 19, 2005
    3
    While playing it I often thought to myself "this is a great feature" but never "this is a great game". There are a couple new features which should be incorporated into future RTS games (war planner, citizen manager, PIP) but many aspects of the game are horrendously amatuer. It sorely lacks the polish and easy-to-learn interface of its competitors: Warcraft III, Rise of Nations, and Age While playing it I often thought to myself "this is a great feature" but never "this is a great game". There are a couple new features which should be incorporated into future RTS games (war planner, citizen manager, PIP) but many aspects of the game are horrendously amatuer. It sorely lacks the polish and easy-to-learn interface of its competitors: Warcraft III, Rise of Nations, and Age of Mythology are all better games. It's like they invented some new features, but otherwise failed to build on the past ten years of RTS features. Pathfinding is completely broken and by all accounts on fan forums in-game performance is universally mediocre given the quality of graphics, but these things could be improved in patches. I guess Magazine reviewers are easily swayed by a couple of 'spiffy' features, it's sad to see the harsh disconnect between reviewers and actual gamers. Empire Earth II has a lot of exciting crap stitched together but doesn't come through with a coherant game. Try it if you're a die-hard fan of the original, otherwise give this one a miss.… Expand
  34. AnonymousMC
    May 11, 2005
    6
    disapointing the could patch it up to 8 of 10 for me if they improve the field of view, you see just too little to fight with your big units on the small screen, even medium formation of 8 tanks doesnt even fit on screen so all the nic ideas of war plans and so on are useless if yount make the big picture in the main screen.
  35. BBD.
    May 9, 2005
    1
    Terrible stuff really. Back to rise of nations and age of mythology.
  36. Kuro
    May 3, 2005
    3
    Lacks the flair and design of the original, very disappointing. I find the UI and engine quite disgusting, mad-doc have made it feel far more amatuer. A definite step backwards.
  37. EdoardoDellaV.
    May 1, 2005
    7
    Very similar to "Rise of Nations", it's a pity that the previous "Empire Earth" was much better than "Rise of Nations"!!! In this game there isn't the possibility of custom civilations, and the presence of useless and complicated "special powers" only make the game more complicated and not user-friendly. Good graphic and audio, but small maps and the game is too fast leaving Very similar to "Rise of Nations", it's a pity that the previous "Empire Earth" was much better than "Rise of Nations"!!! In this game there isn't the possibility of custom civilations, and the presence of useless and complicated "special powers" only make the game more complicated and not user-friendly. Good graphic and audio, but small maps and the game is too fast leaving little time to devise strategies. Civilizations unique units are somewhat useless since they don't advance through ages. Nukes do very little damage. The civilian managment screen is a excellent idea and a very powerful tool!… Expand
  38. Chimp
    Apr 23, 2005
    7
    Empire Earth II is not a bad game. Just like the first one, it has way too much stuff. There are so many ages and civilizations, but each age("epoch") has about 7-16 military units total, with a couple special units for each civ. The game itself copies Rise of Nations so much its insane, but thats not necessarily a bad thing, i think its good. Now there are cities and the civilzations are Empire Earth II is not a bad game. Just like the first one, it has way too much stuff. There are so many ages and civilizations, but each age("epoch") has about 7-16 military units total, with a couple special units for each civ. The game itself copies Rise of Nations so much its insane, but thats not necessarily a bad thing, i think its good. Now there are cities and the civilzations are more distinct. My biggest problem with this game has to be its graphics-just so you know, if you've seen screenshots in ads for the game, the game does not look like that. AT ALL. i put it on max resolution, all settings maxed including shadows, and it looked nowhere near as good as the picture, especially for the units. the pictures they show have to be in at least 2048 resolution, something few people can have. So unless you can get it to look like the screens, the graphics arent too great, especially the water, which comparing to what we have been seeing lately, sucks. the gameplay has tons of things to do like war plans, but i can already tell no one is actually going to use them in multiplayer games. although ive only played the demo, i know from experience with the first one that the game is simply a technology race, without time to use any of the nice features that come with it.… Expand
  39. [Anonymous]
    Apr 22, 2005
    3
    Disapointing to say the least. the engine is buggy, and combat is mushy. back to rise of nations
  40. AlphaO.
    Apr 22, 2005
    7
    I've had the game 24 hours. So far it's a bit disappointing. The only graphical improvements I can see are minor: The water uses pixel shaders to gain a slight "sheen" and the people models are slightly better ... frankly it's hard to tell it isn't Empire earth 1. A lot of the "new" features (IE borders, trade caravans etc) are just the "old" features of other games I've had the game 24 hours. So far it's a bit disappointing. The only graphical improvements I can see are minor: The water uses pixel shaders to gain a slight "sheen" and the people models are slightly better ... frankly it's hard to tell it isn't Empire earth 1. A lot of the "new" features (IE borders, trade caravans etc) are just the "old" features of other games (civ3, rise of nations etc.) so it just feels like a mishmash of a rehash. It's not BAD.. just not great. I've finished the four tutorials. .. and haven't yet mustered up enough interest to play the campaigns.… Expand
  41. HughBetcha
    Feb 28, 2005
    4
    An ugly dull clone of Warcraft/Starcraft whose reach exceeds its grasp.
  42. MatiasK.
    Jan 4, 2005
    10
    The Best Epich Strategy Game Ever!

Awards & Rankings

47
#47 Best PC Game of 2005
32
#32 Most Discussed PC Game of 2005
39
#39 Most Shared PC Game of 2005

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
79

Generally favorable reviews - based on 39 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 32 out of 39
  2. Mixed: 5 out of 39
  3. Negative: 2 out of 39
  1. Game Informer
    75
    Given both its de-emphasis on low-level tactical decisions and its ambitious scope, EEII resides in a bizarre no-man's-land between "Civilization III" and "Kohan II." [May 2005, p.124]
  2. GameSpy
    80
    I can think of very few games that I could play for the next 10 years (or until I get eaten by that monster in the woods) and never run out different ways to play and different strategies to explore. Empire Earth II is one of those games.
    Read full review
  3. IGN
    89
    A deep and satisfying real-time strategy game. The campaigns are great, the multiplayer is super fun, and skirmish allows for tons of single player satisfaction thanks to some terrific AI that'll give you fits.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »