Europa Universalis IV

 PC
User Score
8.7

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1463 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1,250 out of 1463
  2. Mixed: 115 out of 1463
  3. Negative: 98 out of 1463

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. Klewer
    Sep 15, 2013
    8
    Another very strong and feature rich game from Paradox. Continues to improve on the previous version and adds new features. While it does not bring anything overly exciting or brand new the amount of time and enjoyment you will get from this makes it well worth the price.
  2. Tytos
    Nov 5, 2013
    8
    This is nothing for the mentally handicapped. A lot has improved since EU3, especially the multiplayer-features. My only critique here is that there is too much focus on rulers, it's pure luck due to this system how easy or hard your nation is going to be played and that's pretty frustrating, especially in multiplayer.
  3. Jockedamus
    Aug 18, 2013
    8
    Other than the huuuuuuuuuuuuuuge rebel groups that sometime appear and ruin the game I'm starting to enjoy this more and more. However I really do think you should be able to spend cash for research boosts.
  4. metagray
    Aug 31, 2013
    8
    The text is not sharp or big enough at 1920x1080 resolution. Too bad that they make such a good game but can't solve basic problems that existed in previous games.
  5. SchnitzelPoof
    Feb 20, 2014
    8
    After sinking (way too much) time into this game, I can say that I absolutely LOVE it.
    However, be warned that this style fits a particular kind of strategy gamer, not all of them. For example, if you enjoy Total War games (which I also love), EU IV might not necessarily give you the right thrill.
    For one thing, it has a steep learning curve for newcomers (such as myself), who didn't    After sinking (way too much) time into this game, I can say that I absolutely LOVE it.
    However, be warned that this style fits a particular kind of strategy gamer, not all of them. For example, if you enjoy Total War games (which I also love), EU IV might not necessarily give you the right thrill.

    For one thing, it has a steep learning curve for newcomers (such as myself), who didn't play EU III or similar installments from Paradox, but if you have the patience to learn the details (and there are many of them), you get to play a game that covers a fascinating historic period, on an unsurpassed scale - the entire span of the globe, no less, from East to West.
    It has a deep diplomatic model, which can be very satisfying to use. Wars, in particular, are not a matter of extermination, but can rather serve as a means to weaken an enemy, gain some territory, or (my favorite) force enemies to grant independence to countries they had annexed earlier.

    On the other hand, the satisfaction EU IV provides is mostly cerebral. There is a lot of satisfaction in seeing your carefully laid plans bear fruit, but your time is spent gazing at the map which, as pretty as it may be, is still a map; and at numerous icons, texts, and information sheets. EU IV might be a very complex board game, but that's what it is, basically. In regards to audio-visual entertainment, the cover image is the most exciting part of the game, so if that's what you're after, I suggest looking elsewhere.

    Still, if you enjoy strategizing, outwitting foes, and growing a country that you picked to scary proportions, I believe you will love Europa Universalis IV almost as much as I do.    … Expand
  6. mcmanusaur
    Oct 20, 2013
    8
    ---Rating---
    Design: 4 /5 (good strategy gameplay, frustrating randomness, a few design issues)
    Polish: 4 /5 (graphics are acceptable given the game's nature, some bugs are present) Value: 5 /5 (huge map with excellent replay potential and emergent storytelling aspect) ---Review--- While Europa Universalis may never be as flashy from a technical or "eye candy" perspective as some    ---Rating---
    Design: 4 /5 (good strategy gameplay, frustrating randomness, a few design issues)
    Polish: 4 /5 (graphics are acceptable given the game's nature, some bugs are present)
    Value: 5 /5 (huge map with excellent replay potential and emergent storytelling aspect)

    ---Review---
    While Europa Universalis may never be as flashy from a technical or "eye candy" perspective as some other historical strategy titles, its fourth installment provides significantly more depth and freedom than any of those competitors. This is simply a must-play for history buffs, but otherwise it's a very solid and functional (cough, TWR2) grand strategy game with an emphasis on expansion and trade. Although the interface and controls are much more accessible than in previous iterations, some of the mechanics remain quite clunky; trade is heavily abstracted and the combat system is relatively simplistic. There are even a couple instances of what might more-or-less objectively be labeled poor design decisions, including the occasional punishing random event over which the player has no control. The fact that the rest of the game is excellent unfortunately makes its few obvious flaws stand out even more, but that said if you can get past the randomness and arbitrary abstractions Europa Universalis- with all of its immense replay value- can be a very rewarding experience.    … Expand
  7. CopyPaste
    Aug 29, 2013
    8
    EU IV for me is one of the most eagerly anticipated games of the year. I’ve played all the previous instalments and just couldn’t wait for a sequel. Now we have it, and it’s great. For the most part.

    It’s still the good ol’ EU, with some improvements in graphics and UI departments, and many new bells and whistles. The new game engine we know from Crusader Kings II is much more eye    EU IV for me is one of the most eagerly anticipated games of the year. I’ve played all the previous instalments and just couldn’t wait for a sequel. Now we have it, and it’s great. For the most part.

    It’s still the good ol’ EU, with some improvements in graphics and UI departments, and many new bells and whistles. The new game engine we know from Crusader Kings II is much more eye appealing than the oh-my-God-it’s-so-ugly EU III. UI is much more streamlined and isn’t as over-cluttered as before, and aims to make the player’s life easier. Some game mechanics are overhauled, some new are introduced, some are abandoned, but the game as a whole seems very well thought out. Again, for the most part.

    I have a feeling that you as a player have less direct, and more of an indirect influence on the functioning of your country of choice. For example, unlike before when you could compete for trade virtually anywhere in the world, now your country can net trade profits only in a couple of hubs, so you must steer trade flow to benefit those hubs, while your opponents will try to over-steer your efforts in a different direction. It’s an interesting mechanic that directs gameplay in new and interesting ways. Trade income, tax income, tariffs and so on, everything is automated now, and you as a ruler have only indirect influence on money earning and spending. All this is new and good, and once you get used to the new system, you can exploit it to great effects.

    Diplomacy was always the weakest link in the EU chain, and that hasn’t changed. We got rid of spies from EU III (and good riddance it is), and the new envoys mechanics are great. Now we have option of making coalitions, a viable way for small guys to survive in the neighbourhood of a big, bad aggressor. But peace-making mechanics are more broken than ever, and sooner or later you’ll find yourself in situation where you can’t possibly (I mean, literally, theoretically) make peace, so you’ll get stuck with an endless war that will break your country sooner or later. Only option is to loose (and badly) on purpose, or load an earlier saved game.

    For example, I play as Sweden, declare war on some single-province German state and puff, I have on my hands a war with half a Europe. OK, fine, but now Turkey (of all things) is in charge, and even if I crush the little German fellow, I can’t make peace unless I crush the Turks as well. I have no chance of marching across the entire (hostile) continent and winning anything, so there you have it, an endless war. They can’t beat me, I can’t beat them, and AI doesn’t seems to accept white peace any more. Even if I offer ceding some provinces and what-nots in situation when war score is positive for me, it’s a no go.

    So there you have it, a brand new Europa Universalis game. Somewhat broken, but still one of the best strategy games available today. I think I’ll wait for a couple of patches and let them fix stuff before I start playing it again, because, as things stand right now, it can get really frustrating, and that beats the game’s entire purpose having fun.    … Expand
  8. Lokomoko99764
    Sep 4, 2013
    8
    By all means one of Paradox Development Studio's better games (Although I like them all really). They've made much-needed improvements in comparison to EU3 in most areas, and although there is some controversy over the monarch point system and to a lesser extent trade, it's definitely worth the money. The visuals and season system is one thing in particular that is quite nice which IBy all means one of Paradox Development Studio's better games (Although I like them all really). They've made much-needed improvements in comparison to EU3 in most areas, and although there is some controversy over the monarch point system and to a lesser extent trade, it's definitely worth the money. The visuals and season system is one thing in particular that is quite nice which I wasn't expecting to enjoy as much as I did. I've yet to get the full enjoyment out of it after many hours.… Expand
  9. Back2c
    Nov 25, 2013
    8
    First of all, I'm a new player to EU. Then, to briefly sum up, that game is great but unfinished.

    Let's start by the wrong side the game crashes quite often (like 1 time on 5 or 6 when I accept a peace treaty), the translation isn't over (I'm playing the french version, and lots of stuff are nearly un-understandable due to translation that doesn't always make sense, sometimes not even    First of all, I'm a new player to EU. Then, to briefly sum up, that game is great but unfinished.

    Let's start by the wrong side the game crashes quite often (like 1 time on 5 or 6 when I accept a peace treaty), the translation isn't over (I'm playing the french version, and lots of stuff are nearly un-understandable due to translation that doesn't always make sense, sometimes not even translated), there's code in some pop-ups (FRONT_Stuff), and so on...

    Now the good side I find it a great strategy game, for it is complex (sometimes a bit too much, considering there are some information lacking, mostly about trade, and the ingame help is not really helping for it is far too short) but still manageable. The system of diplomatic alliances is complex yet you can't but use it if you plan on becoming important (and not being override by your foes), your economy is quite hard to manage (wars nearly always ruined me in the first times), and even after hours of playing, you still discover stuff you never noticed.

    Then again, it might not be different from previous EU, I can't compare. But this game is definitely great, though I advise you to wait for its development to be really ended.    … Expand
  10. 68Camaro
    Dec 16, 2013
    8
    Great game. Very addicting. A few minor quarks but every game has them. Paradox is getting better and better over time though. In a few years, I bet I have all their major titles, instead of just Hearts and Europa.
  11. Raybit
    Jan 29, 2014
    8
    This is my second review on this game and I just wanna update a few points I didn't mention before.

    First of all, to open the real door of this game, you need to active "Iron Man" mode in the option, which allow you to obtain achievements and also limit your saving file to only one. And during the game, it will auto save each month or when certain events happens. These setting will    This is my second review on this game and I just wanna update a few points I didn't mention before.

    First of all, to open the real door of this game, you need to active "Iron Man" mode in the option, which allow you to obtain achievements and also limit your saving file to only one. And during the game, it will auto save each month or when certain events happens. These setting will greatly alleviate pain of random dice issue in the war since in the most of case you will not put your army into a dangerous situation(or even in the balanced one) due to the fact you may win a battle but lose the war and there is only one record you can reload.

