Europa Universalis: Rome

 PC
User Score
6.0

Mixed or average reviews- based on 48 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 19 out of 48
  2. Mixed: 11 out of 48
  3. Negative: 18 out of 48
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. Infamous_Z
    Feb 20, 2014
    2
    Acquired this game on the cheap at a Salvation Army thrift store for a few bucks. I won't even get into Paradox's policy of locking down support and other technical issues behind a forum that requires fresh reg codes, and their support of the forum troll's who's answer to everything is snark and sarcasm. This is about the game itself...

    Europa Universalis: Rome, I went into after much    Acquired this game on the cheap at a Salvation Army thrift store for a few bucks. I won't even get into Paradox's policy of locking down support and other technical issues behind a forum that requires fresh reg codes, and their support of the forum troll's who's answer to everything is snark and sarcasm. This is about the game itself...

    Europa Universalis: Rome, I went into after much play on Europa Universalis 3. The game seems graphically the same, just on a far smaller map. The game did not strike me as fun, as while EU3 was very much more straightforward by comparison, this game has a Crusader Kings-like game with various characters that you have no reason to get invested in or care about, and the game does not explain just why you SHOULD care. It screams that you SHOULD pay attention to them, that approving this person as a General or this person to office gives some character of yours points, but with so many different characters and none of them to really call YOURS (Whereas some games let you focus on and build a dynasty), the characters here lead to a sense of detachment to the game. And that may of killed a part of the game that others feel is crucial: The entire characters side of it. The Total War games give you a reason to care about what happens to your character, by simply not overwhelming you, and showing you just how your actions influence that character. My Roman General in TW has a knack for management? Then I'll assign him to govern that frontier post that is crucial to my expansion. My Roman General in EU:Rome got a job and I get higher standing with him? Okay, tell me why that matters? The game seems to want you to care about this, but it is incapable of telling you why.

    The other side of the game, Empire management, comes off as severely limited when compared to EU3 as well. The tech path is very slow, and you don't get a feel for progress, and playing as any other side but Rome is just asking for a beating. This side alone, unlike what I experienced in TW: Rome which starts you off with a divided Rome and the prize of a united Rome MUST be earned, just didn't seem to suck me in either. Both sides of the game, just did not catch my interest nor hold me in it.

    What DID I like? Well, the music is nice. Paradox games usually has nice music.

    The game did have several bugs, which seems to be fixed by the Patch hiding as an Expansion, and I'm getting a growing dislike for Paradox game's policy of rolling out severely buggy games, and fixing them only with patches you have to buy.

    This game gets a 2, but only cause of the music and..well..the music. The game was acquired at the Salvation Army, and after a few years of collecting dust on my shelf, it is slated to go back there this weekend.

    I much more recommend you get Total War: Rome 1.    … Expand
  2. Gratson
    Dec 11, 2013
    4
    What a buggy mess! I've tried 3 times playing this game and always end up crashing after a while. Also the battles sometimes make no sense, my 100000 troops get slaughtered and the enemy loses 10 troops or something. Disappointed and just spent my money on a game I'll probably not play above 5 hours. Avoid this is my recommendation.
  3. WagnerM.
    May 6, 2008
    10
    For those who love a good deep strategy game, with the possibility to change history, this is the game to stay playing for hours and hours, and hours.
  4. KevinBishop
    Jul 5, 2008
    2
    Very poor game, I expected much better from Paradox. It is basically just like EU3, except with a lot less nations to fight and play as, more tedious bugs and features that annoy me to no end, and a different time setting.

    I did not like it. I love EU3 however, and will continue to play it.
  5. Ian277
    May 11, 2011
    2
    this is a horrible game if you know how to play in the first place it is too complecated it forced you to micromanage every aspect of everything. i hate the gameplay and the strategy is dumb i've had a battle i lost about 10000 men they lost 0. totally unrealistic. dont buy it is just a broken AI and some thrown in battles. this game was only 10 bucks so i guess i am not all that mad.
  6. [Anonymous]
    Apr 24, 2008
    10
    Best Paradox game since Crusader Kings pay no attention to the grogs they always complain.
  7. Skulb
    Mar 12, 2015
    7
    This game manages to both hit a few highs and some real lows, so clearly all the other user reviews on Metacritic are wrong. Allow me to explain:
    EU Rome is a grand strategy game set in the 5th century BC. If you want to play as Rome this means you will play during the period when Rome grew from a small European power on the Italian peninsula to an empire. It gives one of the better    This game manages to both hit a few highs and some real lows, so clearly all the other user reviews on Metacritic are wrong. Allow me to explain:
    EU Rome is a grand strategy game set in the 5th century BC. If you want to play as Rome this means you will play during the period when Rome grew from a small European power on the Italian peninsula to an empire. It gives one of the better representations of this that I have seen in a computer game, and faithfully simulates each front the Romans had to hold, including the home front where its increasingly arrogant generals would assert themselves. To the north the Gauls and other barbarians, to the east a divided but potentially powerful Greece and to the south the Roman nemesis, Carthage. The game also does its best to represent Senate politics, although the individual politicians are not terribly interesting. At least it`s there though, as are many other aspects of Roman culture such as religion, trade etc. The game also looks good for the genre, as most Paradox games tend to do, and the music is absolutely perfect.
    It should be great but isn`t. I will now explain why:

