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
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 »