    Secondly, I guess most of players who just played within 40h may the part of exploring and colonizing. As you see, the whole game map only get charted a small part, and a big world is waiting for you to discovery. Unfortunately, there is no words mentioned this fact in EU4 tutorial... Go youtube, and find a way to allow allow you to do so.

    Last, I said technology upgrade is not that effective in my previous post, and that is totally wrong. Actually, their effects could became very obvious, especially when your tech tie is over other by 2 or more( at least, it is very true for military tech line). And normally, you can't over tech other countries too much as there is a limitation/roof for each tech line could reach in the certain age unless you are willing to expend substantially extra points and time for that.

    By understanding all these design rules, I think it is worth a score of 8. However, this deep depth will restraint a lot of people to find the fun from the game. After all, most of the reviewer of this game who give 9/10 score are very likely to fail to understand these rules& complicity but do the comparison superficially.

    Anyway, the Paradox game seems to be designed for player to learn not play in their first 50h :)    … Expand
  12. Vespa
    Feb 11, 2014
    8
    EU4 is a grand strategy game that keeps its predecessors model (EU3), with updated graphics and a more enriched feel to a grand strategy game its a joy to play. Each nation can rise to power and fall only to rise again within the same game, something all strategy games should copy. I like the new ideas, and tech system which allows u to upgrade tech then ideas to enhance a nationEU4 is a grand strategy game that keeps its predecessors model (EU3), with updated graphics and a more enriched feel to a grand strategy game its a joy to play. Each nation can rise to power and fall only to rise again within the same game, something all strategy games should copy. I like the new ideas, and tech system which allows u to upgrade tech then ideas to enhance a nation abilities, with a variety of choice, will u be an explorer or a conquer a merchant or an innovator, all is possible. The new diplomatic, military and administrator point system works great forcing u to think about when its time for peace so u can save military points for new military tech or go to war also they affect the construction buildings, they also have to b shared between ur ideas and tech. I found it a delight when they brought out an expansion pack that gave new native American nation and tech ect about time really....
    1 down side is that the AI doesnt really compete over the new world like I would have like, with only 2 - 3 nation really making an effort to colonise it becomes easy to take over the new world. Also I would have liked a more dynamic events system which allows for a nation to activily go though a civil war with regions divided up according to faction within the civil war similar to crusader kings 2 (mayb that will b in the expansion packs). Also colonies dont tend to want independents at all unless ur a complete dick to them. I would have liked random events that allow France to have a revolution at any time during the game or a more aggressive cultural change for the American culture from the English culture ect, in addition it would b nice if it was easier to cause spys to create political problems in other nations (that includes the AI sending spys to cause riots in my regions) as it seems pointless even using spys. That being send its a great game and I look forwards for further updates and expansions.    … Expand
  13. Greywolf2001ca
    Oct 11, 2014
    8
    A much better game than its predecessors. It is better made, the interface is similar but some tweaks have improved it greatly. The game itself is more pleasant to play and does not seem like a job like EU3 or the others, albeit being decent games too. EU4 is far from being as good as Crusader Kings 2 though. There are no family trees and you have no control over the succession of yourA much better game than its predecessors. It is better made, the interface is similar but some tweaks have improved it greatly. The game itself is more pleasant to play and does not seem like a job like EU3 or the others, albeit being decent games too. EU4 is far from being as good as Crusader Kings 2 though. There are no family trees and you have no control over the succession of your monarchs.
    You say, this is going to remove a way to take over a realm... but no, it is much easier to conquer land in EU4 than in Crusader Kings 2, especially if you have a good military or great prestige and reputation.
    I bought it at a huge discount on steam, but I think it worth at least 20$, so if you see it at the price or lower, buy it if you like strategy games. :)    … Expand
  14. mvm900
    Feb 5, 2016
    8
    I, unlike others apparently, enjoyed the game. Sadly it seems that some people couldn't figure out the game and I must confess that, in my 400 clocked hours on steam, have never touched the tutorial. I learn myself from just jumping in and seeing what happens and EU4 wasn't too hard to figure out. Some mechanics are still kind of weird and alien to me, like the trade system which isI, unlike others apparently, enjoyed the game. Sadly it seems that some people couldn't figure out the game and I must confess that, in my 400 clocked hours on steam, have never touched the tutorial. I learn myself from just jumping in and seeing what happens and EU4 wasn't too hard to figure out. Some mechanics are still kind of weird and alien to me, like the trade system which is actually kind of weird. All in all as a game I liked it for it's historical accuracy it aims to have.

    And onto the DLC. This game has been updated and changed since it's inception. It is now an almost completely different game. The DLC only adds stuff and you lose nothing by not buying them, and they go on sale quite a lot. A lot of paradox games do. In fact I picked up CK2 and all of it's DLC for $40. And they do it rather fairly on multiplayer because if the host has it everyone can use it.    … Expand
  15. tima26tl
    Dec 3, 2019
    8
    Europa Universalis is one of the most re-playable games that you can find. You can play for Any country from 1440-1821 period. Compare to the previous game it became much more diverse and detailed. All big nations feel unique thanks to the tree of missions and special mechanics. For the person who wants to start to play this game for the first time it will seem too complex, and most peopleEuropa Universalis is one of the most re-playable games that you can find. You can play for Any country from 1440-1821 period. Compare to the previous game it became much more diverse and detailed. All big nations feel unique thanks to the tree of missions and special mechanics. For the person who wants to start to play this game for the first time it will seem too complex, and most people will quit after few hours. It is a common problem for almost all Paradox games. Therefore, when you get into it will become one of your favourite strategy games.

    Strategy Element- 5/5 From the first moment you get a full control of your country. You control micro and macro econ, you have control over foreign policy, control over army...

    Re-playable element-2/2 As I said you can play for any country and as soon as you finish playing for one of them you would want to start playing for the new one.

    Multiplayer-0/1 Unfortunately it is almost impossible to play multiplayer. Me and my friends tried to play together but we couldn't play even at speed 4 out 5( speed of time). Our best result was speed 3, in the end we gave up since it would take us ages to finish the party.

    DLC-0/1 generally most of DLC are good and add interesting mechanics, but the problem is that there is more then 10+ DLC for which you need to pay 50+ dollars in total.

    Music-1/1 It is OK, a beat repetitive, I liked more the one in Stellaris    … Expand
  16. Thunfish
    Sep 28, 2019
    8
    EU IV is a fantastic game but with a massive caveat that really hurts the game. In itself, it's a pretty fun game that allows you to take any nation in the world somewhere before the start of World Exploration all the way to the French Revolution and basically turn them into a superpower. Even if you're not playing the game, you can just sit back and watch the AI spin the world in allEU IV is a fantastic game but with a massive caveat that really hurts the game. In itself, it's a pretty fun game that allows you to take any nation in the world somewhere before the start of World Exploration all the way to the French Revolution and basically turn them into a superpower. Even if you're not playing the game, you can just sit back and watch the AI spin the world in all sorts of ways. The only real downside (and why I'm not giving this a 10) have to be the DLCs.

    Don't get me wrong, Paradox still updates the game and the DLCs do keep the game alive as well but they can be pretty expensive at times, which really hurts the game, as some of those DLCs are actually pretty important for the game to be... well, properly playable. Still, a blast to play nonetheless, but this does become a bit of an issue pretty often.    … Expand
  17. YigidOx2
    Feb 12, 2021
    8
    Paradox Interactive is already the god of strategy games. EU4 is a bit of a complicated game. But the playing time is very long. One of the best strategy games.
  18. JanuszekPLY
    Sep 8, 2021
    8
    Very great game. I really appreciate my amatour 500h in game. I had and i will have so much fun with my friends playing ths. I like strategic games from Paradox. And even that i still cant normally exit to main menu bc of popup and playing without dlcs is mess that still. i like this game
  19. kitru
    May 23, 2021
    8
    Отличная стратежка, с друзьями позависать самое то, из-за относительно понятного большинству временного промежутка игры ( до первой мировой ), где мы наблюдаем уже знакомые нам Польшу, Пруссию, Османов, каждый найдет себе страну по душе. Как только поиграл за все страны и испробовал все страты - забрасываешь (у меня ушло на это 500+ часов).Отличная стратежка, с друзьями позависать самое то, из-за относительно понятного большинству временного промежутка игры ( до первой мировой ), где мы наблюдаем уже знакомые нам Польшу, Пруссию, Османов, каждый найдет себе страну по душе. Как только поиграл за все страны и испробовал все страты - забрасываешь (у меня ушло на это 500+ часов).
  20. Jackie_Jackson
    May 26, 2022
    8
    Всё очень просто как играть в эту игру почему все говорят про высокий порог вхождения если ты заходишь за Францию и можно сразу сдаться?
  21. Marube
    Oct 12, 2022
    8
    It's a great game if you like history and strategy games. It really makes you feeeeel like a 15th century tyrant. The dlc system is very rough, many dlcs completely change the way you play the game, and there is like 30 of them. I dont think that you should lock whole core game mechanics ander such a paywall.
  22. donatodo
    Dec 27, 2022
    8
    As the name suggests, the game is very euro-centric. They don't do a good job with Eastern concepts. For example, Buddhism is a dharmic religion, which should be categorized under Hinduism and Sikhism. As someone not from Europe, the game gets boring very quickly.
  23. Mikimax
    Aug 21, 2013
    7
    This game is gonna make your head, eyes and back hurt, it's gonna eat your life away and give you insomnia. If you have a life, stay away, if you have time to waste, this is the game for you!
  24. Tubey
    May 16, 2015
    7
    Hmmm what to make of this... on one side of the coin, this is an absolutely majestic bit of game making with an unparalleled amount of attention to detail. But on the other side, it is horrifically dictated by RNG random events and has the smallest UI text known to mankind; which is bad because this game lives and dies by its' massive amount of menus and sub menus.

    Intricate is the    Hmmm what to make of this... on one side of the coin, this is an absolutely majestic bit of game making with an unparalleled amount of attention to detail. But on the other side, it is horrifically dictated by RNG random events and has the smallest UI text known to mankind; which is bad because this game lives and dies by its' massive amount of menus and sub menus.

    Intricate is the buzzword here. It is a horrid game to try and get into, and a lot of players will turn it off within 30 minutes because not since the likes of X-Com (the old one) has a game been this reliant on literally hundreds of micro options. So it's crucial you get the UI and navigation right - EU4 does and doesn't in equal measure. The menus are strategy gamer porn - but you need a magnifying glass to see them. So it makes the game a pleasure and a chore in equal measure.

    A key part of the game is a stat called Stability, and it is this that is very much in the hands of the RNG gods, as random events pop up at... well, random, to undo your best laid plans. Rather than add to the game an element of dynamism, they serve to by and large annoy.

    You can pore hundreds of hours into this, then look back with satisfaction but also an element of "what the hell did I just do all that for?" It's fun and tedious, compelling yet labour intensive.

    In summary, if you love Civilisation and want an extra challenge (albeit an overstated one; when you get the hang of this, it's positively easy), then EU4 is for you. If you haven't played Civ, consider picking up Civ4 first and getting your feet wet before delving into this, as it's a game where even the tutorial takes pleasure in complicating you.    … Expand
  25. thenerdmaster
    Aug 19, 2013
    7
    This installment of the europa universalis series has improved alot of features about the game, making the game easier to play, keeping complexity but making the game less complicated. What I don't like is that the AI is still pretty bad in the EU series. While the opponent wont send troops to random suicide missions like previous installments it's basically still broken. For exampleThis installment of the europa universalis series has improved alot of features about the game, making the game easier to play, keeping complexity but making the game less complicated. What I don't like is that the AI is still pretty bad in the EU series. While the opponent wont send troops to random suicide missions like previous installments it's basically still broken. For example during a long war the enemy had stacks of 20 troops which they were just moving between the same provinces for the entire war. This ended up with me winning against a enemy that had a vastly superior military than me. By killing of his weaker stacks first and then going for the big one.

    Allies are also abit stupid and they usually end up standing around at a corner of the country that you are trying to invade instead of actually helping in the battles. This, coupled with a warscore system where the death of 1000 soldiers is about equal to the death of 10000 soldiers, kind of breaks how war works in the game. Alot of the times you will see big territories on the AI map that has been conquered by rebels due to the AIs inability to handle wars properly.

    Another thing that I found disturbing is that the game is also somewhat too european centric (yea i know its called europa universalis).
    http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?657309-IS-Europa-Universalis-3-somewhat-racist
    Where anything that isn't western is deemded as technologically backwards. This clearly ingores the fact that alot of discoveries in the 1400 where made in the east (for example gunpowder and muskets). I know that this is the world from a european point of view but it still seems to be abit baltant to devide countries into technology gropus where some are just "worse" than others. Also making poland a eastern technology group is in my opinion historically incorrect in that case.

    But im really focusing on the bad bit the game has alot of positivies also, if you are willing to spend hundreds of hours on this game then you will probably have alot of fun (and also neglect work and family).    … Expand
  26. some_gamer
    Jan 12, 2014
    7
    This is the first EU game I've played. At first I liked it (once I got past the steep learning curve), but then the flaws started showing- there's way too much randomness in this game which is not bad in itself, the problem is that this randomness has huge, tremendous impact on your game- it can turn it into a boring snooze fest or completely break it depending on what random events youThis is the first EU game I've played. At first I liked it (once I got past the steep learning curve), but then the flaws started showing- there's way too much randomness in this game which is not bad in itself, the problem is that this randomness has huge, tremendous impact on your game- it can turn it into a boring snooze fest or completely break it depending on what random events you get and by random events I mean also the stats of your ruler, whether he dies prematurely and you end up unable to declare wars for a very long time or worse- your heir dies and then your ruler and it can literally mean game over. There are many more examples of why this is all bad design and not fun at all.

    Then you get to the late game, once your nation has reached a certain size it becomes a pain to expand. There are all sorts of terrible mechanics in place to make late game expansion as painful (not difficult, just boring, tedious, repetitive and painful) as possible.

    On the bright side, it's a one of a kind game with huge potential and a must try for every fan of strategy games. It's also very cheap so it's still worth getting IMO despite the flaws I've pointed out earlier. I'll give it a 7 because of good, frequent patches which have straightened some issues and might fix some more in the future.    … Expand
  27. Heraldofmyself
    Nov 28, 2018
    7
    Still absolutely stoked to see which insta-power buttons the Indonesians will get in the 2019 "expansion".
  28. longuigon
    Feb 12, 2019
    7
    I am impressed with Paradox's work. A complex game that makes you learn something new about it every time you play it. It may take hundreds of hours of gameplay to master the harder difficulties.
  29. vvmax
    Jan 29, 2019
    7
    This game is good and has potential, but many of the features baffle my head. I love the idea of colonialism in Grand Strategy Games, but most of the games that use the mechanic add too much to the idea, making it way to confusing. Overall, EU4 is a game with great potential and a great battle system, but many mechanics make it confusing.
  30. WCM320
    Feb 6, 2021
    7
    It's a fantastic game, but its also a game were your either goingt o like it or your not.
  31. Imperius147
    Aug 22, 2019
    7
    Pro+
    - best grand strategy
    - alternative world history... transforming my country to the World Empire

    Cons-
    - tons DLC
    - DLC politics
    - expensive DLC
  32. Wrathzo
    Mar 21, 2022
    7
    Europa Universalis IV is a grand strategy video game in the Europa Universalis series, developed by Paradox Development Studio and published by Paradox Interactive as a sequel to Europa Universalis III (2007). It is a strategy game where players can control a nation from the Late Middle Ages through the early modern period (1444 to 1821 AD), conducting trade, administration, diplomacy,Europa Universalis IV is a grand strategy video game in the Europa Universalis series, developed by Paradox Development Studio and published by Paradox Interactive as a sequel to Europa Universalis III (2007). It is a strategy game where players can control a nation from the Late Middle Ages through the early modern period (1444 to 1821 AD), conducting trade, administration, diplomacy, colonization and warfare.… Expand
  33. HusoBabush
    Dec 17, 2020
    7
    Good strategy game which supported with DLCs but has too much bug and unbalanced stuff
  34. KevLooney
    Feb 28, 2021
    7
    The game is too inaccessible to get a higher rating. I got bored because I didn't know up from down. It would be a 9/10 if I didn't get bored first.
  35. Yaav13
    May 9, 2022
    7
    My truthful honorable incorruptible conclusive rating of this considered game: 7.
  36. Molazza
    Jun 28, 2021
    7
    Massive game thath you can enjoy for infinite hour. The problem is always the same: with all dlc, from the release of the base game to the addiction of the monthly subscription, we have paid more than 200€. I don't like the moneygrabbing policy of paradox.
  37. HeitorCampos
    Mar 13, 2023
    7
    It´s fine, you need most if not all dlcs to have fun with it. But it is a good game, even if some mechanics are bad.
  38. OniGioRi
    Sep 7, 2023
    7
    Score: 7/10

    Europa Univeralis IV is an awesome game for people who enjoy playing history/strategy games. While I don't really play strategy games this game still managed to have me invested for couple hours. It has a huge variety of playing styles which can easily entertain you for many hours.
  39. gracjanski
    Mar 12, 2018
    6
    I dont know, how people can give this game 10/10. For me this means, this game is at least almost perfect and there are only little mistakes. In my view this game has more than just little mistakes.

    First of all, this game is 5 years old and it costs a lot of money (over 200€), because it has countless DLCs. Some of the content should be in the base game, so this politics makes me very    I dont know, how people can give this game 10/10. For me this means, this game is at least almost perfect and there are only little mistakes. In my view this game has more than just little mistakes.

    First of all, this game is 5 years old and it costs a lot of money (over 200€), because it has countless DLCs. Some of the content should be in the base game, so this politics makes me very suspicious. In addition there are 2 DLCs with metal soundtrack, in most of the cases to find out later, that you dont want it...you cant make it more obvious how commercial EU4 is.
    In addition you cant buy everything retail, only on Steam...what I will never do.

    Another big problem with EU4 is the tutorial and manual. After completing them you still dont know the details of the game mechanics, maybe you just know the basics. For a complex game this is unacceptable. You need to research in internet to understand how this game works and you will need a lot of time. It means also you will loose a lot of your life time to be able to enjoy this game, before that you are often searching for informations to solve a problem you have in your campaign.

    The 3rd problem is the boring graphic and presentation of the game. The fun factor is low, this game looks like a visualisation of an excel table. Look at Civilization 4 or 5 how it works. In EU4 there is no intro, no videos at all, nothing special happens, just some texts from time to time, some numbers are changing. And to get that, you need to research in internet for informations like mentioned above...I lost my motivation for that.

    Of course this game has some strengths. The most obvious is the amount of data about history of the world. You get many historical events and missions to play a country more or less like in reality and not only countries from Europe or North America, but also from Asia, Africa and Middle / South America. Perfect.

    The gameplay is very complex, like wrote earlier. So there are many possibilities, many mechanics to discover. We have enough games for the masses, so the more complex games we get, the better.    … Expand
  40. Mynameispingu
    Aug 25, 2013
    6
    If you liked EUIII you're going to like EUIV.
    However on the contrary the game's been out for a week and there's already DLC, which is slightly disgusting in my eyes.
  41. jblac02
    Nov 28, 2013
    6
    Before I get into my thoughts about the game I'd like to state that this is my 2nd Paradox game after Victoria 2(V2) and my opinions will be biased based on the hundreds of hours I've spent on playing V2. I read alot of glowing reviews before buying EU4 and even more before writing this which makes me feel like they either have very little experience with gs games or they didn't playBefore I get into my thoughts about the game I'd like to state that this is my 2nd Paradox game after Victoria 2(V2) and my opinions will be biased based on the hundreds of hours I've spent on playing V2. I read alot of glowing reviews before buying EU4 and even more before writing this which makes me feel like they either have very little experience with gs games or they didn't play very much before writing the reviews.

    The first thing I read was that a new player could pick any little nation and jump right in with the potential to become a world power; this couldn't be further from the truth. Even after extensive reading and testing(and I'd consider myself a veteran of strategy games), I found it basically impossible to play anything other than a european great power if I wanted to accomplish anything other than sitting there passively building up points for decades at a time. The "monarch points" system is a major design flaw in my eyes and seriously hurts the flow of the game; all of the points are linked to at multiple different uses and really affects your ability to experience control of your nation without giving up other aspects. What this basically means is that if you declare war alot, your navy will fall behind because its linked to diplomatic points while the same idea holds true for administrative points because you have to use it for administrative technology and "ideas" which are basically traits you can pick for your nation plus all the points are linked to different buildings forcing you to pick over another choice. When you compare this to the system in V2, all of these things are on their own point system and aren't shared with other actions meaning research points are strictly for new research and you aren't forced to use them to acquire territory or perform anything else.

    One thing I noticed was that no matter who I played, unless I was playing a great power I could never seem to field more than a tiny army in comparison to some of the enormous million man armies I've fielded in V2. Even playing as spain while being the 1st great power with an enormous empire spanning most of south and north america nearly 70% through the game I had a laughably small army of maybe 120-150k men while barely breaking even and almost all of it was required simply to keep France and its allies at bay leaving little opportunity to attack anyone elsewhere or even to really defend most of my empire. In comparison to V2, I just feel like I'm almost better off not fighting anyone simply because I'm losing points for capturing territory and having different resources from territories means basically nothing since none of the units require anything specific to build. In V2 there are certain provinces that contain extremely valuable resources like rubber and coal which are required for many military units/buildings and it just doesn't feel like there's any real urgency to capture anything in EU4 in comparison.

    Another major issue I have with the game is the huge amount of random events;they are pretty much just there to make your life more difficult; Some of them were just minor nuisances like a bit of lost prestige and some of them were major crippling events like losing tech points or like stability loss during early wars putting my fragile economy negative in an already gold starved game. Buildings are also mostly pointless because of the incredible cost sink and the relatively tiny gains(+0.01 gold per month in most cases) meaning it would take decades or more just for them to pay for the initial investment while random events can cost you even more gold.

    While I really enjoyed the idea of having to explore the "new world" and not knowing what each colony even had to offer this too was flawed because of the goofy colonial design. Because of the way the naval distance works and the fact that you have to use technology points for the idea traits required to colonize, only portugal, spain and possibly france via north west africa(though i haven't tested it) can even attempt to colonize anything until much later in the game. The only way to really colonize is a linear path to brazil(or south into africa) via cape verde or one of 3 unclaimed west african provinces, and because of the distances and locations this either locks most european nations out of the colonial race entirely or until they have enough tech to completely cross the ocean without a bridging colony. While this may hold some historical truth it doesn't make alot of sense in a game that basically encourages you to change what happened historically.

    While I've said alot negative about the game it wasn't my intention to bash the game, just to describe my griefs and it's mostly nitpicking from a strategy game autists PoV. The game is still decent and I especially enjoyed the music, it just could have been so much more given a few mechanical direction changes.    … Expand
  42. OllyNorton
    Dec 9, 2013
    6
    Picked this up in a recent steam sale. I hadn't played any of the previous EU games and gave the reviews a read before jumping in and was overwhelmed by how positive they are.

    The best word I can use to describe this game is obtuse. It is extremely unforgiving of any early players. So what anyone, who hasn't played the early versions, needs to know is that this game requires a lot of    Picked this up in a recent steam sale. I hadn't played any of the previous EU games and gave the reviews a read before jumping in and was overwhelmed by how positive they are.

    The best word I can use to describe this game is obtuse. It is extremely unforgiving of any early players. So what anyone, who hasn't played the early versions, needs to know is that this game requires a lot of time to get to grips with. I personally picked this up for a laptop game to play whilst travelling and just can't be bothered to master it's overly complicated UI and subtle nuances. For those willing to invest the time I'm sure all these 10s are deserving but if you are looking for something Enjoyable right off the bat keep looking. This game will mock you with it's overly complex UI and seemingly inane strategy system.

    Im still at the point after about 5 hours where everything feels random earlier today an army of 20k English troops got decimated by a Lancashire revolt of 6k. I met them on a plane and they just fought through me like I wasn't there. It's unexplained stuff like this that gets me. The game requires you to go hunting for the stat that caused this battle to go so very wrong, it won't show you or tell you why you lost that would be far to straight forward. As I say this is obtuse.

    I imagine the 10s are from those who have managed to master it's subtleties but for anyone looking to jump in and play know you are in for a very hard time at first and if you aren't wiling to invest that time it will be an ultimately poor experience. That is how I have graded this game, no doubt I will have a fair few people moan 'how can i judge a game when i haven't committed to learn it blah blah blah blah). However there are probably others like me out there considering this game and I will say only buy if you have the time.    … Expand
  43. YukineUchimaki
    Nov 8, 2019
    6
    Tanto Europa universalis como Crusaders kings II son juegos que me gustan mucho, Pero la politica de Dlc's de Paradox es muy fuerte y eso jode mucho la experiencia de jugalabilidad.
  44. wojownik133
    Jul 28, 2021
    6
    It's good game but I guess it inflated over the time and requires refreshment. The resolution is way to low for 2021. Plus I have never figured out how the trade worked.
  45. Frost_Cube
    Feb 1, 2021
    6
    It may be a good game however there is one critical flaw. The text in the game (and this is a text heavy game!) is difficult to read at a resolution of 1900x1200 (native monitor resolution).
  46. Rnoviok
    Dec 4, 2021
    6
    in my opinion one of the most difficult games i have ever played with high entry threshold

    and with thousands of dlc's .......
  47. Megatanis
    Aug 28, 2013
    5
    uhm..ok this is a tough one. I am a huge fan of the EU and CIV series, been playing since EU2 and the very first civ game, pure genius. They did with EU4 more or less what they did to the civ series: streamlined. If this is good for you, then you'lll ike EU4. Personally, I consider civ5 to be one of the worst pieces of crap to have ever graced my HD, an insult to intelligence.
    With EU4, I    uhm..ok this is a tough one. I am a huge fan of the EU and CIV series, been playing since EU2 and the very first civ game, pure genius. They did with EU4 more or less what they did to the civ series: streamlined. If this is good for you, then you'lll ike EU4. Personally, I consider civ5 to be one of the worst pieces of crap to have ever graced my HD, an insult to intelligence.
    With EU4, I am not very sure. To understand why, one must have some sort of previous knowledge/experience of EU titles.
    The game is playable, and moderately enjoyable. Many dynamics have been completely changed, such as economy sliders (economy sliders?), the ever present money vs inflation vs tech investment "thing" (gone), trade is a sort of mystery I still have to figure out (but it's waaaay less relevant than in the older titles) and a very heavy reliance on a sort of point system determining tech progress and national ideas development (points generated are determined by your leader's skills, so you basically pray for a good leader).
    Everything is easier, simpler and more direct than in the older titles. Which does'nt mean I think it's better. I had perfectly accustomed to the old system, so these changes I view as unnecessary at worst and marginal at best. What I may say is that certainly the game tries to play like a classic EU title, and ends up being a slighlty less interesting "adventure" than in the previous installments.
    Of course there will be mods and patches, so I guess the game is going to change a lot.
    Suffice to say that my very first game at EU4 I chose to play the Pope, 3 starting provinces and lousy economy. Anyone who has played a EU game knows what I'm talking about. Well, after 50-60 years, I had all of Italy from Modena to Palermo. Core status and culture can be changed rather effortlessly, making expansion easy. I found all very very easy.
    Oh and of course, welcome to steam. I hope you are not bothered by things like not being able to play a LAN game with your brother sitting next to you without passing through steam, or having to read every time you start the game things like :"BUY NATIONAL MONUMENTS NOW!! ENTER OPEN STORE!!" which is kind of lame in my book especially in a strategic title (and btw, so I don't get national monuments if I don't pay?).
    At the end of the day, right now EU4 is a blander, less interesting and VERY streamlined version of EU3. A completely modded EU3 is a much more "mature" game.
    Time will tell if this game's aim was to change the genre and revive it in a constructive way, or to allow people to play EU on their iphones or something.    … Expand
  48. Yazah
    Sep 7, 2013
    5
    This game is your standard micro-management world domination type of game. It has a demo, so check it out and see if it is worth buying.

    Two things I don't like: 1) Almost all the 10 star reviews on here are from people who have never reviewed another game, and they all use pretty much the same language. So be suspicious. 2) The game itself has tons of DLC so if you want the    This game is your standard micro-management world domination type of game. It has a demo, so check it out and see if it is worth buying.

    Two things I don't like:

    1) Almost all the 10 star reviews on here are from people who have never reviewed another game, and they all use pretty much the same language. So be suspicious.

    2) The game itself has tons of DLC so if you want the "full experience" it costs closer to $70, not the $40 you pay initially.

    Beside that, rebels in the game are severely overpowered, and so world domination becomes more of a "whack-a-mole" challenge with rebels that magically arise from poor and remote provinces with 10 armies. Sure, keep your people happy, give them what they want, expand slowly I get it. But if you want anything resembling a "quick" game (under 30 hours) this is not it. And the 30 hours aren't fun it's just waiting for things to build, hoping nobody declares war on you for the things you did 500 years ago, and totally disrupting your empire's stability.

    Also, research: It penalizes you for getting ahead, which basically takes away any incentive for a technological type victory and instead forces you into the cookie-cutter "gentle wars and diplomacy" approach that this is built around.

    Overall, game design needs a bit of diversity, and more strategic options to make it replayable.    … Expand
  49. Relian
    Jun 1, 2014
    5
    Tried playing this game and just couldn't get into it. I kept getting wars with 8+ factions against me, and it just took forever to get anything done. Boring.
  50. swammerdam
    Feb 19, 2015
    5
    Good strategic game with lots to take care of. But way to much negative point, the tutorial mission are useless which make it really hard to understand that complex game. There is a lots of grammar mistake in the French version, and the text is way to small in 1920 p .
  51. Refar
    Sep 2, 2013
    5
    Somewhat disappointing. My expectations were quite high, and unfortunately the game did not live up to them. From the mechanics point of view there are a couple of steps back or things missing compared to the previous EU3. Probably leaving space for future DLC (and there are already a dozen of them out, the game being a month old).
    And then there is the issue with the ancient    Somewhat disappointing. My expectations were quite high, and unfortunately the game did not live up to them. From the mechanics point of view there are a couple of steps back or things missing compared to the previous EU3. Probably leaving space for future DLC (and there are already a dozen of them out, the game being a month old).
    And then there is the issue with the ancient engine/interface. Barely any options to setup the graphical detail, bitmap fonts not scaling with resolution and other small things like that.

    I think with time, patches and DLC content, the game might some day become really good, bit it is not there yet.    … Expand
  52. tbas11
    Sep 10, 2013
    5
    This is not a bad game but it is a significant downgrade from EU3.

    My biggest problem is that the gameplay feels extremely game-y. The technology system is beyond ridiculous. A country that invests heavily in colonial technology will exhaust all of its "diplomatic points" and will have terrible ship technology, which is absurd. Likewise a country that constantly goes to war will    This is not a bad game but it is a significant downgrade from EU3.

    My biggest problem is that the gameplay feels extremely game-y. The technology system is beyond ridiculous. A country that invests heavily in colonial technology will exhaust all of its "diplomatic points" and will have terrible ship technology, which is absurd. Likewise a country that constantly goes to war will exhaust all its "military points" and end up with terrible military technology, which is the opposite of what should happen in reality.

    I understand why Paradox did this to prevent big countries from getting to much momentum and eating all the little ones. However, it doesn't work, since all the same countries that dominated in EU3 will still dominate in EU4. Likewise, it forces the player to spend a lot of time sitting around doing nothing, since the points system rewards passiveness and punishes any sort of player action. This is especially true with non-European countries who get hit with -1 tech points.

    The game also weakens the player's ability to control his country's direction, compared to EU3. No longer are there sliders. Much of your nation's success will come from your monarch's statistics (pure luck) as well as luck with the CONSTANT random events.

    It also suffers from the exact same major problems as EU3, none of which Paradox bothered to fix: easily abusable enemy AI and "blobbing" by countries like France and the Ottomans.

    Pros:
    + Easy to learn for new players
    + Good music

    Cons:
    - Less intuitive technology system than EU3
    - Same AI problems as EU3 (especially with regards to troop movement)
    - Historically unrealistic domination by the same countries as in EU3 (France, Ottomans, Ming)
    - Too many random events take control out of the hands of the player
    - Lack of any significant gameplay improvements from its predecessor, in fact a downgrade when playing non-Western countries
    - Game rewards passive play through the points system    … Expand
  53. mekane84
    Dec 11, 2013
    5
    This game was really cool at first, but by the end of my game (after 60 hours of game play or so) the game has lost all of the fun and interesting elements to it. The strategy in the game seems very limited. By comparison, I feel that Civ 5 has WAY more strategical depth and important decisions to make throughout an entire game.

    -Technology is a joke: its impractical to take    This game was really cool at first, but by the end of my game (after 60 hours of game play or so) the game has lost all of the fun and interesting elements to it. The strategy in the game seems very limited. By comparison, I feel that Civ 5 has WAY more strategical depth and important decisions to make throughout an entire game.

    -Technology is a joke: its impractical to take technologies ahead of time, so you end up at the same technological ability as all of the other top rivals. The only real difference would be through the Idea groups. That's basically you're biggest economic strategical decision to make in the game which Idea groups to invest in. However, these aren't exactly overly influential to the game play.

    Decisions on money spending: You basically have to choose which buildings to build, or how many troops to raise. I don't feel like this decision is generally very difficult, or even that important. Usually you get as big of an army/navy as you need, and spend the rest on buildings. The buildings don't do much though, and its usually not tough to figure out where or what buildings to build.

    Combat: Combat is really annoying more than strategical. The AI is very pesky and it forces you to constantly pay attention and combat their movements with your own. Its very tedious because they can be very hit and run style, and unless you pay very close attention and turn down the game speed, they will take advantage of you. And even when you do pay close attention, its not difficult to figure out where you want your troops, its just tedious work.

    Diplomacy: Annoying. I am allied with England, but if I go to War with France and their allies Burgundy and Scottland, England won't really help me, they will only attack Scottland and leave me to die via huge armies from Burgandy/France. Also, when they call me to war, and I help them by taking over all of France, they will then sign for peace, and I get no new territories, wtf...

    Random Events: powerful but uncontrollable? no thanks.

    Positives:
    -I do like the UI, its fairly easy to do things in this game mass build, queue units, get to different screens, transport units.
    -Music is really good, though if you don't like it, it could get repetitive.
    -First 100 years were pretty exciting, more things to do at that point.

    I am definitely disappointed in this game. It is not fun. This game is complicated because it has a lot of different components to it, and hard to figure out how they all work, but it is not complicated from a strategy perspective, i think you'll see how simple it really is after you figure out how all the components of this game work. Like another reviewer said, its basically Risk with a thin layer of economy and diplomacy attached.    … Expand
  54. jmhoffer
    Oct 29, 2015
    5
    Europa Universalis is nearly brilliant. Nearly.

    On the grand strategy level, it is beautiful; make alliances, arrange marriages, control trade, pirate your rivals' trade, colonise the primitive lands and more. But where it fails spectacularly is on the TACTICAL level. Which, if you plan on expanding by conquest, is major. The inherent problem with combat is that you have zero    Europa Universalis is nearly brilliant. Nearly.

    On the grand strategy level, it is beautiful; make alliances, arrange marriages, control trade, pirate your rivals' trade, colonise the primitive lands and more.

    But where it fails spectacularly is on the TACTICAL level. Which, if you plan on expanding by conquest, is major.

    The inherent problem with combat is that you have zero control over it. You send in some armies and then everything is handled automatically. The problem with this is that the combat is SPECTACULARLY complex. And despite being complex and difficult, the only control you have is how many men you send into battle and whether or not they have a general leading them.

    This means that you win or lose battles for entirely unknown reasons or by total random chance. The battle system is so complex that the only way people actually know anything about it is by delving into the code. Despite this, again, you have ZERO control. Worse yet, random chance can easily screw you over when you otherwise have an overwhelming advantage.

    Unless you study the battle system like you study for your college exams, you have no chance of understanding it or how to win. This completely takes away from the rest of the game to the point where it just gets frustrating and no longer fun unless you have a strange obsession or literally have no life other than working and this game.

    Of course, the combat becomes much easier when you get cannons. The secret to cannons? Get a **** ton of them. The more you have, the more likely you are to win. So have as many cannons as you have men in melee and you'll nearly always win. But until then, combat is spectacularly difficult without doing an immense amount of research and asking for immense amounts of help from people that have delved into the code.

    Either pick a start date where cannons are already available or only fight when you have overwhelming numbers on your side.    … Expand
  55. Spartan91
    Nov 29, 2018
    5
    This game is a huge meh, and definitely the WORST paradox game I've played. Compared to HoI and Crusader Kings this is just awful. Mostly boring and trying to give the impression that there's actually a lot of options, while having very little actual substance. In the end the whole thing still feels unfinished and lazy.
    It really doesn't help that just like so many other games it still    This game is a huge meh, and definitely the WORST paradox game I've played. Compared to HoI and Crusader Kings this is just awful. Mostly boring and trying to give the impression that there's actually a lot of options, while having very little actual substance. In the end the whole thing still feels unfinished and lazy.
    It really doesn't help that just like so many other games it still basically boils down to fighting wars, therefore battles, which like so many other games just comes down to luck. Although this is especially lazy by just determining it through literal dice rolls which it shows you    … Expand
  56. Bad_Reviewer
    Jan 4, 2022
    5
    The game feels so empty without $300-$400 of DLC. The game has fun nation RP but it will cost you $400. I like the game but it needs to add the DLC to the base game.
  57. vXxo0oxXv
    Oct 6, 2013
    4
    After about 25 hours I decided I'd had enough. I entirely appreciate the hard work and research that went into this game, but when I play a game I'm looking for entertainment, not a history lesson. The game's UI is overly complicated, and difficult to navigate. The tutorials are short and vague and don't really explain how to play the game. The gameplay is stiff and feels linear. When IAfter about 25 hours I decided I'd had enough. I entirely appreciate the hard work and research that went into this game, but when I play a game I'm looking for entertainment, not a history lesson. The game's UI is overly complicated, and difficult to navigate. The tutorials are short and vague and don't really explain how to play the game. The gameplay is stiff and feels linear. When I play this game, it feels like I'm staring and watching the game play itself most of the time. One of the more exciting aspects of the game is clicking on a button to send a diplomat to another country, so you can watch a number climb on the diplomacy screen.. wtf? Feels more like a spreadsheet than a game.… Expand
  58. Surg3on
    Aug 15, 2013
    4
    It may be a good game however there is one critical flaw. The text in the game (and this is a text heavy game!) is difficult to read at a resolution of 1900x1200 (native monitor resolution).

    Until UI scaling is implemented the game its unplayable for any prolonged period of time. It will give you serious eyestrain if you have a high DPI monitor.
  59. AtlasOrion
    Nov 22, 2013
    4
    I have to agree with the posters that say the text is far too small, and really the whole UI is way to small. It's like paradox is trying to show off as much of their map as possible, but it's really unspectacular anyway. Horrible, tiny, little icons spread all the way around the map, things should be centralized to one side, or two at most.

    This is a really slow game, very hard to    I have to agree with the posters that say the text is far too small, and really the whole UI is way to small. It's like paradox is trying to show off as much of their map as possible, but it's really unspectacular anyway. Horrible, tiny, little icons spread all the way around the map, things should be centralized to one side, or two at most.

    This is a really slow game, very hard to get into unlike other games where you can hop right in, pick it up more or less right away, and only have to learn about or research a few alien principals or gameplay mechanics. I'm sure it's satisfying for those that enjoy it, but it's DEFINITELY not created in a way that will appeal to a wider spectrum of gamers and gaming styles.