    The first huge failure of EU Rome is the AI. It is so passive that if you do nothing the map is very likely to look almost the same after 400 years. Some smaller states are guaranteed to be gobbled up by more powerful neighbors, but that`s it. They apparently don`t colonize at all and seemingly endless wars between powerful nations result in nothing. The best example I can give how just how comatose the AI is you can find right as you start the game. As the game kicks off Rome is at war with Magna Graeca and Epirus, Epirus being the main threat of the two. And it has a rather large army of 19000 standing in its home province of Epirus that NEVER MOVES. No matter what you do it just stands there and all you have to do is amass a force powerful enough to beat it and you have won the war. And it really doesn`t get much better as the game goes along. It is an imperial strategy game where the warfare is the least interesting bit of the game, and this is the fault of the AI more than anything. When you consider that I have once seen Denmark conquer China in one of my EU games, the lack of history generation in EU Rome is pathetic. If you want anything to happen you`re gonna have to do it yourself.
    On the reverse side of course, if you play as any other power than Rome the simulated Rome you face will not put up a good fight at all and will make few, if any, realistic moves. It will in fact almost certainly not behave as an ominous, budding imperial force for you to rally your defense against. And this is all very disappointing. It is possible that you could be lucky and get a great alternative simulation of the Punic Wars out of this game. But honestly I doubt it.
    Another issue is the challenge of disloyal commanders. It is true that Rome`s greatest enemy was itself and its legions in the end. But not in 470BC. It is historically inaccurate to the extreme.
    And then the final problem: You are clearly meant to play this game as Rome, a disappointingly limiting restriction after the other Paradox grand strats. You can of course play as other powers, but the only effect of this is either a copy of the Roman political system, sometimes with the titles changed, sometimes not, or a bare bones and totally uninspired monarchical structure. So much more could have been done with this side of the game that it leaves you feeling very unsatisfied.

    And much the same can be said for almost every aspect of the game. Everything is there but not deep enough to make the game a rewarding grand strat OR political simulation. There is diplomacy but it doesn`t really matter, if for no other reason than the abysmal AI. There is trade and it is well handled but it`s not deep enough. There is technology but you can`t control it and it might as well be automated. There is political simulation but it`s too shallow and you can`t influence it enough to make it interesting. And above all there is strategy but not from the AI. In all these areas of gameplay you are much better off getting either EU IV or Crusader Kings II, depending on what you`re looking for. And it`s a shame because the game is very promising despite all of this. I would prefer this over Total War: Rome though, because I consider that more of a grand tac than a grand strat. But for a period game you`d have to choose one or the other, unless you fancy AJE, which I do not.

    To me EU Rome is either a 6 or a 7, But since the majority of the reviewers on MC are too low I`ll go with a 7 to balance things out. I`d recommend the game cautiously to anyone who has an interest in Roman history and to anyone who wants to dip their toes in a grand strat but is intimidated by the EU or Crusader Kings series or Alea Jacta Est. For all its flaws EU Rome is a nice entry level game in this genre. Perhaps that`s good enough to commend it to your attention. Perhaps not.    … Expand
  8. Panopticon
    Dec 17, 2020
    3
    A very boring game. Some great ideas, like characters having their own assets and agenda who can try to take power, but not a lot for the player to do. This was a common flaw in early Paradox grand strategy games - the computer has more fun than the player.
  9. Keron_Heruman
    Aug 25, 2023
    9
    Good game with very good concepts, with historic events, politic and more realistic diplomacy added to a solid settlement management in a grand strategy base. May be better rounded

Awards & Rankings

64
#64 Best PC Game of 2008
76
#76 Most Discussed PC Game of 2008
53
#53 Most Shared PC Game of 2008

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
73

Mixed or average reviews - based on 19 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 11 out of 19
  2. Mixed: 8 out of 19
  3. Negative: 0 out of 19
  1. IGN
    87
    For the rare gamers who can happily lose themselves in a world where the ability to create armies is more valued than the ability to lead them on the field of battle, the EU games are a revelation. When you combine that approach with the appeal of the historical Roman setting, it's like an arrow of happiness aimed straight at our hearts.
    Read full review
  2. GameWatcher
    82
    From strategic trading, the recruiting of legions, where to garrison them, who’s right for the job from governor to general – Rome is possibly one of the only games out there that can really give gamers a glimpse into just how pressured emerging super powers were. After all Rome wasn’t built in a day, let Paradox show you why.
    Read full review
  3. GameSpy
    60
    Unfortunately getting to a multiplayer game is more trouble than it's worth.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »