Total War: Rome II

 PC
  • Publisher: Sega
  • Release Date: Sep 2, 2013
User Score
4.4

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 3974 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1,184 out of 3974
  2. Mixed: 613 out of 3974
  3. Negative: 2,177 out of 3974
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. astralheights
    Sep 6, 2013
    5
    On first impulse, I was going to give this game a 0. But, after some thought, I decided to give the game a 5. Why? Because it is an average RTS game. As a Total War game it deserves an even lower score.

    Read other reviews for the host of problems. I'm sure the graphical issues will be resolved. Many other issues will be resolved. But, how do you fix the fact that the battles aren't    On first impulse, I was going to give this game a 0. But, after some thought, I decided to give the game a 5. Why? Because it is an average RTS game. As a Total War game it deserves an even lower score.

    Read other reviews for the host of problems. I'm sure the graphical issues will be resolved. Many other issues will be resolved.

    But, how do you fix the fact that the battles aren't tactical? I buy Rome: Total War so that I can set up the Roman war machine and put my enemies through the meat grinder! I want every one of my legionaries to thrust their gladius into the stomachs of the enemy! How can I do this without legendary Roman organization and discipline? When is that going to be fixed. How will that ever be fixed? Answer to the former: Don't know that it ever will be. To the latter: I don't know that it can be. But, if only this issue were fixed, I could play the game, and happily too. As it stands, I can't. If I wanted a turn-based game without tactics I could have played Civ or a Paradox game.

    Will never again pre-order a Total War game.    … Expand
  2. Viva_Fanta
    Sep 6, 2013
    5
    Looks Good. Plays Bad. New province system is rubbish, absense of walls makes city defence ridiculous, unit cards are example of poor game design.

    This game has potential and probably after 2 years of patching it will be great game. Unfortunately at this moment this game is awful beta with poor optimization, retarded AI.
  3. Southers
    Sep 12, 2013
    5
    After playing for 45 hours through a brilliant prologue, some great historical battles, a few (very laggy/ desynced) quick matches and two 100 turn in progress campaigns as Rome and Iceni, I feel like it is time to give my opinion. I have read some real troll reviews, and some real hype reviews, and it may look like i'm sitting dead in the middle but this is my honest opinion so pleaseAfter playing for 45 hours through a brilliant prologue, some great historical battles, a few (very laggy/ desynced) quick matches and two 100 turn in progress campaigns as Rome and Iceni, I feel like it is time to give my opinion. I have read some real troll reviews, and some real hype reviews, and it may look like i'm sitting dead in the middle but this is my honest opinion so please bare with me.

    The game has some serious flaws right now, mainly performance related and AI. Especially a dreadful waiting time for turns-end. It also lacks some really important features such as the family tree, and a capable political system especially for the roman faction. I was also fairly jaded by character progression from agents to generals, with not only a lack of but also no real logic to how it all works or flows. Not to mention them dyeing on you as soon as they become your hero. New province system and transport over sea system seemed great at first but soon came to be a nuisance late game for many reasons. Army traditions is overall a great additions, and one of the best in my opinion.

    Rome 1 was a very long time ago but parts of that could do with returning to this game. Especially if you plan to play as a roman faction. I'm talking about the senate and family system which we shall all remember so clearly. It doesn't feature in this game, instead you have 1 faction panel which tries and fails to convey a poorly designed and rushed system.

    I have also had a terrible experience with Multiplayer desyncs, whilst the singleplayer battles are flawed from the capture points system through to the whole mosh pit over in 5 seconds deal. Naval battles fair worse with many issues from balancing to some really strange auto resolve decisions and spamming of transport fleets (which dominate).

    However, I will be fair to this game because it has some real wow factors. The animations and generally the visuals (if you can get them to work) look stunning. The prologue is also fantastic, if a little buggy/ short. The campaign map itself is stunning, not only extensive, but offering a great detail and historical correctness. The amount of factions added is unbelievable, half the reason for turn end time problems...There is a crazy amount of work that went into the design of this game from all fronts, but again I just feel a serious lack of testing and optimization of the engine has taken place.

    I am not sure what CA plan to do but I 'hope' they make a vast array of changes where needed, and learn that striping out perfectly good features from previous games was perhaps a mistake.

    If they can focus on performance issues and tear down the turn end time to below 30 seconds this would receive a 6 or 7, as I am sure it will get from various patches.

    If they could improve drastically on AI in all areas of the game from battles to simple diplomatic actions such a trade agreements, and balance the many different units in the game, as well as coax in a family tree system with easier marriage and less of an aging issue we might be looking at a near 8, however this should of been in the game for release, as I feel that is what I was really sold.

    If they wanted to head toward or above a solid 8 i would need to see some significant additions. Basics like general speeches and agent action cinematics (absolute favourite), through to more complex additions like a deep political system, polished UI and a deeper multiplayer (fully working) experience.

    Finally I am also skeptical of the DLC direction of the game, similarly to CoH2, another sega game. It feels to me like they will be selling a lot of what is already in the game, such as cultures and factions. They may also add some missing units or even features through DLC, something I would not be happy to pay for. These should have come with a well polished game upon release, not later on as a stab for cash. If CA/ sega want any more of my money I will be expecting a fully finished expansion after a decent amount of work on the base game. I will certainly not be pre-ordering sega games after doing this for both CoH2 and Rome2 until major changes occur in both (free changes).

    I wish CA the best of luck for it will be a massive undertaking to reinvigorate what they have lost. Sadly in its current state as of 12.09.2013 its a mediocre 5/10.    … Expand
  4. Agriphal
    Sep 7, 2013
    5
    I prior ordered the game in expectation of the kind of visuals likely to knock my socks off. The hype was very effective and I was suckered in, like the fool I am. I checked my computer specifications against the list provided by Creative Assembly and to my joy I found that I met the recommended specifications. Wonderful, I thought, I'm going to get the close to the top graphics. On MondayI prior ordered the game in expectation of the kind of visuals likely to knock my socks off. The hype was very effective and I was suckered in, like the fool I am. I checked my computer specifications against the list provided by Creative Assembly and to my joy I found that I met the recommended specifications. Wonderful, I thought, I'm going to get the close to the top graphics. On Monday I started playing. Well, tried to play. Strained my eyes trying to look at the screen that looked more like a slideshow than a computer game (frames for each second at ten or less). It turns out that you need the very best computer on the market to get anywhere near attractive graphics. Sad of heart I turned down the graphics and unit size to the lowest settings. Visually it looked worse than the first Rome game. Then I encountered the worst part. The units had almost zero weight. So, this game still carries on the tradition of floaty combat established by Empire Total War and perfected by Shogun Two. Back in Medieval Two time units felt like they actually had mass. They clashed with a crunch. It was the most satisfying part of the game. That is now ancient history (ironically). Overall this game is both unfinished and underwhelming. Even when all the patches are out, this game wont be worth the effort it takes to click "purchase". Or the time wasted downloading it. If you're a fan of this franchise, and you want more, get Medieval two Total War, and download one of the many excellent modifications out there.… Expand
  5. Morogath
    Sep 6, 2013
    5
    Just to clear it up: I've been a TW fan since the start.. In all honesty: this is probably the worst title in the whole series. Why? Good question.... Extrem performance issues on my high-end PC, the AI is stupid as bread.. every round there is some single unit attacking one of my gigantic armies... I mean really... Even the campaign-map AI is too dumb for this world on hard difficulty.Just to clear it up: I've been a TW fan since the start.. In all honesty: this is probably the worst title in the whole series. Why? Good question.... Extrem performance issues on my high-end PC, the AI is stupid as bread.. every round there is some single unit attacking one of my gigantic armies... I mean really... Even the campaign-map AI is too dumb for this world on hard difficulty. What was CA doing while developing? This is the first time that i regret having paid for a TW game. The politicial plunder is unmotivating, not really well explained and straight up boring. Sorry for the harsh words, but I'm just so extremely disappointed.… Expand
  6. icemanerz
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    Having started my Total War fascination with Rome 1, and having played every Total War from then on. I can honestly say Rome 2 is a let down. It's far from a 0 or 1 you are seeing here (overreaction), however, the game needs a lot of work. Optimization is a serious issue, as my well over recommended rig does stutter on high settings; and the visuals don't even look good to be worth theHaving started my Total War fascination with Rome 1, and having played every Total War from then on. I can honestly say Rome 2 is a let down. It's far from a 0 or 1 you are seeing here (overreaction), however, the game needs a lot of work. Optimization is a serious issue, as my well over recommended rig does stutter on high settings; and the visuals don't even look good to be worth the stutter. Computer AI is dreadful, beyond the usual bad of a strategy game AI. But my biggest gripe is the quick/non-strategic combat. If you expect anything from a Total War game, it's strategic combat. And sadly that is sorely lacking here. Combat is usually a giant ball of death that doesn't even last long. No guard stance, unit abilities don't stand true for form (phalanx not holding up to even weak charges), and archers with dreadful range (why bother?). Patches may fix this game.. eventually.. but it's far from being the release it should have been.… Expand
  7. ntkb
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    Go look at Shogun 2 user scores, then look at this game. It's not the fans CA... it's you. Thanks for the Alpha version game. I really wish you pushed the release date back if you still needed to polish and fix the game. I have bought every single TW game since Shogun ONE on release day or preorder. I won't be doing that with your next title. The next title I will wait till theGo look at Shogun 2 user scores, then look at this game. It's not the fans CA... it's you. Thanks for the Alpha version game. I really wish you pushed the release date back if you still needed to polish and fix the game. I have bought every single TW game since Shogun ONE on release day or preorder. I won't be doing that with your next title. The next title I will wait till the modding community fixes your game for you before I buy it. 4/10, 5/10 being average is my initial impression of the game.… Expand
  8. Caesar_Flavus
    Sep 6, 2013
    5
    Well I believe that all the positive reviews were written by company employees or some test group guys? most positive reviews state nothing and look like advertisement: "buy it buy it buy it!" Now about the game, IMHO Napoleon and Shogun were much better. There is no more good old TW experience here, I just don't know how to describe it. Game design looks bad and they removed many goodWell I believe that all the positive reviews were written by company employees or some test group guys? most positive reviews state nothing and look like advertisement: "buy it buy it buy it!" Now about the game, IMHO Napoleon and Shogun were much better. There is no more good old TW experience here, I just don't know how to describe it. Game design looks bad and they removed many good things such as family tree. I d recommend to play Rome 1 with Roma surrectum 2 mod, you ll get more fun.… Expand
  9. Red_Oktoberfest
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    Total War: Rome II is a box of chocolates, you don't know which is the good or bad chocolate each time you reach for one.

    BATTLE; The battle is, to be frank, not great. This is especially bad since one of the main selling points of the entire franchise are the battles. In battle there are no tactics, the enemy just charges straight at you with everything, even missile units. Although    Total War: Rome II is a box of chocolates, you don't know which is the good or bad chocolate each time you reach for one.

    BATTLE;
    The battle is, to be frank, not great. This is especially bad since one of the main selling points of the entire franchise are the battles. In battle there are no tactics, the enemy just charges straight at you with everything, even missile units. Although going into melee combat was typically the only thing you could do back then, but there's no tactics. No flanking, no individual units fighting, no formations, nothing. It's just a giant blob in melee combat that even includes the enemy missile units. It's also uncommon to see enemy generals charging into your lines well before the main line can get there.

    Also in many many scenarios you'll find that yourself or the enemy has a capture point. This is dumbing down the battles considerably, further detracting the game's selling point. You can win the "main" battle (As in two main battle lines fighting) but one enemy skirmisher unit can reach your capture point, win the battle, and your army is destroyed despite a clear victory. It's hard to counter this due to the running speed and how fast a single unit can capture a point. One tactic you can do yourself is have two-unit armies, one unit runs to the extreme left or right, and the entire enemy army chases that unit. The other unit proceeds to go to the enemy's capture point, and the enemy doesn't react due to chasing that unit. Even not chasing any units they typically don't react to anything, flanks, ranged units, nothing.

    I haven't played any sieges yet, but I've only heard bad things about it. Mostly about path-finding, which I've already encountered in open-field battles somehow. The worst thing I heard was that as defenders in a siege, you absolutely have to go out and meet the enemy in the field, or else they stay in place and win due to the timer or you get bored if you got the timer disabled.

    CAMPAIGN;
    The gameplay has changed very significantly in Rome II. Managing your cities is actually important due to the re-emergence of squalor from the days of yore in Medieval II. This combined with the many different building types in four trees (Barbarian, Eastern, Hellenistic (Including Carthage), and Roman.) makes a large variety. Although I wished that there was a difference between the Barbarian building trees, into Britons, Gauls and Germans.

    On the topic of variety, the 500-Units claim is a hype, and tripe. Many of the units are recoloured for other factions, and many of them have no statistical difference. Two examples are the Carthage & African Artillery trees, and the Arabian & Aethiopian Cavalry. There are many more, The Romans also have access to almost every faction unit (Including "unique" units) by constructing auxiliary camps and adding an "Auxiliary" prefix to their names. This brings down the "500 Units" to possibly one-fourth being unique, while still a lot, is still a half-truth and essentially a lie in advertisement to get buyers.

    The faction-count is the same as Shogun 2, but there is promise of free and paid DLC later on. Two of the factions (Carthage and Rome) have families/sub-factions to choose from, which only change which bonuses and detriments you receive.

    GRAPHICS;
    Needless to say the graphics in the game are very well made, and well executed. Even on low settings it is above many similar strategy games. This is made better with the inclusion of "Extreme", going above the formerly "Ultra" in terms of graphical appeal, and melting your computer. One of the most useful features is the inclusion of a Benchmark to see how well your computer can run with the options. But it is rather misleading since battles are more complex than the benchmark, consisting of thousands of troops individually animated, individually fighting, individually dying....

    STABILITY;
    For myself, the game is very stable and I can play for hours on end. But a vocal part of the user-base literally can't open the game at all. This is becoming more and more common with each Total War game, and this is the worst so far. If you thought Empire or Shogun 2 were bad with stability, you should look at the Steam forums for Rome II. For me the game runs well, so I can't really comment on the stability but I won't recognize that it is completely stable.

    I seem to be running out of characters, damn you, 5,000 character limit! So I'll leave you with this mixed review of 5/10. The game is fun, but there's a lot holding it back and it's like Empire all over again, promise things but don't deliver or half-deliver.    … Expand
  10. SoulSurgeon
    Sep 8, 2013
    5
    I pre-purchased this game the day it was pre-released. I installed it the day it came out. It ran ok the first night...but I noticed a LOT of bugs. I tried some custom battles. I used 4 squads of Spartan Hoplites against some Rome Cohorts...I got pwned. I even out-flanked them and out-maneuvered them...nope, dead. It is on "normal" difficulty.

    Since day 2, I have spent 30+ hours    I pre-purchased this game the day it was pre-released. I installed it the day it came out. It ran ok the first night...but I noticed a LOT of bugs. I tried some custom battles. I used 4 squads of Spartan Hoplites against some Rome Cohorts...I got pwned. I even out-flanked them and out-maneuvered them...nope, dead. It is on "normal" difficulty.

    Since day 2, I have spent 30+ hours trying to get the game to launch..it won't...freezes on the load-up screen. Right now there are 434 positive reviews of RTW2, and 767 negative...make that 767. CA and Sega have my money....I don't have anything in return except anger and frustration. I'm going to make sure that they lose lots of money by helping scare away potential buyers...until the game is FIXED. DO NOT BUY THIS GAME yet. Wait until they get their together.    … Expand
  11. Ed_
    Oct 30, 2013
    7
    After the release of patch 5, the game improved really well. The gameplay became enjoyable and the AI improved slightly.

    The campaign map is very nice, graphics is amazing. The new family and upgrading system are also fascinating, however the one-year turn system is pretty annoying and fast.

    All in all, download all the patches and feel the difference.
  12. ozozio
    Sep 7, 2013
    5
    I Wanted to like this game.. I wanted to,, so Bad. But it has been a letdown. The problem with Rome 2 has less to do with the fact that it feels like a title from over ten years ago and more to do with the fact that it is full of poor design decisions, simplified game mechanics, and horrible UI. Overall, the game suffers from a lack optimization and tones of bugs.
  13. VideoDead
    Sep 9, 2013
    5
    I'm not going to go into all the other stuff other reviewers have gone into (awful graphical optimization, terrible A.I.), but rather some seemingly small details which have annoyed me a great deal.
    1 Victory points in open battles. The very thing that prompted me to come and write this review scenario: i had a large force consisting mainly of chariots, got ambushed by a much larger    I'm not going to go into all the other stuff other reviewers have gone into (awful graphical optimization, terrible A.I.), but rather some seemingly small details which have annoyed me a great deal.
    1 Victory points in open battles. The very thing that prompted me to come and write this review scenario: i had a large force consisting mainly of chariots, got ambushed by a much larger force of enemies consisting mainly of spears. I retreat, they chase, giving me no option but to fight. Battleplan: give them the run-around pelting them with javelins (this is the sort of thing that would've worked in any previous TW game). Got into the battle and lo and behold, a victory location! Thus, the enemy ran all his spears into the victory location, sat there for 50 seconds and won a "decisive victory" resulting in the complete annihilation of my army.
    2 If you attack a port settlement from the sea you cannot disembark your troops onto that city's wharfs and jetties. This just seems completely illogical, say no more!
    3 Why can't i shoot arrows at troops on boats waiting to disembark? Another battle i lost was due to the enemy's boats getting tangled up thusly stuck forever while my vast amount of archers sat 20 feet away on land unable to shoot them (i play unlimited battle time btw so i couldn't wait it out)
    4 Troops just seem to die very quickly and don't hold their formation and phalanxes and shield-walls are useless. It makes it hard to micro-manage when you can't take your eyes off a unit for more than 5 seconds in case they're completely wiped out. Why isn't there a "guard" button like there has ALWAYS been in TW?
    5 Interesting units, where are they? I remember Rome TW 1 having flaming pigs and head hurlers. And why aren't my general's elephants armoured like they are on the unit card?
    6 Diplomacy is just cack and i don't see the point. No-one wants to trade, even factions that are apparently my best-mates, so i just don't bother.

    Other than those negatives i'm not going to judge the game too harshly as i've always found TW games tend to grow on you after you give them a chance, especially the interface (still not sure about it though).

    I'll give it a 5 out of 10, but without all the stuff i've mentioned plus all the other stuff you'll read about in many negative reviews, i'd probably give it a 9 out of 10    … Expand
  14. Naku
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    I've been waiting for this game with hope since i'm Total War fan, i played all titles in series since first Shogun. I would not tell that this is worst launch in Total War series history but it's close to Empire. But since CA have so much experience now in 2013 im suprised that this game came in such terrible contition. I cant point out pros for this game becousei just can't enjoy playingI've been waiting for this game with hope since i'm Total War fan, i played all titles in series since first Shogun. I would not tell that this is worst launch in Total War series history but it's close to Empire. But since CA have so much experience now in 2013 im suprised that this game came in such terrible contition. I cant point out pros for this game becousei just can't enjoy playing it right now, there are so many bugs and glitches that eh...

    - Horrible optimalization, horrible performance even on high-end machines.
    - Clunky UI
    - Loading times
    - False advertising, they showed something different on thieir alpha version.
    - Way too fast battles, every battle ends in under 10 mins.

    Big, big disapointment...    … Expand
  15. HazardGamer
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    The game is full of bugs

    Insanely stupid AI. The only way it could possibly protect a capital city is if it had 40 units guarding it. The AI also doesn't know how to use siege weapons, and will often fail to even get past the wall. Death from above, and a 2000 man army lies dead at my feet... with 3 of my units lost. Some cities can only contain 5 (capital) or 3 buildings, yet    The game is full of bugs

    Insanely stupid AI. The only way it could possibly protect a capital city is if it had 40 units guarding it.

    The AI also doesn't know how to use siege weapons, and will often fail to even get past the wall. Death from above, and a 2000 man army lies dead at my feet... with 3 of my units lost.

    Some cities can only contain 5 (capital) or 3 buildings, yet nothing was done to display why a capital city such as Rome can't contain 6 buildings. Hey, maybe it's just a bug.... as if there wasn't enough of those already.

    The AI will constantly abandon cities (capital ones aswell) even if it has more units than the approaching enemy.

    Agents who can't enter armies, cities or board ships.....

    Siege engines are bugged so much that units either get stuck or fail to actually use them.    … Expand
  16. Heathy
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    So, I didn't want to rate it super low out of complete disappointment, It does deserve some points for being a considerably deep game and you can tell a lot of research went into creating the units and factions.

    The Pros. Ill start with the things I found to be an improvement on the series, Then move onto a list of problems. First of all, The provinces and edicts, This system seems    So, I didn't want to rate it super low out of complete disappointment, It does deserve some points for being a considerably deep game and you can tell a lot of research went into creating the units and factions.

    The Pros.

    Ill start with the things I found to be an improvement on the series, Then move onto a list of problems. First of all, The provinces and edicts, This system seems to be a much better idea overall than having individual towns not really gaining any benefit from neighbouring towns beyond the overall benefit you have from owning that town any way, when you capture the 3 or more towns in a province you can install a region wide bonus on those towns, which to me is an improvement.

    The physics system, another good addition to the series, combined with units shielding themselves from ranged attacks, it makes certain situations feel more dynamic.

    Other Pros would probably be the Naval sieges and army traditions these are new concepts for TW and it seems to be a fun addition to attacking coastal towns shogun 2 was halfway there with bombardments, but being able to send men in from the sea is another winning addition to the game. it just adds another level of depth to battles, the traditions seem to be another flat buff to a force that has survived long enough to gain plenty of battle experience. you can even resurrect old forces to keep their traditions alive.

    Cons.

    Terrible performance on a game touted to run on anything. (I get a steady frame rate in shogun 2 but this is simply inconsistent, changing the detail doesn't seem to make any difference on the frame rate or stuttering units in large battles)

    Armies are tied to generals, So if you have a broken unit you either need to move another general to his location to switch units out or disband, there are no interchangeable town garrisons unless a general is there as all units can only move with a general.

    no restacking broken units, you can't combine half dead stacks of men into a new full stack, you either have to disband and buy new units or wait for them to regenerate.

    The campaign map UI, now a lot of folks have complained about the unit cards, I personally do not mind them that much, it would of been nicer to see graphic representations of the units in question and not just a tapestry image but its not as big of a deal as the whole UI in general, the event message window takes up about 3 times as much space as it does in shogun 2, the hot bar and information panels are either non existent until you click an army or town, or are simply convoluted beyond recognition, Infact the whole UI feels like it was designed for a console. There was nothing wrong with the UI's in the previous titles, it makes no sense why they redesigned the best working part of the franchise.

    The battles themselves are over rather quickly, if you want even the smallest chance of changing the momentum of a fight or being able to simply keep pace with the battle, you have to play it in slow motion otherwise everything just happens so fast, most battles are over within 6 mins.

    The AI in general is no better than previous titles, the technology tree feels a step back from shogun 2, the diplomacy has gained a few options, but the AI which manages it doesn't always see a beneficial request for trade or NAPs, often asking for gold in return for something that is going to benefit them just as much as you.

    only one agent per army, maybe a balancing issue?
    no family tree? why?

    If you ask me, skip this for a while wait for some patches perhaps it'll get better, but I think shogun 2 is a far superior game.

    Edit: One part of the Campaign I didn't mention was the victory conditions and i'm not sure if I like it or not, basically there are no more short or long campaigns as far as i can tell you can simply win in 1 of 3 ways, economic, military and cultural, its a bit of a change from the previous games in which domination and military might was practically the only way to win. it could make for some fun games.

    after the game is patched ill try to remember this review and alter it based on the performance and quality of life changes.    … Expand
  17. crokotay857
    Sep 6, 2013
    5
    Not worth buying. I don't know why but this game bore me so much. Removed family tree and adding army cap was a bad move in my opinion. I think they really need to make patch fast. Graphics and UI look much worse than Shogun 2 and that piss me off too.
  18. abic007
    Sep 4, 2013
    7
    The fail of Rome: A strategic map without strategy... A tactical mode without tactics

    Skip it. Shogun II is better in every respect, as are several mods for the original Rome: Total War.

    Very bad strategy game!
  19. hardingman
    Sep 12, 2013
    5
    Awful UI, systems explained incredibly badly, multiplayer is unplayable. AWFUL FPS, and the AI is beyond broken. Thank god the time period and epicness of the campaign can carry it off. JUST
  20. Legion_ix
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    Some reviews criticizing the AI very harshly dampen my hopes seriously. But after the very well made tutorial, where it was possible to see that the AI is still not good (like in every Total War game, maybe except Medieval 1), but by far not such a catastrophe as it was described in couple of reviews. So confidently I went to the main campaign. Now some hours of playing later, I have toSome reviews criticizing the AI very harshly dampen my hopes seriously. But after the very well made tutorial, where it was possible to see that the AI is still not good (like in every Total War game, maybe except Medieval 1), but by far not such a catastrophe as it was described in couple of reviews. So confidently I went to the main campaign. Now some hours of playing later, I have to admit Rome 2 is a huge disappointment it feels unfinished, confusing and counterintuitive, castrated and yet overcomplicated, and yes, boring most of the time. The reason for this is not the AI. Rome 1 managed to create a much more enjoyable gameplay with even a worse AI.

    Not finished

    Sadly in current status the game is on the late beta level. For sure it is better than by some other games published in early beta or even nearly in alpha but still it is not polished, not even finished. There is a massive amount of things that are simply not done or not done properly.

    Sadly there are tons of other minor or major undone or badly done things in this game. It is clearly that some months in development would improve the game hugely. For such an established company like CA you can expect a finished, polished product. Especially after the experience that they had with Empire.

    Music

    The soundtrack in Rome 1 was one of the things that supported the atmosphere massively. Without it would be a different game. It included some slow, relaxing but also fast, aggressive tracks. In Rome II there is barely any music and if you hear something it is just some tu-tu-tu in quasi ancient style that don’t create any immersion. In De Bello Mundi you get shivers by listening to the Gladiator main theme on the campaign map or a great feeling of an epic battle by listening to Conan theme. In Rome 2 you only get sleepy and bored instead.

    Click orgy

    Why to make things easier when it is possible to make them complicated? In other TW games you send the agent to the province and let him do his job. Intuitive and easy. In Rome 2 you have to click every time when she arrived in the new province. If you forget to click on the icon, well your problem. The agent won’t do anything.

    You want to make a new trade agreement? Then go to one of the both icons (click!), go to the faction symbol (click!), go to the agreement button (click!), go to the trade agreement (click!), go to send (click!), your counterpart sign it or refuses go to the accept button (click!), go to the button to stop the negotiations (click!). Congratulations you signed your first trade agreement! Just kidding, in most cases you don’t. So please go on to another faction and make click, click, click. And don’t worry now there are so many factions you can spend half an hour to sign couple of agreements and make hudreds of click, click, click besides.

    After some hours of click, click, click I was very excited by the glorious work CA did here. I’m confident a bit of more click, click, click would improve the gameplay even more.

    Road to win: “Cancel good feature and make the existing more complicated”

    It is impossible to explain why CA cut such important for the atmosphere and easy to implement features like family tree or wide building management. But it is even worse. Some of the features are now without any reason overcomplicated but not necessary better.

    UI Uber Interface

    I have to admit that I hated (and still hate) the unit icons and also don’t like the buildings icon. However the new UI approach looked good and I seriously thought it could be a good improvement for the gameplay. Unfortunately it’s not, it’s a catastrophe. And unlike most of the things mentioned above it won’t be completely fixed, since it is unlikely that CA will redone the UI completely.

    There are two problems with it.
    First. It is confusing and counterintuitive. Some things are on different places instead to be combined, or the structure doesn’t make any sense, or the icons are sometimes too large but in important to small, or is it just not logical at all.

    Second problem is the coexistence of such an UI with the Total War gameThe design, all these non saying criptical pictures and the information that are not visible on the “right” place but somewhere besides are out of place. You never get the feeling to play a game about ancient times. To create an empire, to build it up, to manage it, care for your characters and command your armies. The whole time you just clicking some pictures. A very, very big fail. I have to appreciate now modern UI and a historical game are just things that don’t match. At least not in this way done in Rome II.

    Conclusion

    I’m a bit angry but also very, very sad what happened with Rome II because I had such an expectation for it and especially shortly before the release very optimistic about the result. For sure it will be better through patches and mods, though due to some fundamental reasons even with that won’t be a game that a lot of us expected.    … Expand
  21. tomhardy
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    The worst gaming experience in my life. Played only few battles, but graphics look worse than tetris and AI sucks. For some reasons game crashed 2 times.Definitely unfinished product

    Now I will give it 4/10 because game needs a patch.
  22. Dynex811
    Sep 7, 2013
    5
    Rome 2 has a LOT of potential and a lot of great points. But it is clearly unfinished, there is no way anyone can deny that this is not a finished product and any way shape or form. Agents can block armies, client status is meaningless, siege towers are too short to be used against Athenian walls, bronze gates can be burned down by torches, naval transports are stronger than dedicatedRome 2 has a LOT of potential and a lot of great points. But it is clearly unfinished, there is no way anyone can deny that this is not a finished product and any way shape or form. Agents can block armies, client status is meaningless, siege towers are too short to be used against Athenian walls, bronze gates can be burned down by torches, naval transports are stronger than dedicated warships, etc. (believe me I can go on).

    It does have positive aspects It has wonderful campaign aesthetics (and i mean everything on the campaign map from the strategic views to your army set pieces fighting each other). The civil war is a fantastic addition to the game as well. The concept of combined naval and land battles is incredible. And the fact that other factions don't constantly and pointlessly declare war on you is what I have been waiting for since Rome 1 in 2004/5. Field siege weapons such as the ballista are amazing, using their explosive rounds is so satisfying. The cinematic camera is a great addition and the fighting animations are great as well. Lastly, the Civil War event is crazy fun.

    However the game has a LOT of pitfalls. Aside from what I mentioned before: units don't hold formation, they took out a number of working diplomatic features that shogun 2 had, fights descend into blobs fighting other blobs and they only last 30 seconds before units flee with more than half their troops remaining, the battle ai will just run past your troops without engaging to try and capture victory points (which are arbitrary points on a map you can capture to win the battle, these are negative points in of themselves), troops will not chase down routing enemies.

    I want to give this game a higher score for its clearly seen potential, but I cannot rate a game on what it can be but only on what it is. As of right now its a mediocre game that I'm going to enjoy playing because I love the series and I've already bought it, but I would not under any circumstances recommend buying the game until it is balanced out and polished. If that never happens, avoid this game and play Shogun 2 Total War if you're itching for a great strategy game.    … Expand
  23. Franotix
    Oct 3, 2013
    7
    I change my score now

    After many patches, since the first one, I put a 7 instead of a 3 Now the AI will try to destroy the walls, or the doors and enter in the cities at least at very hard difficulty this is what they do before they were standing in front of the wall doing nothing. The AI turns are now alot more fast from what I can see in my advanced campaing at least 5 time    I change my score now

    After many patches, since the first one, I put a 7 instead of a 3

    Now the AI will try to destroy the walls, or the doors and enter in the cities at least at very hard difficulty this is what they do before they were standing in front of the wall doing nothing.

    The AI turns are now alot more fast from what I can see in my advanced campaing at least 5 time more fast than it was... So Now I play more than i waiting, its already a great improvement.

    some capture point on open battlefield have been remove this is a great improvement too
    But theres many point inside a cities and AI split his army sometime because of this, and its really easy to beat them when their unit are all split across a giant city you just got their stack one by one... Still need improvement

    And in average it seem I have better fps for the same graphics I had.    … Expand
  24. bills6693
    Sep 3, 2013
    5
    Not at all compelling campaign map play. Battles have very little tactics. New UI is not useful and much information is obscured. Disappointed in new mechanics. Still a TW game but lost that 'one more turn' addictive quality and in an attempt to simplify it, they have made it much worse.
  25. JaM1977
    Sep 3, 2013
    7
    Worst game of the series.. Battle Combat lacks any tactics, its just about making all units to fight in one huge blob. strategy part is no better. Its dumbed down to any "fast Clicking" RTS level..
  26. dbyron87
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    I'm starting this review by saying that this could have been an amazing game. Truly, it could, but in the state that it is now, it just isn't. The worst part about everything is that some of the problems, i don't even think willl be addressed.

    Let's start with the good, shall we? + I love the campaign map, it is big, awesome and epic, the scope is enormous, and i like that, i also    I'm starting this review by saying that this could have been an amazing game. Truly, it could, but in the state that it is now, it just isn't. The worst part about everything is that some of the problems, i don't even think willl be addressed.

    Let's start with the good, shall we?

    + I love the campaign map, it is big, awesome and epic, the scope is enormous, and i like that, i also like how we can expand our cities and the new way they're developed, make some cities really strategic.

    + The visuals are good, i didn't have the problems, some people had with the graphics, so i could enjoy them, and they're very pretty.

    + The soundtrack, it is...Good. I mean, the original Rome soundtrack was better, the Shogun 2, as well, but it is a good soundtrack.

    Now the things that have a problem, but, may become amazing later:

    +- The diplomacy as it stands is...Insane. The AI tries to negotiate at least, but it's way too stubborn for it's own good, not making deals that would save it, etc...Needs some tweaking, but, it would be nice if some factions continue to be stubborn for the rest of the game.

    +- The political system. Ok, no more families, no problem about that. But as it stands is too artificial, too little control, it's just not fun. With some tweaking, it would be quite cool, but may take some work.

    Now, the bad.

    - The battles. The units move way too fast, not only the light cavalry, that is supposed to be fast, but the heavy infantry is really fast! I like the Hoplites skill that makes them run fast, it reminds me of Marathon, but every heavy infantry moving like skirmishers is bad. Then there is the combat speed, that is fast as well, really fast. I understand when Cavalry Vs. Missile is fast, i understand when Heavy Infantry Vs. Cavalry is fast, but in this game, the combat resolution is way too fast. You coudn't pull a Cannae or Gaugamela in this engine, because there is just no room to manouver. The best way is just too click the units in the enemy and wait, the enemy don't try to maintain cohesion and a battle line, so, no worries. The units don't mantain their formations as well, so your legionaries will be fighting like a bunch of Gauls.

    Conclusion, there is more good than bad, but...The selling point of the TW series is the cinematic and tactical combat, and as it is, that's not in the game. The battle is shallow and unfun, they need to fix those, or the game is lost.    … Expand
  27. ElBasque
    Sep 3, 2013
    6
    If it wasn't rushed out it had the potential to be a 10/10 RTS.

    As it was rushed out, as it stands, its around a 6. The AI is still a bit derpy but that's not really a negative point, especially as I'm not the best player. But the speed of the battles is much too fast, frequently if ordering a three unit attack, after ordering the last to attack, the first unit has already massacred    If it wasn't rushed out it had the potential to be a 10/10 RTS.

    As it was rushed out, as it stands, its around a 6.

    The AI is still a bit derpy but that's not really a negative point, especially as I'm not the best player. But the speed of the battles is much too fast, frequently if ordering a three unit attack, after ordering the last to attack, the first unit has already massacred everyone and is idling around waiting for new orders. Its a race to get all the directions made before you're needed again. It renders the battles simply a chore. I don't know why there's a cinematic button as you need to see all the battlefield at all times with unit on unit fights lasting 10 seconds at best. Playing on "slow-mo" is where the default pace should be.

    Graphically is not optimised in the slightest, and I'm sure the devs know this and are working on it. Its not a big issue for me personally but the downright lying through screenshots months ago is a bit gaul-ing.

    Strategically speaking the shedding of much of the micromanagement smacks of dumbing down. Paraphrasing dev quotes about how you don't now have to have 1-2 unit armies marching across the map to reach the main force is true; but when was any of that ever an issue? In a game that prides itself on realism why is spawning a unit of fully-equipped cavalrymen in the middle of a Germanic forest the preferred option?

    Also ive ran into a peculiar problem that no-one else seems to have had. After winning an engagement in the prologue, clicking "end battle" when prompted, it took me back to the main menu, and upon clicking resume prologue it took me back to the pre-battle strategy map. I had to fight every prologue battle twice to move to the next stage. I doubt that was how it was meant to be.

    Its obviously not a 9 or 10, those written by hype-influenced CA/TW fanboys. Neither is it a 0 or 1, those written by elitist zealots expecting perfection or something to show off their latest Nvidia Titan graphics card. It is, at the moment, a solid RTS let down by untuned graphics and stupid niggles that should appear in a mediocre title.

    Reading this after October 2013? I'd expect it to be an 8 by then, I hope I'm not disappointed.    … Expand
  28. SensualPro
    Sep 3, 2013
    5
    Very dissapointing the multiplayer I wanted a interesting multiplayer that when you play you can upgrade your units and your general like Shogun2 but this is very boring and repetitive.
  29. CaptainThom
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    Initially i gave this game a 9/10 based on my experience in the prologue which i really enjoyed and i would like to apologise for that beacuse that was far from true, since starting the campaign there are a number of glaring issues which has left me dissapointed and annoyed at how broken gameplay is.

    Politics Politics is a new feature in a total war game which makes it all the more    Initially i gave this game a 9/10 based on my experience in the prologue which i really enjoyed and i would like to apologise for that beacuse that was far from true, since starting the campaign there are a number of glaring issues which has left me dissapointed and annoyed at how broken gameplay is.

    Politics
    Politics is a new feature in a total war game which makes it all the more surprising how its completely ignored in the tutorial. Characters have traits which are supposed to effect internal politics and their ability on the battlefield (Gravitas, ambition,cunning etc) However after 12 hours of game play i still have no idea what any of them do.

    Diplomacy
    During my campaign as the Iceni tribes have rejected trade agreements for no apparent reason and anything below high likeness has been rejected. Its almost impossible to get any other tribe to become an ally despite having extremely good relations with them.

    Sieges
    The Ai doesnt defend the walls instead massing all its units at the victory point. On the campaign map a town or city may seem poorly defended only for it to have a massive garrison of hidden units, its especially annoying when you have won an important battle to be confronted by such a large garrison and being forced to retreat from the region.

    Battles.
    When trying to attack the enemy with a phalanx the men all break from formation and charge. All units seem to have throwing weapons which they only use before charging you cant set them to fire at will. Theres pretty much no point in chasing enemy's down after a battle because even horsemen seem to walk along with them instead of attacking them.

    When defending against a larger force theres victory points in stupidly undefendable areas which can lead to you having to give up the high ground or wooded areas. The pace of combat has been massively increased so you have very little time to maneuver taking away a lot of the strategy from larger battles.

    Armies can now randomly walk across water with no cost which is stupid and if their larger than your navy they can properly beat your navy in battle.

    Sadly this is just a list of sum of the issues that i personally have seen and that have really hindered the experience so far for me, there's clearly a great game in there somewhere but it needs a lot of patching and probably a few mods to get it anywhere near the standard that we all hoped for.    … Expand
  30. Malorix
    Sep 8, 2013
    5
    Earlier I gave a score of 8 for this game. I played for 40 plus hrs now and have to lower that score. This game is not finished. I was extremely excited for this game, but at this stage it is simply not fun to play.

    - Tame campaign AI I was not declared war a single time in my Rome campaign!! There is no challenge. Conquer factions one at a time. They're rarely allied with one another.    Earlier I gave a score of 8 for this game. I played for 40 plus hrs now and have to lower that score. This game is not finished. I was extremely excited for this game, but at this stage it is simply not fun to play.

    - Tame campaign AI I was not declared war a single time in my Rome campaign!! There is no challenge. Conquer factions one at a time. They're rarely allied with one another.
    - Battle speed is too high. All battles are over in under 10 minutes. There is no satisfaction because units move too fast and I have lost the familiar TW feeling of control.
    - Naval battles are disfunctional. Real pity.
    - Beaten rebels keep attacking you after being defeated (unlike in Shogun 2).

    There is much that I do like in the game (UI actually, recruitment at general only, limited amount of armies, diverse battles, naval/land battles, the idea of the political factions, etc.). But unfortunately they are prevented from shining because of gameplay flaws.

    I doubt whether CA can fix these issues they purportedly couldnt with Empire but I keep an open mind.    … Expand
  31. dyselehrt
    Nov 2, 2014
    5
    I have some 600 hours put into this game at the moment, and I will play it for many more to come. However, I would not recommend others to buy the game for the vanilla version since I do not think it is that much fun. It has improved in the latest patches yes, but it is still really not that good. If you do get this game though, do it for the mods. There are some incredible mods out thereI have some 600 hours put into this game at the moment, and I will play it for many more to come. However, I would not recommend others to buy the game for the vanilla version since I do not think it is that much fun. It has improved in the latest patches yes, but it is still really not that good. If you do get this game though, do it for the mods. There are some incredible mods out there which lifts the game immensely. But no matter what the AI will still be dumb as ****

    I suggest waiting for Attila since it feels like Rome 2 has been test-version of something greater to come. However, make sure not to pre-purchase it. You never know with Creative Assembly nowadays...    … Expand
  32. R3DSOXN4TION
    Sep 10, 2013
    5
    This game is only half made. Before the patch the glitches were game breaking. There is no unit balance elephants for the win if the A.I. even sends more the one or two army units to attack you at all. The A.I. is incompetent doing nothing even if your troops are standing right out in front of them. The game stripped many features and had many half baked features this game was clearlyThis game is only half made. Before the patch the glitches were game breaking. There is no unit balance elephants for the win if the A.I. even sends more the one or two army units to attack you at all. The A.I. is incompetent doing nothing even if your troops are standing right out in front of them. The game stripped many features and had many half baked features this game was clearly rushed. Even after all of that its still a Total War game and it is still enjoyable, but not $60 enjoyable. Either buy Shogun 2, a far superior Total War game, or wait until a Steam sale to get this. Or skip it all together you wouldn't miss much except for a broken game.… Expand
  33. Merwanor
    Sep 25, 2013
    5
    I have been a big Total War fan ever since the first Shogun TW game came out, which I bought on impulse back in the day, having no idea what kind of game it actually was, and I am so happy I did. Shogun 2 is by far the best in the series as it has the nostalgia feeling going for it, and the amazing depth and passion that CA put into the game. Everything was an improvement over theI have been a big Total War fan ever since the first Shogun TW game came out, which I bought on impulse back in the day, having no idea what kind of game it actually was, and I am so happy I did. Shogun 2 is by far the best in the series as it has the nostalgia feeling going for it, and the amazing depth and passion that CA put into the game. Everything was an improvement over the previous games in my opinion.

    And so it is sad to say that with Rome 2 they have taken a few feet forwards in some aspects, but a big step backwards in the core gameplay. First I want to say that the performance part of Rome 2 is not a big concern for me, as I run the game better than I ran Shogun 2 when it was released, but some of the design issues are puzzling and the game seems to lack the passion that CA has put into previous games.

    Let us start with the good parts of Rome 2.

    The new city/province system:
    This is a big welcome to the game, especially when you start to conquer large parts of the map, it gets much easier, but still retaining the tactical choices of what to build and how to manage, so even if it may lack some depth, it is a step forward for the series. Also the graphical representation of the cities and towns are a great new addition as it really shows the size and type of each town clearly.

    Legacy armies:
    I love the fact that an army has a name, history and well a legacy, you don't care about generals, but you do care about an army.

    Some battle animations:
    I love the physical look of javelins, rocks and arrows have when they hit shields, walls etc. Also some of the fighting animations are great, especially sword wielding units and their clashing of shields.

    The Graphics:
    The game looks good, but so did Shogun 2 and there is not that much of a difference, Rome 2 may have some better looking units, vegetation and lighting, but right now it runs much worse than current Shogun 2.

    The bad things about Rome 2:

    The User Interface.
    The interface lacks so much personality, it looks as if it taken from some iphone game or something, it is so out of place for a TW game and it lacks so much information and depth, and it is not scale able, as it is way to big and covers most of the screen. Those who made it really put no sense of passion into making it I feel. Shogun 2 has a much more authentic and helpful UI.

    The Political System:
    This is the most annoying and pointless system ever, as it seems that Civil War happens randomly or no matter what you do, and some of the options makes no sense, for instance, why do I lose senators if I assassinate a general or statesman, should it not be the other way around? We lost the familiy tree for this piece of garbage feature, I would rather have the annoying pope from Medieval 2 than this system.

    1 year turns:
    Not only have we lost seasons, which I loved in Shogun 2, but generals are pointless because of this as they die so fast. In shogun 2 it was amazing to see the change from winter to summer, you knew that now I can send my armies out without losing men to attrition, now attrition is specific to special places on the map instead. A big step backwards.

    AI:
    As stupid as ever, and even dumber in many ways than in Shogun 2. Why are they demanding loads of money from me to make peace when they are about to be crushed, makes no sense. And it is so easy to win as they seem to only produce slingers, create just a bunch of cavalry and you win all battles.

    Diplomacy:
    Some of the new features here is actually great, like being able to set a target for your allies to attack a city, but the whole system is bugged as client states are supposed to give me tribute, which never happens and AI keeps demanding crazy amounts of money for trade rights, and somehow they know how much money I have since they keep demanding more the richer I get. And there is no freaking give or demand city option, man I miss this.

    Cavalry animation:
    They just run through enemies, they don't seem to do much in battle, just Rome 1 level type stab animations. Compared to Shogun 2 this is just lame.

    Generals and traits:
    Since a turn lasts a year, they die so fast I just don't care about them, and they are annoying as they keep leveling up and gaining useless traits. I wish I could rid myself of generals all together.

    Armies requires generals and there is a army cap:
    I hate that I can't just make a few groups of soldiers here and there to keep order while i move my main armies around, this is a big step backwards. And the army cap is way to small and I require those annoying generals to lead an army. Sure it may be more realistic, but it is still annoying.

    Victory Points:
    Remove these game breaking victory points, but I get the reason for them when talking about naval/land battles. Only instance where they can be used.

    No Cutscenes:
    Where are the awesome assassin cutscenes, man champion cutscenes would be awesome, lack of passion.

    Rome is a big disappointment, so it gets a 5/10 from me.    … Expand
  34. tumbidragon
    Sep 16, 2014
    7
    After a complete farcical release, Rome 2 a year on is now an actual good game. 15 patches has seen vast improvements to optimization and game play. We now have three great campaign in CIG, HATG and EE. Battles are no longer decided within 2-5 minutes and I have had some last ~20mins with the new unit re-balancing to morale and armor!
    Unfortunately It still lacks the depth in which so    After a complete farcical release, Rome 2 a year on is now an actual good game. 15 patches has seen vast improvements to optimization and game play. We now have three great campaign in CIG, HATG and EE. Battles are no longer decided within 2-5 minutes and I have had some last ~20mins with the new unit re-balancing to morale and armor!
    Unfortunately It still lacks the depth in which so many were hoping they would deliver. The "new" political system is nothing more than a updated graphic to the UI so that you are able to track what is happening easier. But you could hardly call it immersive or in depth. Diplomacy is still hit and miss and just outright random sometimes (specifically trade agreements). There are also still major path finding issues atop walls when you have multiple units stationed on them. Also AI is still.. meh.

    Upon release I would of given this 3/10. But now I could unabashedly give it a 7/10 (but not forgiven nor forgotten CA!).    … Expand
  35. zarule
    Sep 9, 2013
    5
    Rome Total War 2 does not live up to either advertismen/marketing or even earlier games in the series standards. It does bring some innovative ideas and concepts but the execution is so poor, the bugs are so many that the only explanation is they released a BETA and charged for the full game using buyers as testers. Unacceptable!
  36. Yazilliclick
    Sep 10, 2013
    5
    Has a lot of potential but falls completely flat due to bugs, poor AI and questionable UI decisions. It's amazing that a developer would go backwards on so many items in a series that they've worked on for over a decade. Shogun 2 had pretty good UI for presenting information in a lot of cases, not perfect but OK; Rome 2 goes backwards with battle UI not presenting proper information, notHas a lot of potential but falls completely flat due to bugs, poor AI and questionable UI decisions. It's amazing that a developer would go backwards on so many items in a series that they've worked on for over a decade. Shogun 2 had pretty good UI for presenting information in a lot of cases, not perfect but OK; Rome 2 goes backwards with battle UI not presenting proper information, not showing skill trees, settlement details about order and such being hidden in mouse over popups etc... The AI is probably amongst the worst in past several games which is incomprehensible how they can go backwards. Performance is poor, turn wait times are very very long even on decent hardware. They've sped up combat both by making units run faster and making units die and break morale sooner which takes away the ability to really feel like your in command of the battle and turns it more into an arcade action game of trying to control units.

    Ultimately there's potential here for a decent game if they can patch this stuff out but at this point the developer deserves no respect for handing the game out in it's current state. These are all common and very apparent issues which would not have been missed in Q&A and thus were deliberately shipped with the game.    … Expand
  37. triarii3
    Sep 24, 2013
    5
    Unit AI....I win 9/10 battles due to the AI's own stupidity.

    This game is released as a barebone. or even Beta.

    As someone who has bought EVERY title since the FIRST Shogun total war. I am most displeased with this one.
  38. Wuffel
    Sep 24, 2013
    5
    After playing Shogun 2 for over 500 hours, Rome 2 is quite a dissapointment to me. Although the era it is set in allows for much more identification than historic Japan, Rome 2 did not quite spark my interest as its predecessor. It also taught me not to preorder the next TW title.

    First of all, I still experience FPS drops although the in-game benchmark recommended high settings. These    After playing Shogun 2 for over 500 hours, Rome 2 is quite a dissapointment to me. Although the era it is set in allows for much more identification than historic Japan, Rome 2 did not quite spark my interest as its predecessor. It also taught me not to preorder the next TW title.

    First of all, I still experience FPS drops although the in-game benchmark recommended high settings. These frame drops mainly happen while on the strategic map so scrolling over is quite a lagfest. In battles, I experience graphics glitches: Large black boxes keep appearing to cover the terrain. After 3 weeks, they should have fixed that.

    But there are more important things than graphics in a strategy game. What I liked most about Shogun 2 was the more or less clear-cut rock-paper-scissors(-lizard-Spock) system in its battles. Almost every unit type had its use. This is not the case in Rome 2 which evolves into a heavy infantry spam fest. Although in historic terms, this is quite an accurate representation of Roman military tactics, it is not fun. As in Shogun 2, they should have put gameplay first, historicity second. (And I'm saying this as a historian ^^).

    The gameplay on the strategic map seems to be limited. Okay, it was limited in Shogun 2 too, but there seems to be no real improvement, except the new provincial system which I quite like. The auxiliary units are also a good idea, as is the more stream-lined research. I would say it is solid, although compared to titles specialised on strategic gameplay like Europa Universalis, it still is simplicistic. Especially the diplomatic system needs expansion. The internal political system has no impact on the game which is a huge disappointment. With the political system so well documented and the more or less clear-cut Roman cursus honorum, they had so much potential to toy with. Why did they put it in there in the first place then?

    The worst thing, as in any TW title, is the AI. It's utterly stupid on the strategic map. I mostly auto-resolve battles, because they keep attacking with ridiculously small stacks. In the battles themselves, the AI can be quite good, but also utterly stupid. During sieges, the enemy troops love being butchered by artillery/missile inf. What better thing to spend the day with than being pierced by arrows or squashed by catapult-launched rocks? That's what the poor encamped Samnites must have thought when I shot them with my ballistas in the Prologue Campaign/Tutorial. Quite an eye-opening OMG moment right at the start ...

    But still, AI does not matter in multiplayer. After all, utterly stupid AI does not matter there. I spent 300 hours in Shogun 2's avatar conquest. I liked the sense of achievement it gave, the identification with my general, my ridiculously custom-named and painted units (even the useless ones just vetted for fun). The whole system of course was also quite simple, and the retainer-drop and matchmaking led to unfair situations. But why did they drop it as a whole? Rome 2 just offers the bare-minimum ranked-ladder custom battle. And those are dominated by pike/heavy inf spam, which becomes boring very fast. Instead of further developing the avatar system or coming up with something new, they took two steps backward. As it seems that CA is not able to program a decent AI, they should have put much more effort into multiplayer, especially interactive-wise.

    All in all: Rome 2 is still a solid game. But after CA raised expectations that much and the hope that the more familiar setting would do its part to make it more fun than Shogun 2, I have to conclude that even after the first 3 patches, Rome 2 does not even come close to fulfill my expectations.

    CA really has to earn my trust a second time.    … Expand
  39. spartan1008
    Dec 5, 2013
    5
    absolutely painful to play for any total war vet in its current state. how and why this was released as it is, no one knows, but it is lackluster and boring. the ai doesnt do any thing, completely non aggressive on the battle field and campaign map. and once you grow just a bit, its next to impossible to lose, you pretty much just steam roll every thing in front of you
  40. Master-of-War
    Nov 29, 2013
    5
    At first completely unplayable. After 7 patches boring, uninspiring and unchallenging. Very disappointing total war game. Very disappointing sequel to the first Rome game. Too great an emphasis on graphics and changing core elements. Should have focused on gameplay and immersion. And should not have released a game in such a state. Everything Rome II now has a foul stench about it. But itAt first completely unplayable. After 7 patches boring, uninspiring and unchallenging. Very disappointing total war game. Very disappointing sequel to the first Rome game. Too great an emphasis on graphics and changing core elements. Should have focused on gameplay and immersion. And should not have released a game in such a state. Everything Rome II now has a foul stench about it. But it does look great.… Expand
  41. ApexPanda
    Dec 6, 2013
    5
    So I've played about 200+ turns and about 55 hours of play time into this game. Did CA up with the release? Yeah! BUT a lot of the problems you guys seem to have encountered have been fixed for the most part. And don't complain about a game this big crashing. All big games do when they first releases bad if you play any game enough it's bound to crash eventually. I got this game a fewSo I've played about 200+ turns and about 55 hours of play time into this game. Did CA up with the release? Yeah! BUT a lot of the problems you guys seem to have encountered have been fixed for the most part. And don't complain about a game this big crashing. All big games do when they first releases bad if you play any game enough it's bound to crash eventually. I got this game a few days ago and it seems like a lot of the issues are patched/fixed. But seriously! No family tree?! Wtf!?
    For content I give this game a 3/10
    For playability I give it a 8/10
    For CA/Sega being such and releasing this too soon without proper testing 1/10. Bad show    … Expand
  42. TWfreak
    Dec 16, 2013
    6
    Despite the somewhat nice graphics, the game has a lot of problems, like bugs and of course the goddamn 5yr old AI!
    As you may have guessed the problems are all caused by the quick release and the patches have made this game slightly more playable than at first
  43. metamoth
    Jul 11, 2014
    7
    I used to wonder why in spite of all the very good professional reviews there were so many criticisms and negative feedback from users. Then when I bought this game at a steam sale a couple of months back I realised why... cos they are all true. And yet... I've had an enjoyable 89 hours with this game thus far. There are many good things about it that perhaps is lost amidst the criticism.I used to wonder why in spite of all the very good professional reviews there were so many criticisms and negative feedback from users. Then when I bought this game at a steam sale a couple of months back I realised why... cos they are all true. And yet... I've had an enjoyable 89 hours with this game thus far. There are many good things about it that perhaps is lost amidst the criticism. The campaign map is a thing of beauty. It is the best in a TW game so far. The graphics, especially of towns and cities are very good if you have the right equipment to play at ultra settings. The field battles (not siege battles) are comparable to the best TW games. Diplomacy is definitely way more interesting than past TW games. If you are a fan of ancient history you will find much to like in R2 as it is populated with lots of ancient nations. The strategic situation is ever changing with public order, political intrigues and rebellions giving you something else to worry about apart from how to fight your enemies. Naval battles are some of the most enjoyable for me. Ramming ships just doesn't get old. Still the game is far from perfect as you can read from the negative reviews, but for me it is very fun to play. If CA finally makes siege battles challenging I'll be more than happy with this game.… Expand
  44. Groundducky
    Aug 28, 2014
    5
    I have been playing the Total War series since the original Shogun. Often with each game there has been at least to some extent a jump in features, graphics and gameplay as each new game has been released with so far the pinnacle of the series being Shogun 2. Rome 2 however has been a major disappointment. The gameplay trailers originally shown made the game look much better than theI have been playing the Total War series since the original Shogun. Often with each game there has been at least to some extent a jump in features, graphics and gameplay as each new game has been released with so far the pinnacle of the series being Shogun 2. Rome 2 however has been a major disappointment. The gameplay trailers originally shown made the game look much better than the version we have even now, even with mods. Everything was hyped about the content of the game, the graphics, that the game will actually perform well. Almost all of this turned out to be a total lie by CA with them taking ~14 patches just to get the game to a state that it should have been on release. But of course while they have been making the game playable they haven’t stopped giving us lovely DLC to buy from new units to mini campaigns.
    Many people point to Empire being the worst of the total war games but at least with Empire the game had the excuse of being the first Total war to be set in the gunpowder age. The mechanics in Rome 2 are not that different to the ones used in Shogun so I do not understand how they managed to get it all so wrong. Although I am now enjoying the game this is mainly due to mods I suppose on consolation is at least CA are supporting mods again.
    If it is your first Total War, get Shogun 2. If you loved Rome 1 just don’t buy this.    … Expand
  45. SaintJames012
    Nov 4, 2013
    5
    Coming off of Shogun 2, the only word you can use to describe Rome II is utter disappointment. This game took out a lot of what made Shogun 2 so fun. There are bugs that cause it to become just an annoying PoS, and overall after about 10 hours you will stop having fun. the game feels more like a chore than a fun strategy. Family trees and rulers have become completely irrelevant and whenComing off of Shogun 2, the only word you can use to describe Rome II is utter disappointment. This game took out a lot of what made Shogun 2 so fun. There are bugs that cause it to become just an annoying PoS, and overall after about 10 hours you will stop having fun. the game feels more like a chore than a fun strategy. Family trees and rulers have become completely irrelevant and when one of your generals dies the game just spawns another one almost equal to what your last general's stats were. victory is too easy and battles seem to be rushed as I have run into epic battle of 1500+ armies win in 15 minutes flat. The only thing I think the game added that is useful is auto pilot. There is a move you can do in battles where you can tell specific units to attack an enemy unit, then that unit will be set on auto pilot and attack the unit you ordered, once the enemy is killed the auto pilot unit will then go and attack another enemy where it is needed. This is nice as it allows for you to set a couple units to autopilot and eases the burden of running a massive army in battle, as you can set some units to auto pilot then set them back to manual once you need them. Other than that Rome II is a major step back and not worth the $60 pricetag. Game is worth a $20 tag maybe, but beware, this game sucks. Go back to Shogun 2… Expand
  46. smeeeee
    May 27, 2014
    5
    Total War: Rome II was a bit of a disappointment, to say the least. The game lagged quite a lot on my computer, the epic battles Creative Assembly promised weren't all that great, and I found it hard to implement strategy when I could hardly figure out what the heck was going on. Plus, OP units like the Italian Noble Cavalry of the Etruscan League/Samnites are a) easy to get, b) probablyTotal War: Rome II was a bit of a disappointment, to say the least. The game lagged quite a lot on my computer, the epic battles Creative Assembly promised weren't all that great, and I found it hard to implement strategy when I could hardly figure out what the heck was going on. Plus, OP units like the Italian Noble Cavalry of the Etruscan League/Samnites are a) easy to get, b) probably the most powerful cavalry in the game.… Expand
  47. vanzi
    Oct 31, 2014
    7
    After all the patches that were released and the even better job of modders (DeI, Radious), the game is in a definitely playable state. Performance is A LOT better than it was on release. The AI is still pretty dumb though and I'm personally not a fan of some of the changes they've made to the game (especially the province system and army movement only with general). All that said, I'mAfter all the patches that were released and the even better job of modders (DeI, Radious), the game is in a definitely playable state. Performance is A LOT better than it was on release. The AI is still pretty dumb though and I'm personally not a fan of some of the changes they've made to the game (especially the province system and army movement only with general). All that said, I'm having a lot of fun playing with Divide et Impera and I've spent over 400 hours in game.… Expand
  48. Spedattack
    Mar 20, 2014
    5
    I have very much enjoyed the Total War series especially when I played Empire. However, I am really starting to get tired of the almost broken AI both on the Campaign and Battlefield. I have tried for months to give this game a chance to kick in, but it just isn't working. There are times that I enjoyed the game, but most of the time it was just frustrating at how difficult it is to playI have very much enjoyed the Total War series especially when I played Empire. However, I am really starting to get tired of the almost broken AI both on the Campaign and Battlefield. I have tried for months to give this game a chance to kick in, but it just isn't working. There are times that I enjoyed the game, but most of the time it was just frustrating at how difficult it is to play the campaign when the AI is so bad. The game definitely looks good, but it lacks the enjoyment of its predecessors. Creative Assembly needs to stop trying to add new features that aren't needed and fix the AI that has been a problem since the beginning of the series. There is no longer an excuse for the AI to be this terrible and I hope Creative Assembly has the sense to address these issues before adding new features.… Expand
  49. Onebadbasterd
    Nov 19, 2013
    5
    At this point 2 months and a few days after it's release it's beggining to be ''playable''. (Thanks to some mods also)

    I was one of those who DID pre-order this game and sadly was deceived by SEGA and CA that made false promises and false advertisement...But that is another story. Buy the game at your own risk because it's the Stripped Feautures,DLC Whoring and ''X'' number of bugs    At this point 2 months and a few days after it's release it's beggining to be ''playable''. (Thanks to some mods also)

    I was one of those who DID pre-order this game and sadly was deceived by SEGA and CA that made false promises and false advertisement...But that is another story.
    Buy the game at your own risk because it's the Stripped Feautures,DLC Whoring and ''X'' number of bugs that are killing the game.

    Thanks SEGA for making our greatest expectation this year become our worst deception ever.    … Expand
  50. NobbyNobbyBoy
    Nov 7, 2013
    5
    I dearly wanted to love this game. I have enjoyed every Total War so far (except Empire and Napoleon that wouldn't work on my computer!) and especially Shogun 2. I felt as if this game might bridge the gap between the dated but undeniably fun Rome and the beautiful, tactical game that Shogun 2 is.
    Unfortunately, the failure to release this game in a playable state has ruined the fun for    I dearly wanted to love this game. I have enjoyed every Total War so far (except Empire and Napoleon that wouldn't work on my computer!) and especially Shogun 2. I felt as if this game might bridge the gap between the dated but undeniably fun Rome and the beautiful, tactical game that Shogun 2 is.
    Unfortunately, the failure to release this game in a playable state has ruined the fun for me. I can see the potential and I fully expect this to be a great game in a year or so. But, (and this is a big but) you cannot release games in such a poor state and not expect a customer backlash.    … Expand
  51. Operative13
    Dec 1, 2013
    5
    It is obvious there has been a ton of work put into this title. However, it does not excuse the fact that the game is virtually broken, with buggy AI, clunky graphics performance, questionable design decisions, and current game price of $60. When a game is released, it is expected to, at the bare minimum, function. It is even more so that these problems be fixed as soon as possible afterIt is obvious there has been a ton of work put into this title. However, it does not excuse the fact that the game is virtually broken, with buggy AI, clunky graphics performance, questionable design decisions, and current game price of $60. When a game is released, it is expected to, at the bare minimum, function. It is even more so that these problems be fixed as soon as possible after release. However Rome II so far has failed to provide any of these even in the few months after its release. The game obviously was not ready to be released and does not bring the Total War experience as much as previous titles have in its current state. Unless drastic measures are taken to improve the game's current quality, it will be riddled with poor gaming experience.… Expand
  52. Parkateer
    Dec 1, 2013
    5
    Now that the game has been out a couple of months you would think it would be solid, but unfortunately glitches remain. It is still possible to get stuck in a screen with no option but to ctrl-alt-delete out of the game. The battles, while fun, can become tedious as enemy forces stand off, forcing you to run out the clock to victory. This has all the feel of the Empire Total War engineNow that the game has been out a couple of months you would think it would be solid, but unfortunately glitches remain. It is still possible to get stuck in a screen with no option but to ctrl-alt-delete out of the game. The battles, while fun, can become tedious as enemy forces stand off, forcing you to run out the clock to victory. This has all the feel of the Empire Total War engine (which I loved), however, everything they tried to improve on is seemingly broke. Rome 1 was great and I, for one, am sorry they could not improve on it.… Expand
  53. JBOer
    Dec 3, 2013
    5
    Until now I played 48 hours of Rome II. And to be honest, it was a fight to get this time. This game is just disappointing. Don't get me wrong, I love the Total War franchise, but to play this game isn't fun at all.
    OK, the graphic is awesome, but that's pretty much it. The AI fails time after time after time, the UI is horrible and the big announced home policy doesn't effect anything.    Until now I played 48 hours of Rome II. And to be honest, it was a fight to get this time. This game is just disappointing. Don't get me wrong, I love the Total War franchise, but to play this game isn't fun at all.
    OK, the graphic is awesome, but that's pretty much it. The AI fails time after time after time, the UI is horrible and the big announced home policy doesn't effect anything. Generals are completely changeable and their "portraits" look like sh**. Oh and the music... I muted it after 5 min.
    After all I have to say this Total War is a big disappointment and not the game CA announced. If they won't fix it, this will be the last Total War I ever bought.    … Expand
  54. JonMetacritic74
    Apr 1, 2014
    7
    The game is far from flawless, but it is no junk as most of the users say. With the latest patches Creative fixed the game and it rather enjoyable to play. It was a shame to launch the game with such a poor AI. However, they tried to improve the game and answer the fans' demands. It is a must if you like the Total War series.
  55. Kazakdum
    Apr 7, 2014
    5
    Nostalgia was the greatest selling feature that this game had going for it. To compare the first to the second, witnessing how far the gaming industry has come in a decade of innovation and development. What was actually received from Creative Assembly, bought from paying customers, was a game that was broken, mechanically flawed and had unsuitable computer expectations from the averageNostalgia was the greatest selling feature that this game had going for it. To compare the first to the second, witnessing how far the gaming industry has come in a decade of innovation and development. What was actually received from Creative Assembly, bought from paying customers, was a game that was broken, mechanically flawed and had unsuitable computer expectations from the average consumer. Months later and the game is still getting ridiculously large patches to fix gameplay issues that should have been resolved in Alpha. Consumers have the right to high expectations from a developer who have: 1. high experience in the creation of games; 2. Have worked on TW games for over a decade and should be developing, innovating and perfecting the genre; 3. Have released a game that was broken, awful mechanic decisions (1v1 fighting) and have further released DLC that was already in the game.

    Disgraceful move on the developers part, and i hope they are ashamed. I will buy into the next TW game, but if it follows the way Empire, shogun and now rome 2 went, I shan't ever again. And that is not my fault, but purely Creative Assembly's for their awful state of releasing games to gain a profit before 4th quarter.

    Its positives? This is a Total War game, and in the end they are fun. I just feel that this game has frustrated me now, beyond return. Will seriously have to consider whether to buy one in the future. And don't get me started in pre-release DLC. Cause that is another post WAITING to happen.    … Expand
  56. usmanali
    Apr 13, 2014
    7
    overall the game was not bad although it has some features that needs to be improved regarding the details.AI does not play so bad but it is also not convincing.overall a good game.
  57. TheMasiMan1
    Nov 19, 2015
    6
    I agree, Total War: Rome 2 was broken at lauch, but it has been 2 years. The game is fixed. Total War: Rome 2 features alot of additional content alongside of the campaign: Custom battles, historical battles and a multiplayer mode, witch is 2 player only. The campaign is beatifull and well crafted and the AI dosent do any stupid stuff anymore, compared at lauch. But the DLC hoarding is offI agree, Total War: Rome 2 was broken at lauch, but it has been 2 years. The game is fixed. Total War: Rome 2 features alot of additional content alongside of the campaign: Custom battles, historical battles and a multiplayer mode, witch is 2 player only. The campaign is beatifull and well crafted and the AI dosent do any stupid stuff anymore, compared at lauch. But the DLC hoarding is off the charts. Theres over 10 different DLC packs available right now. If they would have put al lthat DLC as a free update on Day 1, then I would give this game a beter review. But the bottom line is that the game was broken on lauch, that draws the review score pretty low, but if Rome 2 wasnt broken at lauch and all this DLC was free, then it would be solid 10/10.… Expand
  58. Wraithcat
    Dec 4, 2014
    5
    After playing nearly 60 hours on this game, I can say that it is really an enormous disappointment. Having bought the Emperor edition (which represented the FIFTEENTH major patch to the game!), I figured that all of the bugs would have been ironed out and that there would be a decent core game. The diamond would have been polished.

    How wrong I was. Playing with the Romans, who should    After playing nearly 60 hours on this game, I can say that it is really an enormous disappointment. Having bought the Emperor edition (which represented the FIFTEENTH major patch to the game!), I figured that all of the bugs would have been ironed out and that there would be a decent core game. The diamond would have been polished.

    How wrong I was.

    Playing with the Romans, who should be a good starting faction, the first thing I really noticed was the incredible lack of in game information. The in game encyclopedia is simply awful. It a **** to navigate, and many of its entries simply don't contain the sort of information that you need when playing a complex game of this sort. For example, For example, if I click on a particular skill during a character level up, I get only that skill with no way of knowing what it might lead to, meaning I have to manually access a separate entry containing this info

    The search function is useless and doesn't allow the player to click through to a more detailed explanation. When I went to try and look up information about Traditions, I came up with two entries, but no way of clicking through to the actual Encyclopedia article on the topic itself.

    The way provinces are arbitrarily organised into groupings of 2-4 cities is unhistorical and frustrating as well. It inhibits the ability of the player to successfully manage their gameplay as they see fit.

    For example, Southern Italy and Sicily form the province of Magna Graecia, which contains a provincial capital (Brundisium), along with three other cities, one of which is Syracuse.

    Syracuse was founded by the Ancient Greeks and was still held by the Greeks at the emergence of the Roman period. It was a powerful, independent city state in its own right and not simply a Greek imposition on a Roman province.

    Because the game registers the city as part of a mostly Roman province, it is going to suffer major cultural issues because the province isn't entirely Roman, or Greek. Initially as the Romans, I chose to ally with Syracuse, thereby ensuring that one of my major provinces suffered a permanent hit to its unhappiness. In my second game as the Romans, I killed them off straight away, but this left a very bad taste in my mouth. Good game design wouldn't force Railroad the player into there being only one correct strategic choice to make. I should be able to live and let live with my allies without suffering negative gameplay effects.

    Another issue, is the stupidity of naval combat. There are two major problems here. Firstly is the unhistorical treatment of ranged weapons in the game. In ancient times, ballistas and catapults were fitted to ships, but were incredibly and inaccurate. Not in RTW2, however, where they are the killer app. A Navy made up of 50% ballistas and another 50% of ships to just float around and confuse the enemy can easily win battles without any significant losses. Ramming might be historical, but it is for chumps.

    A major issue that really ruins the game is that the IA doesn't know the difference between attack ships and transports and that transports can actually be used to ram other ships. The IA will happily send a whole Army to attack a navy, despite having absolutely no chance of winning. Sure, on land, those Royal Spartan Hoplites are a force to be reckoned with, but on sea they are about the equivalent of a mob and die far easier. But the IA continually sends its armies to attack my navies, fails to run when I attack their transport fleets and almost never backs up its transports with a proper escort.

    Another issue with the Navy IA, is that LAND UNITS can reinforce naval battles, meaning an automatic loss to the navy being attacked unless it is stupid enough to land. I was blockading a town with my Navy and realised that I was suffering attrition, so I decided to hightail it out of there as my army was going to be there in two turns. As I left, I was attacked by a couple of ships in the port. It took me less than a minute of game play to kill them, but I lost the battle, and was force to retreat on the campaign map because the battle took place within the Armies reinforcement zone, despite being on the sea. Had I landed my crews, I would have been slaughtered, but they couldn't touch me and certainly couldn't reinforce a Naval battle and shouldn't have been part of the equation to begin with.

    There is also a limitation on Armies that you can field and the requirement that every army MUST have a general. The practical effect of this is that it means that you can't simply shuffle units around to reinforce your armies as needed. Instead, you have to take one whole army over to the other army and reinforce in person.

    For example, Romans have no archers, so if you want those Cretan Archers, you have to either send your entire army over to Crete to get them, or assign a general specifically to take them to armies that need them. Either way its a micromanagement nightmare.    … Expand
  59. grandmasterchef
    Mar 11, 2015
    5
    Rome Total War is a good game with one major drawback cause as much as I love to play as Rome they do not have their own unique Archer unit so you are forced to conquer someone who might have archer units and then if you want to build military out of Rome you then have to move army to location that has archer units cause Javelins suck and war dogs get hammered when you auto resolve andRome Total War is a good game with one major drawback cause as much as I love to play as Rome they do not have their own unique Archer unit so you are forced to conquer someone who might have archer units and then if you want to build military out of Rome you then have to move army to location that has archer units cause Javelins suck and war dogs get hammered when you auto resolve and that should not happen… Expand
  60. xesmi
    Nov 3, 2016
    5
    Could have been better. Should have been better. The game still faces random crashes and bugs even after so many patches.
    I like the variety of factions and events but battles are very weak in comparison with previous total war titles
    I have been playing Total War since Shogun 1 and Rome2 is the worst of the series by far.. ...and its so annoying to buy a game and during first 2-3    Could have been better. Should have been better. The game still faces random crashes and bugs even after so many patches.
    I like the variety of factions and events but battles are very weak in comparison with previous total war titles
    I have been playing Total War since Shogun 1 and Rome2 is the worst of the series by far..

    ...and its so annoying to buy a game and during first 2-3 days realize that in order to end one turn you need to wait 10-15 mins...    … Expand
  61. Graham67722
    Mar 5, 2019
    5
    I was really disappointed by this game. I pre-ordered it and was ready to experience the greatness of rome total war. All battles boil down to giant blobs and there are no tactics involved in the bottles. The naval battles are even worse.
  62. Shimmeywill
    Feb 26, 2020
    7
    Despite the solid visuals and great unit design, the ultimate combat system is a step back from the other titles.
  63. Woody0
    Sep 5, 2013
    6
    I had some graphic and FR problems but was expecting the game to be buggy at release as the other TW games. To save time for some of you I would not buy this game until 2014 when more patches are released and the modders get a chance to polish this game. Overall I found myself spending most my time hitting the end turn button. This game seems to have a tremendous amount of potential ofI had some graphic and FR problems but was expecting the game to be buggy at release as the other TW games. To save time for some of you I would not buy this game until 2014 when more patches are released and the modders get a chance to polish this game. Overall I found myself spending most my time hitting the end turn button. This game seems to have a tremendous amount of potential of being the best TW title yet. I'll go back to playing the older titles and check back 6 months down the road to see if the game becomes more challenging and fun to play.

    Likes:
    Graphics

    Dislikes:
    Battles:
    -Victory points in open battles( Flags you have to hold placed in non strategic points) makes strategic placement of forces, hiding and ambushing pointless.
    -BAI not defending walls but the victory point in middle of city
    - Too fast paced battles, the one full stack vs full stack battle I had lasted under 10 minutes, no time to maneuver or check out the awesome graphics, before my cav flanked battle was pretty much over, so no epic 30+ minute battles.
    -Super fast movement speeds for infantry and other foot troops, makes any tactical error easily fixed
    -Units have magic powers(easily fixed by just not using them, the AI needs all the help it can get)
    -Ran into path finding issues both AI and my units in several battles
    -AI blindly heading for victory points regardless of what is in the way
    -Lack of open field battles, AI seems to wait for me to attack a city, many times the AI moves there army away leaving only garrison forces and is content to do it even at their last city.
    CAI:
    -AI seems to prefer small stacks instead of combining into large army, I have seen 4 large armies in 10 hours of playing, only one of which was used against me
    -AI attacks multiple times with small stacks against overwhelming odds
    -Seems more passive against player and more active against non-player factions
    -I have not figured out how to get other factions to trade with me, the diplomacy they do with me is them making unreasonable demands
    -The whole family/political thing does not seem to effect game play, maybe playing longer it will make more of a difference
    -The one turn a year is back, Don't get attached to your generals, they are dead before you can do anything worth while with them. It seems you have about ten turns or less to use them.
    -I do miss the generals' speeches, family tree
    -I am not a big fan of the changes in the UI but did not factor it in with my rating.

    There are of course the bugs here and there but CA has a pretty good track record of patching their games as mentioned before I'll go back to the other TW titles and give CA and the modding community a chance to make this into the best Total War yet.    … Expand
  64. KickingMo
    Sep 6, 2013
    5
    Horrible. Gameplay is extremely dumbed down, lack of family tree in campaign is obvious mistake and the greatest disapointment is the lack of online modes. Also, removing walls from cities is a horrible idea.
  65. nitetrax
    Sep 14, 2013
    5
    Over hyped and under delivered, day 1 DLC for some of the most interesting factions (preorder or pay additional $8 to play as Sparta? F that), bugs, lag, glitches, and crashes (even on a friend's computer running a GTX 780), no seasons like in Shogun 2 leaves the campaign map looking very static, you don't feel an attachment to your generals as they come and go like drops of water during aOver hyped and under delivered, day 1 DLC for some of the most interesting factions (preorder or pay additional $8 to play as Sparta? F that), bugs, lag, glitches, and crashes (even on a friend's computer running a GTX 780), no seasons like in Shogun 2 leaves the campaign map looking very static, you don't feel an attachment to your generals as they come and go like drops of water during a rain, units just magically generate their own transport ships which can defeat actual navy warships in a fight (needed to use autoresolve to fix this), none of the "mechanistic, meat-grinder" combat that CA promised because melees (even between highly disciplined troops like Romans or Greeks) devolve into blobs as units break formation and cohesion, AI is absolutely retarded (will charge archers and slingers into your spearmen, will suicide rush map objectives such as flag capture and have entire force annihilated, etc.), immersion-breaking graphical effects (such as red skies, warped faces or textures), horribly inefficient UI (unit info, overlays, financial/economic information, etc), ridiculously long AI turn times (even if you turn "show AI movements" off, because there's too many factions and even the shortest move takes a second for each faction)

    This is not only a clearly unfinished game, it has fundamental problems with its mechanics which may doom it forever. These would take too long to describe here. The campaign map mechanics make the game less fun to play, while battle and campaign AI completely ruin everything.

    I have always loved Total War games since I play the first Medieval Total War back in 2002. Rome 2 is, in my opinion, the worst launch and worst game (so far) in the Total War series, and I'm not convinced it will improve, as there are fundamental "unfun" mechanics that cannot just easily be patched, altered, or modded

    This is a 5/10 game when judged after playing all the other Total War games that came out before it. When the bugs, glitches, and lag are fixed, this may be a 6/10 game...to people who've never played a Total War game, it may even be 7/10. If you are new to strategy, wait several months or until an expansion to give this a go. If you are a long-term, hardcore Total War fan...this is a far greater disappointment than Empire, and I recommend skipping it completely unless the fundamental gameplay mechanics are reworked (not to mention AI, blob-like zero-unit-cohesion combat, AI, etc.)    … Expand
  66. Gil8ert
    Sep 11, 2013
    6
    I've put in about 30 hours so far, so I think that's enough for an initial review.

    Given the complexity of the game mechanics, I'm more than willing to forgive the bugs it must be one hell of a mission to debug this game! But I have played all the TW games except the first Shogun so I'm definitely a veteran. Firstly, the campaign map is unforgivable in it's playability. I have an    I've put in about 30 hours so far, so I think that's enough for an initial review.

    Given the complexity of the game mechanics, I'm more than willing to forgive the bugs it must be one hell of a mission to debug this game! But I have played all the TW games except the first Shogun so I'm definitely a veteran.

    Firstly, the campaign map is unforgivable in it's playability. I have an Alienware laptop that is only 2 years old, and it was happy handling the Shogun 2 Campaign map. Rome II is not happy at all, even with the fog of war covering most of the map. I'm talking low frame rates, which I find inexplicable. There is nothing going on in the campaign map which is significantly more complex than Medieval II, and yet it takes up many times the processing power simply to run the graphics. The graphics aren't as important as the game. Go all the way back to Medieval and you'll find a quality game still, even though it looks a lot less graphically resplendent.
    Tied in with this is the number of factions available. It wouldn't be so much of a problem if they each didn't take at least 2 seconds to process their moves. With about 50 factions available that's at least 2 minutes to wait for the end of a turn. Couple that with the horrible campaign map frame rate and the campaign side of the game is woefully slow, with the key word here being 'unnecessarily.' Now I understand better systems will cost me less time but as I meet the minimum spec to play the game, I would expect the game to run properly on minimum spec. If you bought Battlefield 3 with a minimum spec machine, then you'd expect 30fps. If the game only ran at 15fps, you'd soon be questioning where the hell they pulled their 'minimum spec' requirements from!
    Next, the management of towns has changed. It looks as though they've tried to dumb down the complexity of the management but have managed instead to make your understanding of how to manage your province impenetrable. They did explain on their forum that they were trying to avoid the amass and conquer style tactics usually employed in the other games, but I personally find this new management style to be horrible. Very little flexibility in managing your towns, very little idea of how to split your building types effectively.
    Then you have the army units themselves. You now need a general in order to have an army and the number of generals is limited by the number of towns you own. This means if you raced in to conquer a town and won, and wanted to move all your archers west to another battle you would have to take that entire army west, drop the archers off and then bring your army back. This is HORRIBLE! And totally unrealistic, which isn't necessarily a hard hitting criticism of a computer game but as they've prided themselves on their realism so far I think it holds strong.
    You no longer need to build fleets to move your army, just walk your army through a port and onto the sea and suddenly they're all in boats. Why? It's a horrible idea.
    The battles themselves are pretty similar to previous titles and so can be a lot of fun. But there is some proper dodgy AI going on in them.
    So all in all, rather disappointing. I really, really enjoyed Shogun II, and the follow up Fall of the Samurai. I can't recommend Rome II to anyone. The changes they've made are for the worse, and it does feel like another dumbing down exercise like with Diablo 3 or Company of Heroes 2. I'm quite sure that pretty soon every game will involve just 1 button to mash repeatedly. After all, that'll be the entire market covered. It strikes me weird that anyone would even attempt to dumb down Total War. The specs to get it running mean only geeks will be playing it anyway.

    I'm not going to shout at CA, I'm not going to get angry. I'm just disappointed. And anyone who's messed up their school year know that is by far the most devastating comment you can get.    … Expand
  67. Efa
    Sep 4, 2013
    7
    A good game, with huge potential, if not for the fact it simply doesn't feel finished.
    Riddled with bugs and frame rate issues, this is only a Beta. Plus, with all the "new" features (by which I mean all the removed features) It just doesn't feel like a sequel, or even part of the series.
  68. SpiritSharD
    Sep 25, 2013
    5
    I don't normally write reviews on this site (in fact, I'm not sure I ever have), but I felt compelled to write one after reading an interview on Gamasutra.

    To put it simply, I am not at all happy with the way this game has turned out. The promotional footage/advertising for this game was incredibly misleading, and I honestly feel as if I've purchased an alpha version of their title.    I don't normally write reviews on this site (in fact, I'm not sure I ever have), but I felt compelled to write one after reading an interview on Gamasutra.

    To put it simply, I am not at all happy with the way this game has turned out. The promotional footage/advertising for this game was incredibly misleading, and I honestly feel as if I've purchased an alpha version of their title. Now, I'm not a huge Total War fan; I brought all the games alongside TW: Shogun 2 several years ago, and whilst I could never get into their previous games I did thoroughly enjoy the aforementioned. Granted, there were many bugs, but over time they were polished out...and it was never broken (for me, anyway).

    Rome II seems as if they've taken steps back for no apparent reason what-so-ever. The game runs poorly, the game is too easy, there are too many bugs (AI mostly), and all-in-all it's nowhere near impressive as Shogun 2 was (for me). I suspect it's due to the publisher rushing the release (SEGA also publishing that abysmal game that was Alien Colonial Marines), but I can't help but feel as if the developers are also at fault here. Their willingness to fix issues is honorable, but I don't believe a single member of staff has come out to say why exactly things turned out as they did. I think CA need to take a long, hard look at themselves, and hope they learn from their mistakes. Oh, and seriously...don't aim for meta-critic scores. I know you only care about the "professional" reviews, so what I have to say here will probably be ignored (that's if any of you actually read this), but it's people such as myself who buy your games so that you can keep your job. You have a significantly large fan-base of people wanting to support you and scream praise, don't let them down just to focus on reviewers who'll put your game down as soon as they've finished writing. C'mon guys/gals, we know you can do better! =)

    I'm giving the game 5/10 now in it's current state, but I'm sure that rating would increase in my eyes if they continue to work on issues. The potential for a great game is there.    … Expand
  69. manyacy
    Sep 13, 2013
    6
    Who is playing Rome II as his first Total War game, maybe this could be a 8/10 game. BUT who has played at least Rome 1, this is a boring sequence that brings nothing notable beside improved UI design (which is normal) and some upgraded mechanics of the campaign map. Worst part is that I don't know if I'm gonna like the game more after they patch it to perfection and eliminate all the bugs.
  70. laris
    Sep 19, 2013
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I have only one word to say: disappointment...
    After of ten years of being royal fun to total war franchise the reward i get is to be foolish and roober like a ten years kid! After a year of promotion and brainwash of all the great stuff this game has i realise that i will never going to buy a product of total war. You spend all your money on promoting and not to even finished the game! Where are the great cities? what's the point of having great cities without having a "show on battle map button" And what's the stupid idea of buying a DLC? What's wrong with you? Even rome 1 total war had more unique units than Rome 2! And where are the wonders? Where is the acropolis of Athens? And what an obelisk doing in the middle of a Greek city? Acropolis of Athens was built 200 years before the game start. IT SHOULD BE ALREADE BE BUILT, not wait 30 years!!! And what's wrong with all those battles? 2-3 MINUTES???????????? MINUTES!!! I think the other comments have cover me...
    TOTALLY DISAPPOINT...    … Expand
  71. Yyrkroon
    Sep 9, 2013
    5
    Long time TW fan going back to Shogun (original). Rome II is apparently a bridge too far. Redeveloped AI is incredibly passive in the campaign I suspect it isn't able to cope with the new campaign features. Battle AI is incredibly easy. Just isn't fun.
  72. gunnergoz
    Sep 10, 2013
    5
    CA's Rome 2 is a disappointing step down from what we were led to expect. It has the feel of an unfinished product released months too soon. TW Shogun 2 was better thought out and reflected some passion for the subject matter. This game gives the impression of a harried design team that was impacted more by budgetary constraints and corporate micro-management than by it's own creativityCA's Rome 2 is a disappointing step down from what we were led to expect. It has the feel of an unfinished product released months too soon. TW Shogun 2 was better thought out and reflected some passion for the subject matter. This game gives the impression of a harried design team that was impacted more by budgetary constraints and corporate micro-management than by it's own creativity and passion for the subject matter. Too much was sacrificed for too little gain, and what gain there is supposedly in tactical graphics is flawed in execution by poor optimization. The strategic map is so large as to make simulating the actual Roman Empire all but impossible, given the rates of movement on the strategic map. I was very much looking forward to this but now have serious doubts about the future of the TW franchise, given how it was handled with this opportunity.… Expand
  73. jseph1234
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    This game was not ready for release and requires a lot of changes to make it worth playing:
    I gave it a score 5/10 due to the following:
    1. Capture point concept in general: Causes the A.I. to sit back and just guard those points and not properly reinforce their beleaguered troops that are under fire. Plus, sometimes you get the A.I. just camping those points, very frustrating. 2.    This game was not ready for release and requires a lot of changes to make it worth playing:
    I gave it a score 5/10 due to the following:

    1. Capture point concept in general: Causes the A.I. to sit back and just guard those points and not properly reinforce their beleaguered troops that are under fire. Plus, sometimes you get the A.I. just camping those points, very frustrating.

    2. Battle Animation Speed/Length of battles: The animations are moving WAY too fast and the units are dying WAY WAY WAY too quick. The length of the battles are absurd.
    3. Blobbing and lack of cohesion of unit lines (A.I. and Player): Perhaps this is due to animation/battle speed but this is not ancient warfare, particularly when you have enemy troops able to push through a phalanx; that is not going to happen without someone dying.

    4. User Interface Cards for Battle are ridiculously obstructive, hard to read and don't provide nearly enough information    … Expand
  74. alQamar
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    Hello everyone,

    after I noticed that we have a very biased official review from magazines, and most comments here let down a certain part of the game, I felt the need to write my own review here: The classical multiplayer I've waited for is a completely desaster at the moment. If you are a player that loved Rome 1 multiplayer, the still active community and their clans and their    Hello everyone,

    after I noticed that we have a very biased official review from magazines, and most comments here let down a certain part of the game, I felt the need to write my own review here:

    The classical multiplayer I've waited for is a completely desaster at the moment.

    If you are a player that loved Rome 1 multiplayer, the still active community and their clans and their world wide hosted tournaments, you instantly wish to rename this Rome 2 into

    "Total Unplayable: Rome 2".

    But there are GOOD things to tell aswell, and I may start with them:

    PROS:
    - Rome 1 fans wished to get rid of avatar, retainers and skilling units there are pro and cons of these. I am with the conservative party here

    - The new deployment is great for clans and teamplayers as you have only one big deployment zone.

    - very good multicore support, and hyperthreading support and freaking fast loading times

    refer: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?549498-Multiple-core-CPU-utilisation&p=13205394#post13205394

    - Classical skilling of veterans, no messing and 60 secs hurry to pick your army anymore.

    - A lot of new game modes
    http://imageshack.us/f/850/zg8d.jpg/

    - you can pick a map location to host a game on the whole campaign map. This may sound new but it was there in Rome 1 aswell but hidden. Now it is easier to make maps, you can even "favorite" your locations. The map preview are now detailed and replaced the fancy pictures of Shogun 2.

    - if your computer can handle it you can set double amount of stack, so 40 units stack per player instead of 20. Currently the performance is that bad that you cannot use it on ultra extreme preset
    GTX Titan does 44 fps on maxed out settings :P

    - The units are sorted by their means and strengh however in the game

    - The alternate attack mode is back again. Pressing ALT key you can force a unit to attack in melee (swords) even cav with pikes, slingers and archers

    - CA spend the chat some great new features like cut & paste (stating or explaining rulesets like CWB or others are not a pain anymore), also better blocking features, reziseable windows, and is for some reason disabled by default. You need to press the Z Y key to enable or hide it.

    - you can pick one of three general presets which all have pro cons in special abilities. In a team match, well applied together they are decisive.

    - all units are very responsive on command, especially when in fight, you can withdraw them much better than in all other TW games

    - many taunts on enemies and accents

    MIXED:
    - Assault siege weapons are on a seperate unit tab ingame. Cost time and micro.

    - We have a variety of units, though the unit cards are not easy to learn and recognize.

    - all units have special abilities which makes fun but also there may be lack of sense on some of the abilities

    - no sword shield skilling anymore only chevrons but compared to Rome 1 you can see the impact of skilling on a seperate unit stats tab. - CA stated there is no mulitmonitor support, but with some tweaks, I've seen it working. So no support seems to be they do not support it on issues, but basically it works. NEGATIVE: - new tactical map (tab key) and unit grouping modes but units do not keep formation like in Rome 1 when advancing. This is a basic warscape issue, that won't be solved. - Eventough you can pick a free location for the battle, you cannot enlarge the terrain thumbnails and they are very dark, low res. You cannot see much details of the terrain esp. hills and obstacles. - I am not a fan of ladders, as I am oldschool player and better stick to tourneys, but the ladders are really too plain now. - no "free for all mode (FFA)" anymore poor Prince of Macedon - no unit or avatar customisation anymore, not even colors or skins - only basic MLAA antialiasing - no DX 11 tesselation support anymore - no HDR light support anymore - the chat lobby and common chat is still not working globally like in Rome 1. You cannot see players online in the global window, rooms are limited to 100 players, and rooms are limited to your setup download region in Steam preferences. So only "local" chat partners. No community this way! - the performance of the game is a -3 10 bummer: while a AMD X3 with a 5870 runs with 40 FPS avg. on high settings, a i7-4770K with a GTX Titan does only have 44 fps on maxed out settings. Both running at 1920x1080 - the game is lagging even on high framerates (about 40) and occasionally you get FPS drops to 9 or 10 with no clear reason. The FPS are not very stable going up and down all the time. - The included "forest" benchmark is not intense enough to give you a good feeling if the graphics settings are choosen well or too high. - The pilae trails are HORRIBLE. Romans throwing them alltogether and it looks like lasers from certain point of views. They throw them while running not stopping like Rome 1 for that, which was more realistic, trails just pop up over their head. Sil    … Expand
  75. jimjamesjim
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    I have loved this game from the start, but as I played (completed a campaign now) I took note of many problems.

    First, prologue campaign is bugged. I beat it and it stayed "locked" on chapter 3. Had to replay the final siege again to get it to finally work. A guy from work had the same problem so it isn't just my system. There are a lot of problems with the tactical battles. The    I have loved this game from the start, but as I played (completed a campaign now) I took note of many problems.

    First, prologue campaign is bugged. I beat it and it stayed "locked" on chapter 3. Had to replay the final siege again to get it to finally work. A guy from work had the same problem so it isn't just my system.

    There are a lot of problems with the tactical battles. The flag system is garbage. I didn't mind it at first but have grown to hate it. It takes away the use of terrain for defensive battles as you have to defend the flag.

    Battle speed is also far to fast. The longest battle I have had was 7 minutes, and that was because I was seiging a city and my naval artillery would not fire on the walls/towers (a huge bug, tried in a few battles and it doesn't work for me), on average my battles are about 3 min tops, making it too fast to enjoy the visuals of the battle.

    It took awhile for me to start getting into naval battles, and was disappointed in them. Ships would get stuck in open water at times.

    Diplomacy isn't as good as they advertised, but not as bad as most non-critic reviews I have read. To get anything you have to bribe them with money usually. I have even been asked to join a war and they demanded I pay them to join their war.

    There are a bunch more bugs that I know they will eventually fix. But I hope they re work some of the game mechanics in the future as well. I am having fun but the game could be much better, and should be. It feels like they wanted to reach a bigger crowd so added in "popular" game mechanics from other games. Which just don't really fit in a Total War games (like the flag capturing and the micro abilities of units).    … Expand
  76. uizueite
    Sep 11, 2013
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Its a nice beta test! Has tons of bugs. I feel disapointed with this game, its almos like a fraud.
    Good thing is the producers are working hard to solve its issues, they say so...    … Expand
  77. dinakos
    Feb 6, 2014
    6
    After the ninth patch the game runs way better. Still the siege mechanics are bad the political system needs further optimization. But the game does not deserve a 4/10 as before but rather a 6/10.
  78. Hamishduncan
    Sep 6, 2013
    5
    I have a middle of the range computer like most of you will and this game just doesn't run as well as the rest of the series,i love total war and have all of them but this beta of a game is a let down,the game lacks substance and the draw in factor of other titles,its sad and hopefully they will fix it but i have no trust in the game any more you can see me playing Rome 1 or empire overI have a middle of the range computer like most of you will and this game just doesn't run as well as the rest of the series,i love total war and have all of them but this beta of a game is a let down,the game lacks substance and the draw in factor of other titles,its sad and hopefully they will fix it but i have no trust in the game any more you can see me playing Rome 1 or empire over this until its fixed… Expand
  79. 2484Stryker
    Sep 11, 2013
    6
    Rome 2 is essentially a shadow & husk of its predecessor, albeit with a few more technical glitches and questionable design changes. While some added features such as the provincial system were interesting, what CA took away effectively hindered my ability to enjoy the game as a whole. Rome 2 feels too streamlined, too simplified, too poorly polished. From the campaign map UI interfaceRome 2 is essentially a shadow & husk of its predecessor, albeit with a few more technical glitches and questionable design changes. While some added features such as the provincial system were interesting, what CA took away effectively hindered my ability to enjoy the game as a whole. Rome 2 feels too streamlined, too simplified, too poorly polished. From the campaign map UI interface to the unit stack icons during real-time battles, it feels like CA treated them almost as an afterthought. Furthermore, some features that were added either made very little sense, or were so poorly implemented that they ultimately were self-defeating.

    In the final analysis, Rome 2 is not a horrible game; it's an above-average yet quite buggy game that should have been better designed, beta-tested more thoroughly, then given deeper polish. And while it might not be a failure compared to the plethora of other games released these days, I do consider it a Total War series disappointment.    … Expand
  80. Thatweirdguy
    Sep 11, 2013
    7
    Totally horrible stupid A.I and graphics buy even with my high end PC and flag points on the battlefield totally ruined it .Horrible campaign matches that serge battle depend on a stupid flag point
  81. vic_travers
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    Well, there's a few positives (Agent's, some politcal intrigue, Art direction, prettiness of the map etc) but....This game does not seem to build on the foundations of Shogun 2 or even Empire before it.

    My issues: AI bugs (both in the turn based and RTS elements) Graphics lag (it auto-tuned to my system and picked extreme graphics etc, I turned it DOWN to ultra and it still lags,    Well, there's a few positives (Agent's, some politcal intrigue, Art direction, prettiness of the map etc) but....This game does not seem to build on the foundations of Shogun 2 or even Empire before it.

    My issues:

    AI bugs (both in the turn based and RTS elements)

    Graphics lag (it auto-tuned to my system and picked extreme graphics etc, I turned it DOWN to ultra and it still lags, even on the campaign map)

    Hitpoint system and moral both seem to be flawed when compared to previous titles.

    Army movment is a big bugbear for me (perhaps my own character flaw) and I'll tell you why dear reader.
    Caeser pacified Gaul in 6 years. In this game, it would take 6 years (turns) or longer just to march to Gaul from Rome, never mind conquer it.

    End turns take way way too long.

    3D advisors waste of CPU and memory

    The grand strategy map, whilst pretty, seems to be a little too cartoony, a bit... sort of.. Tellytubby land

    Hopefully, once the fixes start rolling in this game will be worth your money (CA already have mine). My advice, keep an eye on the MOD community for this game. Once they've cracked it (DarthMod) you'll see the game shine. (check out Empire with the darthmod!!)

    In closing. Get Shogun 2, play it for a few months whilst CA fix Rome 2 and then get Rome 2 and get the MODs.    … Expand
  82. sifuxu
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    I would describe my feelings about this game as huge disappointment. For 5 years after release of Empire CA promises us a good AI. However when we play final product it all looks like a marketing lies. I am very unhappy about this game because of bad optimization, horrible AI, ugly ui, removal of family tree. Developers should stop treating their customers as beta testers and listen moreI would describe my feelings about this game as huge disappointment. For 5 years after release of Empire CA promises us a good AI. However when we play final product it all looks like a marketing lies. I am very unhappy about this game because of bad optimization, horrible AI, ugly ui, removal of family tree. Developers should stop treating their customers as beta testers and listen more to community when they make very controvercial decisions.… Expand
  83. Flam1ng
    Sep 8, 2013
    6
    The game started out with poor graphics and iffy AI but with a good friend it can be alot of o fun, the single player is fine but naval combat is very weird and Seriously underdevolped
  84. Waterz
    Dec 22, 2013
    7
    It is an amazing game much like it's predecessor, yet as many point out it seems more or less unfinished.
    The initially released version 1.0 barely deserves beta status, and i would deem not even worth playing.
    Update to latest beta patch (even though the patch is in beta and can contain some minor problems, the game heavily needs all the fixes they bring in the newer patches!), and you    It is an amazing game much like it's predecessor, yet as many point out it seems more or less unfinished.
    The initially released version 1.0 barely deserves beta status, and i would deem not even worth playing.
    Update to latest beta patch (even though the patch is in beta and can contain some minor problems, the game heavily needs all the fixes they bring in the newer patches!), and you will find it not just playable but very enjoyable!
    Alas you will continually find stuff like phalanx units having so many problems you will all together drop them, and ranged units not firing like suppose to.
    All in all, the recent patches has made the game enjoyable, and hopefully the future patches will restore it to the polished game it deserves to be!     … Expand
  85. 2d_beanbag
    Feb 15, 2014
    5
    I'm writing this short review as of patch 9.

    This is no remake of Rome 1. Rome 2 significantly differs from Rome 1 in many ways such as you can no longer: Build and upgrade roads (no idea why they got rid of this feature) Build and upgrade walls: Walls are preset in the game (around capitals namely) and there is no choice for the player to construct walls around his smaller towns    I'm writing this short review as of patch 9.

    This is no remake of Rome 1. Rome 2 significantly differs from Rome 1 in many ways such as you can no longer:

    Build and upgrade roads (no idea why they got rid of this feature)

    Build and upgrade walls: Walls are preset in the game (around capitals namely) and there is no choice for the player to construct walls around his smaller towns which is kind a sad.

    No more family tree (this never really bothered me, but a lot of people have complained about this).

    Build watch towers with your generals

    Micromanage each settlement individually: This means that instead of managing each single city/settlement as in Rome 1, in Rome 2 you manage provinces (between 2 to 4 settlements). This waters down the strategy side of the game greatly as you can no longer set a different tax rate for each settlement, and whereas in Rome 1 where happiness was indicative of certain buildings being built in that particular city, In Rome 2 building say a temple in any of your provinces will increase happiness over the entire province. Personally I think this over simplifies the game and quickens the pace of the game.

    You no longer recruit troops in your settlements, First you pay to train a general, then you can recruit troops by clicking on your general and the troops available to you is down to what military buildings you have built. This is good in some ways, since you can move your lone general around your province and still recruit troops, but in other ways its annoying because now you can't train troops unless you have a general present - and there is a limit to how many generals you can recruit! So remember when you could train a single cohort of Hastati and merge it into an army? Well you can't do that now. Heck you can't even have an army without a general!

    With every military building built (dependent on its type) it automatically assigns a number of garrisoned troops inside that settlement. And you can find out which troops are garrisoned by hovering your mouse over an icon (I would have preferred a panel showing me what soldiers were garrisoned but as of patch 9 nothing). Again I feel this takes away more control from the player. I would much rather decide which troops to garrison inside my settlement rather than have some troops automatically assigned.

    There are many more examples that make Rome 2 feel watered down like this.

    Now a note about the graphics. It looks nothing like the pre-alpha footage. I can set the graphics on Extreme settings and they are still horrendous! The colours are bright and sharp, the water unrealistic. I'm amazed that CA have on their website screen shots that are no way indicative of the actual gameplay; in fact they look Photoshoped. CA seriously have questions to answer since what they showed us pre-release is nothing to what we got. Also there is no proper AA support; the only option you have is on or off - which is ridiculous.
    Sometimes I play BF3 and Skyrim and wonder how on earth Rome 2's graphics are that bad.

    The UI is so so and the unit cards I think are over simplified, plain and similar looking to the other factions.

    Trait cards are many and confusing. They are just presented to the player in an uncategorized fashion which therefore forces you to hover your mouse on each one to see what bonuses they are concealing. Really annoying since you will discover that there are many trait cards with the same bonus only with different looking drawings on the card. Stupid.

    Apparently there is a cultural and political system but to be honest I seem to be able to play the game without even noticing it so it does make me wonder how important it is.

    This game looks, feels and plays like a cross between a beta and a port and the more I play Rome 2 the more I am convinced that this game was further developed for Modding. If you want good graphics, get a mod. If you want better unit cards, choose a mod... Why should we fork out for a game only for it to be right we have to get it modified?! If the modders can make the graphics work why can't the developers at CA??

    A lot of people have rated this game between 2- 3 I think this is harsh. After 9 or so patches the game is so much more playable now stability wise. I give it 5 simply because I still believe it is an unfinished product and that it is very much watered down in many instances. This game is a huge disappointment.    … Expand
  86. ocelot1300
    Sep 9, 2013
    5
    This is an okay game with the potential to be a great game. Numerous UI and AI issues, lag and graphics issues, prevent it from being what it could be. To illustrate the point, let me give an example:

    I was defending a settlement against significantly superior forces, invading both by land and sea. I defeated the enemy forces. However, one group of enemy units was on a boat that got    This is an okay game with the potential to be a great game. Numerous UI and AI issues, lag and graphics issues, prevent it from being what it could be. To illustrate the point, let me give an example:

    I was defending a settlement against significantly superior forces, invading both by land and sea. I defeated the enemy forces. However, one group of enemy units was on a boat that got stuck, unable to land or retreat. Even though I shattered its morale, they were still counted as active combatants, and thus the game didn't conclude the battle. My options were to concede defeat (even though I had really won the battle), or wait for the 40+ minutes left on the timer to expire. I tried fast-forwarding the game, but due to lag it takes the same amount of time on fast-forward as regular speed. So in the end I decided to concede defeat, and lost the province--even though I had actually won the battle. That's what kills the enjoyment of this game.

    It should also be noted that I tried this game on three different computers. On one it worked with no problems, one I had to delete a folder in AppData to get it to run, and on the newest machine I still can't get it to work. It's not my responsibility to get the game to run, it's CA's.

    Like most CA games, it's not so great out of the box. Hopefully they'll patch the game, and modders will improve the game (by eliminating stupid things like the army cap), and then it will finally be a great game.    … Expand
  87. Davohn
    Sep 6, 2013
    5
    I enjoyed the prologue, and the first few turns of the campaign, but the turn times are far too long which basically breaks the campaign before you even start talking about the tech trees etc.

    The battles themselves are fun and when some technical issues are fixed I can see the historical battles and multiplayer being worthwhile, but unless there is some serious optimization, the    I enjoyed the prologue, and the first few turns of the campaign, but the turn times are far too long which basically breaks the campaign before you even start talking about the tech trees etc.

    The battles themselves are fun and when some technical issues are fixed I can see the historical battles and multiplayer being worthwhile, but unless there is some serious optimization, the campaign is just an excercise in waiting.    … Expand
  88. bzdt1
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    The main problem of this game is that no provide "wow effect" anymore, nothing new, just shogun 2 with some new animations and skins, very boring technical problems
  89. nidza
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    The game is made a for a high end PC and an SSD is a must have if you don't want to clean your house while waiting for your turn.

    The battles are criminally easy. The campaign is slightly harder but still too easy. The battles are slower than in shogun which suits my playstyle. The game is very pretty the graphics are amazing and I like the art style. I like this game more than    The game is made a for a high end PC and an SSD is a must have if you don't want to clean your house while waiting for your turn.

    The battles are criminally easy.
    The campaign is slightly harder but still too easy.
    The battles are slower than in shogun which suits my playstyle.
    The game is very pretty the graphics are amazing and I like the art style.
    I like this game more than shogun 2 but I do see shogun 2 as a better game which makes this a step back.
    It could be optimized better and have SLI support but it's a rush job.

    I wouldn't pay them 83$ which is the European price for the game but the 30$ the Russian price seemed ok enough for me to try this...for the rest I would recommend piracy as it's not a cashgrab per se but day one DLC makes me angry.    … Expand
  90. Deavon
    Sep 8, 2013
    5
    Apart from the bugs there are some serious game breakers for me; not in the least the capture points during battles. Don't too be tempted by the critic reviews, most of them aren't TW players anyway.
    Wait before you purchase.
  91. norwaydude
    Sep 26, 2013
    5
    The first Rome game was good; people accepted the bugs and had fun with it despite the meaningless gameplay in campaign mode and the oddities of the battles. It was the graphics, the epicness and grand scale of the game that made us look past its uglier sides. Now, 9 years and 4 Total War games later, it becomes hard to be so forgiving, especially when the uglier side of the Total WarThe first Rome game was good; people accepted the bugs and had fun with it despite the meaningless gameplay in campaign mode and the oddities of the battles. It was the graphics, the epicness and grand scale of the game that made us look past its uglier sides. Now, 9 years and 4 Total War games later, it becomes hard to be so forgiving, especially when the uglier side of the Total War series have become more pronounced with time.

    For instance, the campaign map gameplay still consists of the same endless micro choosing of options that by themselves have only a minimal effect and that do not matter much in the long run. There is no real gameplay behind all the superficial and seemingly rich set of options to choose from it's just the same flummery and fluff over and over again.

    And likewise with the battles. Here we still have the odd AI behaviour of shifting formations every 15 seconds or so without any real reaction to what you are doing, making it easy to rain death on them with skirmishers without losing a single man. I remember this exact same, annoying and thoroughly stupid behaviour from when I played Rome.

    All in all, there hasn't been much progress in the Total War series. Sure, there are new cool features, like units now being able to raise their shields to protect themselves from missiles and some really cool amphibious assaults, but you cannot build a game on cool features alone. It has to have a fundamentally good core to it, and this is where Rome 2 fails. In addition to all the bugs, unfinished features and lack of polish we are used to with games from the Creative Assembly, of course.    … Expand
  92. Maniacmajic
    Feb 16, 2014
    6
    Despite the fixing of several bugs this game rapidly turns into a serious grind to even reach an ending... graphical errors still plague gameplay as does severe slowdown during siege battles...
    Taking away the family tree just further removes the player from being immersed in the game. Battle speeches and videos are tacked on afterthoughts..
    Final verdict.. get it cheap if you have    Despite the fixing of several bugs this game rapidly turns into a serious grind to even reach an ending... graphical errors still plague gameplay as does severe slowdown during siege battles...
    Taking away the family tree just further removes the player from being immersed in the game. Battle speeches and videos are tacked on afterthoughts..
    Final verdict.. get it cheap if you have hours and days to spend... oh and bring a book..    … Expand
  93. VideogamesIlike
    Sep 4, 2013
    6
    Rome 2 is certinally a disappointment, though hardly the worst game ever as many user reviews state. It does, however, more than earn it's mixed reviews.

    On one hand the game is beautiful on higher end systems like my own, giving a gravity and scale to the conflict unseen in any Total war game before. It brings cultural diversity that Shogun 2 sorely lacked also. However, in many    Rome 2 is certinally a disappointment, though hardly the worst game ever as many user reviews state. It does, however, more than earn it's mixed reviews.

    On one hand the game is beautiful on higher end systems like my own, giving a gravity and scale to the conflict unseen in any Total war game before. It brings cultural diversity that Shogun 2 sorely lacked also.

    However, in many ways it is broken. Good ideas like internal politics are not at all explained, and are poorly executed at best. The player seems to have far more limited control over their cities, with the new interface robbing cities of much of their infomation. I often find myself at very low public order with little ability to work out why, or what I can do about it. Though the new army system is cool in theory, and it's nice to give armies some personality, it robs the game of some tactics, especially the- who should I hold back to garrison, who should I advance- question. Though their are many cultures, and a great deal more diversity than Shogun, there is a startling lack of unique troops, and the large number of filler factions with one or two provinces only seems to rob the primary factions of any unit individuality. Battles are far too fast paced, with combat taking mere seconds, gone are the epic scrums, now battles rarely take longer than five minutes at best. Mist of which is moving your armies. The AI hasn't improved much at all, and all the challenge in hard simply comes from relentless numbers, rather than genuine, fair tactics. Multiplayer has been massively stripped down from a Shogun high point, with all progression and army individuality dropped to return to a comparatively stale no stakes battle. Rome is a strong game on it's own terms, but very weak for a total war game. I have come away more disappointed with Rome than any TW game to date. A sad mistep for the successor to my favorite total war game. It lacks the depth of paradox, and the responsive war-based fun of the older games. The worst of both worlds.    … Expand
  94. kersal
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    Actually the game lack on his most important goal: the challenge. The AI, even at legendary mode, is terrible, especially on campaign map. No challenge means not fun. Now is like playing Sim City and not TW!
  95. zethar
    Sep 10, 2013
    5
    STOP trying to make it a casual game its a battle A LONG BATTLE GAME not a casual Rome 1 was better (111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111) just to fill the rest of the characters
  96. Furious28289
    Sep 4, 2013
    6
    Played for a day but got bored of it real quick unfortunately. Ill try to give an honest assessment.

    CONS - Battles become a giant blob of units mess - One year per turn has destroyed the attachment and reward you get from slowly training up your generals and agents, they just keep dying which brings up the "noble death" cinematic over and OVER again. Agents are also VERY expensive -    Played for a day but got bored of it real quick unfortunately. Ill try to give an honest assessment.

    CONS
    - Battles become a giant blob of units mess
    - One year per turn has destroyed the attachment and reward you get from slowly training up your generals and agents, they just keep dying which brings up the "noble death" cinematic over and OVER again. Agents are also VERY expensive
    - Concept of one year per turn is so stupid, it is adhered to for "historical accuracy" in some areas of the game (to its detriment) yet ignored in others. Just trash the whole idea, and do it like rome 1
    - AI is extremely inept
    - Naval landings against cities is FUNDAMENTALLY broken, as the defending side just clogs the limited landing spots with their own ships
    - Huge performance issues, even on high end rigs
    - Diplomacy has taken a step back from Shogun 2 (the whole game has taken a step back, but this specifically. Diplomacy quite bugged/not working
    - MASSIVE turn times, all those chores u have been wanting to do but cbf doing will be done while u wait for this epic turn time lol
    - As it was called out on the forums, the testudo formation is a useless JOKE, and in itself a true indication of CA's collapse of common sense
    - UI has also taken a step backwards: it is much harder to get a grasp of relations, who owns what on the map, finances, public order etc. NOT because i want it to be dumbed down, but because there are too many uneccessary UI obstacles to getting this information, or it simply isnt there
    - Battles full of bugs, units getting stuck, refusing to obey orders etc.
    - Much more difficult to effectively control your army in battle, couple that with the very fast pace of battles and you have a cluster turd of a situation.
    - Many bugs in all aspect of the game
    - Siege times are too short (CA trying to cling to the ridiculous notion of 1 year per turn again)
    - Sense of satisfaction on creating an empire/playing campaign map is missing, still trying to pin it down but it probably a combination of the above and the one year per turn nonsense inhibiting/destroying all the aspects of previous total war titles that we all loved.

    PROS
    - Has potential, like in a years time when (if) copious amounts of patching has rectified many of the above issues. Wait for steam special folks, in 2 years time. In the meantime go back to Shogun 2: Fall of the Samurai which is actually a much better game.
    - Campaign map looks nice, just need those performace issues addressed
    - Army stances seem nice, although i see limited use for defensive stance
    - I believe the battle speed MAY not be an issue if they can enhance the unit controls more. Mosh pit mob effect must be fixed though, roman legionaries fought with much more cohesion in rome 1.
    - City building is kinda cool    … Expand
  97. IgnasPrzybylski
    Sep 9, 2013
    6
    My first impression was great gameplay and awful optimalisation. I ran Shogun 2 on very high settings without a problem and it was really pretty, while in Rome 2 my good old 448-bit GTX 260 had terrible issues because it cannot support dx 11. I was shocked, first TW games looked way better than what I saw. Got a rather cheap new GTX and the performance is good, I have no more problems withMy first impression was great gameplay and awful optimalisation. I ran Shogun 2 on very high settings without a problem and it was really pretty, while in Rome 2 my good old 448-bit GTX 260 had terrible issues because it cannot support dx 11. I was shocked, first TW games looked way better than what I saw. Got a rather cheap new GTX and the performance is good, I have no more problems with it. The poor AI doesn't really bother me that much, I got used to it and sometimes it's cool that I can hold them off with small armies just because they're dumb. Simplified city management... I like it, to me it's much better than management from the previous releases. Simplifying armies wasn't a very good idea though. Recruiting right on the general anywhere in the province is comfortable, but limit of armies sucks, I mean, economy should be the only thing that stops me from having a lot of troops. What I don't like about it is that I can't just split whenever I want. I can't leave some additional units to help city's garrison, they can't stay anywhere without a general now. This is imo the worst thing in the gameplay itself. But ok, it doesn't really make the game bad, garrisons are pretty strong now, at least I don't have to pay all those guards I usually kept in my cities. The most annoying thing would be ending your turn. There's so many minor factions it takes ages to wait for your next turn and it takes even longer when I alt-tab, not to mention that stuff happens, AI may attack me or some diplomatic proposal may appear. Personally I just play piano or write SMS in the meantime. If you don't have anything to do while waiting for your turn you will spend most of the time looking at the silly AI running around several times longer than in previous games. Of course, it's nice that there is a big variety of factions instead of just anonymous rebels like in, say, Medieval 2, but sometimes it's just scary to press "end turn". I thought it took long in Shogun 2, I don't anymore. Technical issues will probably be fixed, but even though my rig is rather mediocre (i3, gtx650ti boost, 12gb ram) it works and looks decently on high settings now. Lack of a nice multiplayer like the one in Shogun 2 disappoints, that's a huge step backwards. I loved almost everything about Shogun 2, except the fact it's set in Japan, which I dislike. I wanted a new TW game with S2's awesomeness set in Europe, but I feel a downgrade. It's still a fun game to play though, the only thing I really want fixed now is BLOOD. I don't care I have to pay for that anymore, I just want it released SOON, not year after I stopped playing the game. I like watching them fight, but without blood it's really dull. At least the "kill captives" and "raze city" options have returned.

    Pros:
    - very comfortable province management
    - great skirmish map choice
    - huge map
    - very pretty gfx and good audio

    Cons:
    - awful technical issues right after release, bad performance
    - no more depth in multiplayer
    - long wait between turns
    - still no blood    … Expand
  98. athropos
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    Horrendous performance problems on high end systems plague an otherwise average total war game.

    Running this game on:
    i7-3770k
    GTX 680 SLI
    16 gigs of ram

    There is no SLI support as of yet and performance is abysmal. There might be a good game under there but in it's current excessively rushed state this game cannot get anything over a 6/10.
  99. IICRASHII
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    crash crash crash all what i get i have coreI7 2700K 3.5GHz stock 16GB rams, Radeon HD6870 1GB and i run everything on medium and high no antialiasing no ssao and game crash alot in campaign
  100. PublicEnemy
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    Needs a lot of bug fixing and graphical performance improvements. All CA releases are shaky, and that is fine, but after so many titles CA did not learn from their mistakes.
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

4
#4 Most Discussed PC Game of 2013
7
#7 Most Shared PC Game of 2013

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
76

Generally favorable reviews - based on 71 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 49 out of 71
  2. Mixed: 15 out of 71
  3. Negative: 7 out of 71
  1. Worth Playing
    Nov 18, 2013
    74
    The game is far less polished than Shogun 2, and a few more patches will help, but Rome II is still a flawed game that is underwhelming when compared to previous titles in the franchise.
    Read full review
  2. PCGamesN
    Nov 6, 2013
    70
    And here’s the rub: every addition, every sub-system, every mechanic is subservient to War. War is what Total War is really about. Everything else not directly related to conflict comes across as ancillary. Rome II is a game for warmongers, on both the campaign map and, obviously, on the battlefield. When peace is happening, nothing is happening. When war is happening, Rome comes alive.
    Read full review
  3. PC PowerPlay
    Oct 28, 2013
    40
    If you will play literally anything featuring Total War and Rome in the same title and don't value your time, this is for you. [Nov 2013, p.80]
See all critic reviews »