    Bottom line: both the game and the gameplay need to be a lot more inviting and user friendly.    … Expand
  60. iamnotoriginal
    Oct 17, 2013
    4
    Of course I realize that strategy games aren't for everyone. And people can be overwhelmed extremely at first. But this game I can proudly say fixed about every problem in EU3. It also made the game harder. Which I am happy of. The main great thing about this game is that not only it can take you an entire day to finish the game, but also each time you play it it's different. And not likeOf course I realize that strategy games aren't for everyone. And people can be overwhelmed extremely at first. But this game I can proudly say fixed about every problem in EU3. It also made the game harder. Which I am happy of. The main great thing about this game is that not only it can take you an entire day to finish the game, but also each time you play it it's different. And not like minor changes. I mean major changes that can change the entire outcome of the game. One game france can be a major superpower. The next it's the weakest country in Europe. Its the randomness that I love the most about this game. And of course the minor changes of graphics. But I can proudly say this is the best game ever made paradox.… Expand
  61. brajmond
    Nov 28, 2013
    4
    A lot of gamers here complain that the game is hard and difficult to play, but the truth is quite the opposite !
    To me, it feels just like a complex version of Risk! Here lies the problem for me... This game could have been so much better it feels just like a remake of an european cult classic by the holywood producers...
    Where is the internal dynamics of the state there is none..    A lot of gamers here complain that the game is hard and difficult to play, but the truth is quite the opposite !
    To me, it feels just like a complex version of Risk! Here lies the problem for me... This game could have been so much better it feels just like a remake of an european cult classic by the holywood producers...
    Where is the internal dynamics of the state there is none.. Where is the charm of the eras played through the game? (Renaissance, baroque) Where are the strategical and tactical elements of the battles played?... and so, on so on.. Nice graphics though..    … Expand
  62. calo
    Dec 27, 2013
    4
    I love Paradox, and Europa, Crusader Kings etc. However, this felt like a total disgrace to the series.
    It is awkward to begin with and yet it also manages to dump itself down considerably. But do not fear...
    We get coalitions! Which just doesn't work. I would be happy if neighbour states in fear of you formed these, but Ohhh no! It doesn't work by fear it doesn't work by how much    I love Paradox, and Europa, Crusader Kings etc. However, this felt like a total disgrace to the series.
    It is awkward to begin with and yet it also manages to dump itself down considerably. But do not fear...

    We get coalitions!
    Which just doesn't work. I would be happy if neighbour states in fear of you formed these, but Ohhh no! It doesn't work by fear it doesn't work by how much you want to war with them either.
    It works by "over extension" ie. if you have too many uncored provinces.
    What?
    Yes! Totally understandable why say France, with no colonies is mad at me Britain, in having too many uncored colonies.. Ofcourse! This totally effects them.

    Don't worry though we still have a Austria-dominant HRE which is always formed.
    And don't worry! France always acquires parts of Spain, and Spain, Portugal.
    And don't worry! We get an over-powered Denmark who can quite easily form Scandinavia.

    Culture change is super easy now too, and no matter what, your nation will always end up technologically in-advanced.

    No new provinces are introduced as far as I can tell and even better we are limited to having so many relations!

    The only good part is the CK2 EU4 converter, everything else is the exact same.
    A waste of money. If you want this game: Buy Europa Universalis III    … Expand
  63. BillNyeTheScien
    Feb 8, 2014
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The game is not horrible. But not what I expected there are a few things that get on my nerves when playing the game. One is that the game is very dark. not bright at all. Another thing is that the mac version is extremely laggy and delays when you try to move the screen. the time speed increase should be a little faster. And I don't like the new technology and nerfed buildings. I just pointed out some of the bad parts of the game. I do like the new relations and diplomacy system instead of there being a random chance of a nation accepting an alliance like in the third title.… Expand
  64. Telembrium
    Dec 1, 2015
    4
    Europa Universalis 4 is a game that I want to like, but that I just cant due to a number of different issues. From a severe reliance on RNG to inconsistent AI competence, the game just irritates me whenever I try to play it to the point where I don't enjoy it. The large amount of DLC with features that have large effect on the base game don't help either.

    By far the worst problem with    Europa Universalis 4 is a game that I want to like, but that I just cant due to a number of different issues. From a severe reliance on RNG to inconsistent AI competence, the game just irritates me whenever I try to play it to the point where I don't enjoy it. The large amount of DLC with features that have large effect on the base game don't help either.

    By far the worst problem with the game is the AI. Like others have said, the multiplayer is barely functional, so this is a primarily single-player game. What does a single-player game need? AI that is both intelligent and consistent. Instead, it ranges from being near-brain-dead to nonsensically clairvoyant. The AI will frequently march armies back and forth between two provinces while their country gets occupied by a tiny force in comparison to theirs. They'll sign peace deals for idiotic things. I've seen Brittany force a Burgundy that annexed France to release France only to have France declare war on Brittany to vassalise them immediately after. Then there's attrition: AI are completely unaffected by attrition caused by troops that are not their own, frequently resulting in doomstacks of 100K+ men. The AI is unaffected by naval attrition entirely. They'll stupidly colonise provinces with no value while high-value ones are unclaimed. Then there's the flip side. Several small nations will manage to act as a single, cohesive force and win against impossible odds because their large enemy splits its armies into tiny chunks and never changes its strategy in reaction to its losses. The AI will know exactly when armies are coming and exactly when a country is in a weakened state, resulting in a dogpiling effect that destroys otherwise strong nations. Paradox decided to try and fix this by adding in a feature which gives bonuses to a country which is suffering, which offers massive benefits to large countries while giving small ones nothing.

    Speaking of massive benefits to large countries while completely ignoring small ones, Paradox loves to do this. Larger countries get free diplomats, a no-upkeep general, and are somehow able to manage their larger administration more effectively than a small country can manage their smaller one. Larger countries also get benefits that change with their government type, such as conquered lands being more susceptible to pay taxes and contribute manpower. What do small countries get? Nothing. Worse, the larger countries get bonuses that specifically make it easier to peacefully vassalise and promptly annex the smaller countries without giving the smaller country a chance to become powerful. Then there are "lucky nations", which are significant bonuses which get applied to countries which were historically successful, just in case their overpowered "idea" bonuses, or the bonuses from their rich lands, or the bonuses from tailored missions and events weren't enough.

    Then there are more general annoyances. The rivalry system for example, forces the AI to have as many rivals as possible even when it is completely against their strategic interests, resulting in things like Scotland fighting an independent Ireland rather than cooperating with them and leaving England to just show up and annex at their leisure. As mentioned, the heavy reliance on RNG in combat constantly results in losses that should have been victories. Then there's development, which rather than increasing slowly in a somewhat uniform manner with exceptions to areas of plenty such as large cities and trade centers, increases based on the expense of magical "monarch points" to conjure taxpayers and soldiers wherever one wises. This results in metropolises next to dirt hut villages and in ridiculous places like Shetland.

    Finally, the DLC. Imagine if Bethesda released Dawnguard in parts: For $30, you can have the mechanical changes: such as vampirism, the quests, and crossbows. For $12, the dawnguard and vampire armour would come with the new models and textures rather than just looking like the base game's leather armour. For $4.50, you get the music from Dawnguard. Oh, and by the way, the game's mechanics were changed to be balanced around having crossbows and vampire attacks with the "free" patch shipped alongside the DLC, meaning the game is unbalanced if you don't have the mechanical changes DLC. If you choose not to update though, you won't get the included bug fixes or sparse optimisation and gameplay improvements. That's a total of $46.50 for the DLC included with ONE patch, for a $60 game. To top it off, mix in a hearty serving of game-breaking bugs, incompatible saves, crashing, and problems ranging all the way to being unable to even launch the game for at least a week after the patch. That would be Skyrim's Dawnguard DLC if it were made by Paradox.

    Overall, I'd give the game a 4/10, because it shows potential, but nearly $240 (and counting) to play the full game leads me to believe that that potential will never be more than just potential.    … Expand
  65. Vim88pl
    Dec 16, 2018
    4
    I have decided to give this game negative review, because too many pieces which should have been in base game, are in DLC. Transforming your country into Empire, designating a March, increasing development, are few example, which in base game wondered how it can be done and checked online only to learn, that it is in DLC. And it is not one or two DLC, or some cheap DLC, but expensive DLCs.I have decided to give this game negative review, because too many pieces which should have been in base game, are in DLC. Transforming your country into Empire, designating a March, increasing development, are few example, which in base game wondered how it can be done and checked online only to learn, that it is in DLC. And it is not one or two DLC, or some cheap DLC, but expensive DLCs. Secondly, new updates regularly are ruining my saves… Expand
  66. proneisntsupine
    Nov 18, 2018
    4
    One of my most played games ever. I have over 2500 hours in this game, putting it behind only Diablo 2 as my second most played game of all time. However, I can not recommend the game in its current state. Each patch since 1.19 has felt incomplete, and has left the game feeling hollow and half built. The changes to the mission system and addition of government reforms seem to also indicateOne of my most played games ever. I have over 2500 hours in this game, putting it behind only Diablo 2 as my second most played game of all time. However, I can not recommend the game in its current state. Each patch since 1.19 has felt incomplete, and has left the game feeling hollow and half built. The changes to the mission system and addition of government reforms seem to also indicate a development trend towards shoveling out low effort DLC and slapping a $15 price tag on it while not addressing serious underlying issues with game mechanics (most notably naval combat and subject AI, both of which have been major requests of the community for years). At this point in the game's life span, it seems to be best to wait and hope for an EUV rather than invest the $200+ to get all the gameplay changing DLCs… Expand
  67. Crimson9
    Dec 21, 2022
    4
    Probably the worst of the main Paradox games. This is basically a map painter. As a game it does have some tactical considerations and is more complex than risk, but not nearly as much as a game like HOI4. As a simulator it is total nonsense.
  68. TheTruthFromTed
    Jun 19, 2023
    4
    The game itself is actually quite good, I just can't recommend this game because the poor excuses of devs have locked a cr*p load of essential features behind several paywalls which makes around half the factions and thus game unplayable. if your willing to invest triple the amound of the base game on dlc's go ahead. Otherwise don't bother.
  69. Daisai
    Aug 23, 2014
    3
    Although this game is not as bad designed as HoI it still is very bugged and very poorly designed.
    There are so many key bugs in this game that are causing you to lose a battle and for a game that was released in 2013 you would expect a more finished product by now.
    Ones you play and therefor also test this product a little further ( which the developers did not do ) you come across    Although this game is not as bad designed as HoI it still is very bugged and very poorly designed.
    There are so many key bugs in this game that are causing you to lose a battle and for a game that was released in 2013 you would expect a more finished product by now.

    Ones you play and therefor also test this product a little further ( which the developers did not do ) you come across some game breaking bugs.
    Moral values not working and manpower simply disappearing when a army is to big ( with the thousands a tick and without the message ).

    Those kind of bugs should have been fixed long before the game is even released, however this developer is more busy releasing dlc for this game and not fixing these bugs.

    Thats why this game gets a 3, the gameplay is poor and the fact that they give poor support on their product makes it so that they earn this score.    … Expand
  70. lancedance2
    Nov 17, 2013
    3
    I'm done with this game. It's good at first but it is almost a copy and paste of the last game with a couple added features and a little better graphics. That's not my main issue though, the problem is the "random" negative events. The game constantly has one to take down my stability every time I get it up one. If I didn't re-load every time that happened, until I got an event thatI'm done with this game. It's good at first but it is almost a copy and paste of the last game with a couple added features and a little better graphics. That's not my main issue though, the problem is the "random" negative events. The game constantly has one to take down my stability every time I get it up one. If I didn't re-load every time that happened, until I got an event that didn't effect my stability, I would have quit much sooner. These events got more frequent the longer I play into the game to the point were the game is unplayable. This is either a bug or an idiotic development decisions, either way I've quit playing until this is fixed. Buy EU 3 instead or download it for free off pirate bay if you really want to try it out.… Expand
  71. rpundurs
    Mar 6, 2014
    3
    I've never experienced a game like it in its attention to historical detail. I've likewise never experienced a game like it in how little fun it is to play.

    Paradox has produced a game that will entice the student of history in you, but will likely bore the rest of you. To begin with, EU4's presentation is nothing if not opaque. This time they've made more of an effort to document the    I've never experienced a game like it in its attention to historical detail. I've likewise never experienced a game like it in how little fun it is to play.

    Paradox has produced a game that will entice the student of history in you, but will likely bore the rest of you. To begin with, EU4's presentation is nothing if not opaque. This time they've made more of an effort to document the mechanisms of play in tutorials (and a fifty-page manual), but these efforts are still grossly insufficient to meet the punishing learning curve. Without constant reference to the wiki or official forums, a new player will be hopelessly lost. Despite what Paradox grognards seem to believe, this is not a positive feature.

    Ultimately, should you invest the 10+ hours needed to arm yourself with the basic understanding needed to play at all, you will be left with an intensely hollow experience. In the long run, it can be a joy to see your plans come to fruition, but in the interim, you will be left with a lot of clock-watching and empty busywork as the game continues to bombard you with trivial pop-ups for mundane tasks that, irritatingly, cannot be left on autopilot (the Curia control system is most egregious in this regard). The sheer volume of flags, however, belie their emptiness - there's very little fun to be had in maintaining your empire while waiting for your next opportunity to strike.

    For all the Europa Universalis series has been billed as part of the military strategy genre, the warfare is incredibly shallow. There are virtually no tactics involved in prosecuting a war; in some cases terrain may aid a defender, but neither logistics nor heroics are any match for economics in EU's world. Ultimately, this is a game of diplomacy - of decades-long plans to inveigle certain nations into attacking you only to be crushed, of forming royal marriages for the sake of later usurping that nation's throne, of excising provinces from a rival empire over and over again until it is small enough to be vassalized. That description gives the game an air of intrigue and mystery, but make no mistake: the game has all the mystique (and presentation) of an Excel spreadsheet.

    The actual mechanics of play are deceptively simplistic - success in this game relies on diplomatic strategy, but shaping a good strategy relies on an intense, almost professional understanding of the game's unexplained and often invisible logic. That's not even bringing the unfair and unpredictable nature of random events (such as the infamous comet) into the discussion. Ultimately, the best strategies are those that play to the AI's weaknesses and the idiosyncracies of the game mechanics. Though carrying out your strategy requires nothing more strenuous than navigation through a few menus, it is a long process of trial and error to determine which buttons to push and when, and the best methods are often counter-intuitive (if not totally illogical). For instance, the Overextension mechanics restrict the number of provinces you can hope to gain in war to such an extent that the only way to expand with any speed is by integrating vassals and junior partners - and God help you if you attempt to make use of those game mechanics without several hours of wiki-crawling and a few Paradox forum threads.

    The Metacritic score for this game is extremely misleading: despite Paradox's obvious attempt to reach out to new players with polished graphics and tutorials, Europa Universalis IV is not a game that anyone outside its niche will enjoy. Paradox's grand plan for its strategy game lines is essentially to sell slight variations on the same game over and over again to a hard core of devoted fans. Those who enjoy this game are those who do not flinch at the unforgiving, opaque, tedious, and frustrating nature of the experience. For players who are not willing to spend 100+ hours clicking flags, who don't mind watching dozens of hours of work go up in smoke after a couple of random events pop, or who have no objections to constantly alt-tabbing to outside information resources, this game must be Heaven. For the rest of us, it's reminiscent of someplace altogether different.    … Expand
  72. marcantoineg
    May 13, 2018
    3
    3 words : Paradox dlc whoring. As usual this game is empty without the numerous tiny dlcs paradox spews over the years.
  73. elegioneer
    May 18, 2017
    3
    This game is the best strategy I ever played, but the problem is in Paradox: the simply broke the game in a $*%#ton of DLCs which cost half of a game itself.
  74. dlcatalin
    Jan 17, 2021
    3
    Im going to give it a 3 ! It got everything right ... it's a diamond of a game. BUT ... BUUUUT ... it's 0 fun because they spent ZERO EFFORT into making it fair and challenging. What happens is you lose your manpower in like 3 lost fights while the enemy magically has INFINITE pool of soldiers and INFINITE money. So even if you occupy ALL their provinces and SCORCH EARTH all of them andIm going to give it a 3 ! It got everything right ... it's a diamond of a game. BUT ... BUUUUT ... it's 0 fun because they spent ZERO EFFORT into making it fair and challenging. What happens is you lose your manpower in like 3 lost fights while the enemy magically has INFINITE pool of soldiers and INFINITE money. So even if you occupy ALL their provinces and SCORCH EARTH all of them and DEFEAT their armies in ONE MILLION BATTLES, they still spawn back to 100% health in a few days. Not to mention that if you have for example 10 provinces you can make a 10 unit army while the enemy can make like a 30 unit army for the same ammount of provinces with same development and everything. Its just a big unfair pile of %^& to give you the illusion of a challenge.… Expand
  75. erdogfu96
    Feb 8, 2020
    3
    I like strategy games but it's easy is hard for me. This game need to be more playable. If you write there setting named easy, than make it easy. Menus are confusing. No story and gameplay is slow. There is no depth in strategy (plots etc) .
  76. Ananisapta
    Dec 23, 2013
    2
    This is a potentially good title but not ready for prime time. Assets include the ability to take over the realm of your choice in the year of your choice and manage a lot of interesting contingencies within a realistic historical context. There's a lot not to like, however. Documentation is scanty and imperfectly grammatical. The interface is a kludge and not very intuitive for new users,This is a potentially good title but not ready for prime time. Assets include the ability to take over the realm of your choice in the year of your choice and manage a lot of interesting contingencies within a realistic historical context. There's a lot not to like, however. Documentation is scanty and imperfectly grammatical. The interface is a kludge and not very intuitive for new users, plus there are still annoying glitches after more than four months. The user forums don't notify you when a topic you're following is updated, and there is outright flaming of beginners from veteran users. Here's a representative comment: "Why don't you quit whining and learn to use a simple interface?" Perhaps the biggest problem is that the game mechanics are almost impenetrable in their complexity and the playing experience is like being nibbled to death by snails.… Expand
  77. anmont
    Jul 25, 2014
    2
    Out of Sync.

    There is nothing worse than wanting to play an advanced grand strategy game than connecting to the game with a friend and being unable to play. EU4 has not resolved this issue, and it has plagued faithful buyers for years. While this is one of my favorite series, with in-depth complicated gameplay, it is in effect a single player game. Anyone who suggests otherwise, has    Out of Sync.

    There is nothing worse than wanting to play an advanced grand strategy game than connecting to the game with a friend and being unable to play.

    EU4 has not resolved this issue, and it has plagued faithful buyers for years. While this is one of my favorite series, with in-depth complicated gameplay, it is in effect a single player game. Anyone who suggests otherwise, has not played very far into a scenario. It works great for the first couple of decades and then disintegrates into a explosion of saving the game manually across the network and reloading from the last good save.

    If you want to play this game solo, its a 9/10. BUY IT...
    If you want to play with friends, please don't buy this game and quit reading the insane comments from people who have spent less than 10 hours playing the game. Do a simple google search for eu4 and OOS and find the hundreds of threads relating to this topic, that have persisted for several years in all of Paradox strategy games (Eu3, Crusader Kings, Victoria).    … Expand
  78. alex-smollet
    Sep 5, 2014
    2
    This is randomizer - not a strategy game. Random unpredictable game events, random battle results. Very bugged patch 1.7. Waste of time. Shogun 2 or CIV5 more playable than this "product".
  79. jclaiborne2007
    Dec 15, 2015
    1
    There is only one way to play this game. Buy the base game and never ever update. This game has gone from good to horrible with every poorly conceived and ill executed expansion. All of the talent is gone to make a space game leaving 2 imbeciles to wreck this once great game. I would like to introduce these greedy sobs to a brand new concept: Quality Assurance.
  80. Cyliann
    Jun 5, 2014
    1
    Loved EU3, even with the rather abruptly ending time-line. This? Ho boy.

    Paradox Interactive has decided after a repeated amount of failures to simply stream-line their product to a now shallow experience from what used to be an intensive and deep conquering experience. As EU3, EU4 features "Random events" that causes your countries stability to go down. The difference from this game    Loved EU3, even with the rather abruptly ending time-line. This? Ho boy.

    Paradox Interactive has decided after a repeated amount of failures to simply stream-line their product to a now shallow experience from what used to be an intensive and deep conquering experience. As EU3, EU4 features "Random events" that causes your countries stability to go down. The difference from this game and the prequel is that you could spend your country's budget on increasing the country's stability, be it re-building things, bribing rebellious people or just getting things in order.

    What does this mean? Well, you sometimes had to pour every single ounce of your earnings into this as Stability meant more income and a happier populance and sometimes, the game could decide to be especially cruel and constantly ravage your country's stability. That was fine since you could be a careful ruler and prepared counter-measures such as a fat treasury or having the proper advisors. In EU4? Get unlucky with a lot of instability and you're boned by being utterly crippled by either not being able to research better governmenting or simply not gaining enough administrative power due to a rubbish leader. Rebels will also, comedically enough, everywhere at war-times, being many times the size of your country's total manpower as your entire economy also crumbles down to a shadow of It's former glory. The methods of reducing this? Wait around for administrative power. Yup. No budget relocation, no personal efforts from you and 100% impossible situations... Unless you Save & Load abuse, averting these random events.

    It removes depth, It removes customizability, It removes consequences from user input and It's simply a pile of streamlined garbage because Instead of crafting a proper tutorial to get new people into this game, Paradox decided to just slam everything down so flat, any handicapped idiot can walk over it and seeing all these 10/10's being thrown like poop from monkeys makes me believe that everyone either hasn't even tried EU3 or failed to understand even a fraction of it.

    Don't get me wrong, I understand what they were trying to do by making advisors be "point" generators instead of allocating budget.. But the thing is, advisors are vomit-inducingly expensive. At the start of my game, the year 51 after christ, I could have the option of hiring an administrative helper. He demands a down-payment of 150 gold. Understandable since he is good but the sinner here is the additional 9.3 gold EVERY MONTH. How much is that? Well, let's just say It's far above the maximum amounts you can pay to enough to fully maintain an army of about 100,000+ men when you can only maintain about 20,000 men.

    If you own 4-5 regions, you can expect a monthly income of about 2-3 gold discluding expenses. This means he either uses diamonds as toilet paper or has an incureable habit of breathing gold.. Just.... No. Try harder next time, Paradox Interactive.    … Expand
  81. Zarsus
    Sep 12, 2014
    1
    I was utterly addicted to the game.. until the 1.6 & 1.7 that just made me quit it probably forever. It's one thing to fix bugs and adding missing features, it's another thing to modify the game mechanics again and again and again and actually making the game worse.
    Now it's pretty much pointless to play any non-European nation since they'll be utterly defenseless in late games, and    I was utterly addicted to the game.. until the 1.6 & 1.7 that just made me quit it probably forever. It's one thing to fix bugs and adding missing features, it's another thing to modify the game mechanics again and again and again and actually making the game worse.
    Now it's pretty much pointless to play any non-European nation since they'll be utterly defenseless in late games, and westernization is much more excruciating with less benefits than before. If you don't westernize you are screwed; if you do you are still screwed, just a little bit less so. They might as well just stop wasting time on adding events/game mechanics for all non-European nations since there's no point in that. If I wanted to experience something completely historically accurate, I'd read Wikipedia on world history, thank you very much.
    Oh, and it's very irritating that, Monarchy Points, the one most vital resource to the game is nearly completely random, the super expensive +3 administrator means nothing when your ruler has 0 talent, and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it. Nothing. At all. So instead of screwing around with working game mechanics, how about adding some sort of successor mechanics such that the player can select from a number of different successors, each with his own pro and cons.    … Expand
  82. rowt
    Jun 16, 2017
    1
    4 years ago (when I bought it) this game was 100% worth it, kind of bland at some points and a little buggy but still lots of fun. Today, at the current prices, i can't justify dumping this amount of money on it (+DLCs, which the game feels bland and outright broken at parts without). It costs about the same as an AAA title from the past 2 years and it's just not in line with them, sorry4 years ago (when I bought it) this game was 100% worth it, kind of bland at some points and a little buggy but still lots of fun. Today, at the current prices, i can't justify dumping this amount of money on it (+DLCs, which the game feels bland and outright broken at parts without). It costs about the same as an AAA title from the past 2 years and it's just not in line with them, sorry Paradox but I'm not sorry… Expand
  83. Hiro016
    Sep 2, 2023
    1
    SAPORRA LANÇOU A 10 ANOS ATRÁS E AINDA FAZEM DLCS,FAÇAM UMA CONTINUAÇÃO LOGO ENTÃO PORRRR
  84. dainii
    Oct 5, 2021
    1
    The game could be fun but it's unstable and it runs with shutter at x1920 64gb ram and 3080. It's hilarious but after it crashed my pc for the second time I stopped laughing. The gameplay is tottaly random, meh.
  85. Jimbro84
    Apr 10, 2014
    0
    Sadly, a lot of work was put into this game and I wanted hard to like it but no, it sucks. If civ5 is a little predictable, EU4 is soo random. EU4 is superior to civ5 as to diplomacy BUT: Constant clock watching and reading of mundane pop-ups of bad news. Very few units and buildings and 90% of that implies no visuals. Not to mention that the battles are devoid of any strategy besidesSadly, a lot of work was put into this game and I wanted hard to like it but no, it sucks. If civ5 is a little predictable, EU4 is soo random. EU4 is superior to civ5 as to diplomacy BUT: Constant clock watching and reading of mundane pop-ups of bad news. Very few units and buildings and 90% of that implies no visuals. Not to mention that the battles are devoid of any strategy besides terrain modifiers and adding generals and admirals (which is more of a choice than a strategy anyways). Overly hard, boring and complicated. Virtually no tutorials. Nice graphics though.… Expand
  86. m1rev
    Dec 26, 2013
    0
    Unique historical strategy. Difficult to enter. but if you understand it, you love it. Nice graphics, user-friendly interface and addictive gameplay.
    The game has many of little things that generally create a unique gaming experience.
  87. Thunderstorm
    Sep 6, 2015
    0
    Could be a decent game, if it had a tutorial that wasn't broken and "learning" the game would be remotely fun. It requires an unknown amount of entertainment-free work for a new player to do anything meaningful. I don't know where game developers get the idea that it's ok when your game sucks for a while.

    For me it was a clear zero, a complete waste of time and money.
  88. revieweuropa
    Jun 14, 2014
    0
    It's the perfect and maybe most realistic strategy game ever.
    I knew that when I bought it, but didn't think about what it literally means. It means, you have to spend maybe years to conquere the World, maybe at least 3 weeks of intensive gaming, to double the size of your country. It definitely takes too much time, and in my opinion it definitely lacks an easy mode.
    I recommend you to    It's the perfect and maybe most realistic strategy game ever.
    I knew that when I bought it, but didn't think about what it literally means. It means, you have to spend maybe years to conquere the World, maybe at least 3 weeks of intensive gaming, to double the size of your country. It definitely takes too much time, and in my opinion it definitely lacks an easy mode.
    I recommend you to play it, if you have at least two, or more lifes. If you only have one, do not waste 2 or more years on playing this game.    … Expand
  89. ShiningDec
    Jul 16, 2014
    0
    The game was good at the begining, but after each patch, its quality drop constantly. Developer make the game become more boring and prevent player from expanding by any tool they can imagine. Please don't buy this game.
  90. Voyou
    May 25, 2021
    0
    Game is text-heavy, as you would expect. Yet game doesn't offer any means to increase text size until it becomes readable. That basic failure requires so low an intelligence that you would wonder why the game maker even tried to make a strategy game. Anyway, it cannot physically be played, so the intrinsic value of the software is simply zero.
  91. Ntek_sr
    Dec 7, 2015
    0
    I have played the game for about 1000 hour. After a update to create a "pay-wall", you have to buy a DLC to be able to develop your provinces. And you buy the development by "Monarc"-points that is the same for a large as a small country. Mighty empires will not develop.

    Other untested major changes they did (almost everything changed) destroyed the balance and alter the game into    I have played the game for about 1000 hour. After a update to create a "pay-wall", you have to buy a DLC to be able to develop your provinces. And you buy the development by "Monarc"-points that is the same for a large as a small country. Mighty empires will not develop.

    Other untested major changes they did (almost everything changed) destroyed the balance and alter the game into another game. A game that is bad.

    Sadly it seems that Paradox have begin to abuse DLC a lot... don't know if I can trust them any more.    … Expand
  92. MikeB26
    Apr 27, 2017
    0
    Bought it. Wasn't able to start a Steam account. Was told to "try again later." Did this several times over 30 minutes. $39. Can't play. Rip off.
  93. Jyadaus
    Dec 14, 2022
    0
    fix the sieges. they took mountain level 2 fort at %14 and i took grassland level 1 fort at %35. this is **** stupid.

    i forgot to mention the stupidty of ai. **** idiots
  94. Dickm4n
    Jun 9, 2020
    0
    The unbalanced countries / dynasties make multiplayer impossible. The graphic is just below average. Didn't feel entertained while playing, nor was I educated in history.
  95. xxBat
    Jun 29, 2020
    0
    I'm gonna start off with saying that this game (without taking the DLC policy into account) is a masterpiece! It's a bunch of fun with friends, but make sure that you play with people that don't get too mad at you for betraying them, because the multiplayer side of the game is the most fun I've ever had in a game. It includes everything you need for a truly fun and immersive grand strategyI'm gonna start off with saying that this game (without taking the DLC policy into account) is a masterpiece! It's a bunch of fun with friends, but make sure that you play with people that don't get too mad at you for betraying them, because the multiplayer side of the game is the most fun I've ever had in a game. It includes everything you need for a truly fun and immersive grand strategy experience. The main downside of the game is the DLC policy which truly is a stain on this game's legacy, as of now it costs you hundreds of euro/dollars to get all the DLC without a sale, which I would strongly advise against, personally, I got all the DLC on Humble Bundle, you should wait for a sale and then buy the game with the DLC. Or you can buy the game, then see if you enjoy it and if yes, come back when there's a sale and buy the DLC. But the upside is that if you have a friend/host who has all DLC, for the duration of the multiplayer session, all of the host's DLC will be activated for all players. I would heavily advise any Grand Strategy/History enthusiast looking for a fun game, spanning from 1444 to 1821 to choose Europa Universalis IV!… Expand
next
Page:

Awards & Rankings

11
#11 Best PC Game of 2013
34
#34 Most Discussed PC Game of 2013
1
#1 Most Shared PC Game of 2013

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
87

Generally favorable reviews - based on 34 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 31 out of 34
  2. Mixed: 3 out of 34
  3. Negative: 0 out of 34
  1. DarkStation
    Dec 12, 2013
    80
    Once players overcome the initial learning curve, Europa Universalis IV will prove a memorable strategy experience that provides as much fun stories as it does sheer tactical complexity.
    Read full review
  2. PC PowerPlay
    Oct 28, 2013
    90
    Somehow retains the series' trademark braininess and complexity while being clearer, simpler and far more fun. [Nov 2013, p.92]
  3. LEVEL (Czech Republic)
    Oct 24, 2013
    100
    The ultimate strategic simulator of an early modern history state with wide options for both success and failure. Do you want to unite Britain under Scotland, thwart the Spanish Reconquista or maintain the Inca empire? Suit yourself. [Issue#234]
See all critic reviews »