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. Belidon
    Sep 9, 2013
    7
    The atmosphere is all you would want from the sequel to the legendary rome: rome total war. It is a very enjoyable game but it just feels it could've been so much better. It's unoptimized, it lacks depth in the diplomacy and political systems and battles currently suffer from blob fights rather than well executed strategy.

    Patches and potentially mods can make this good game, great.
  2. macedonian21
    Sep 10, 2013
    5
    tbh i never have high expectations from a game as I know it will have problems anyway...but I hate the fact that I pre-order a game for the first time and get to play a more beta looking version of the game...hell I didn't even get the culture pack because I have to pay 7 for it...WTF?...don't get me wrong...the game underneath is good and fun for me maybe because I know how to find thetbh i never have high expectations from a game as I know it will have problems anyway...but I hate the fact that I pre-order a game for the first time and get to play a more beta looking version of the game...hell I didn't even get the culture pack because I have to pay 7 for it...WTF?...don't get me wrong...the game underneath is good and fun for me maybe because I know how to find the good part in everything sometimes but you said you had a 40% bigger budget for this game than for any other TW game before...what did you do with those money? gave it to reviewers so that they could give you a good ratting so on release you will sell a lot of copies?...first of all the publisher for rushing the game...and CA for giving us an unfinished game without even telling us about the current state of the game...wtf CA next time test the game yourselves before releasing...… Expand
  3. sir_langan
    Oct 29, 2013
    6
    While there are a lot of problems, a hell of a lot, this is still a good game. One of the problems this game has is that the bar was set so high after all the previous titles in the series. Without that as a comparison this would be a great game.

    But there is the comparison. Streamlining isn't something the fans of this series want. This game was streamlined in so many ways it is    While there are a lot of problems, a hell of a lot, this is still a good game. One of the problems this game has is that the bar was set so high after all the previous titles in the series. Without that as a comparison this would be a great game.

    But there is the comparison. Streamlining isn't something the fans of this series want. This game was streamlined in so many ways it is ridiculous. Hopefully it has a long redevelopment life.    … Expand
  4. baktor
    Nov 30, 2013
    7
    This game takes a step back from Shogun 2. The game does have quite a few bugs, most fixed now. The combat has some awesome features with automatic unit grouping and better AI. The campaign is just as good and improves on the territory features. It feels lacking of differences and strategies from AI. The entire game will freeze up and drop to 3-6 FPS in some siege battles. This drop isThis game takes a step back from Shogun 2. The game does have quite a few bugs, most fixed now. The combat has some awesome features with automatic unit grouping and better AI. The campaign is just as good and improves on the territory features. It feels lacking of differences and strategies from AI. The entire game will freeze up and drop to 3-6 FPS in some siege battles. This drop is after a constant 75~FPS in everything.… Expand
  5. Brickfaced
    Dec 3, 2013
    6
    This game was certainly an anti-climax upon release, with numerous game breaking bugs and poor design choices. Although some of these faults are still present, CA have put a lot of effort into ironing them out, more effort than people seem to acknowledge anyway. Of course it should have great from the start, and it still isn't without its faults, but not that they aren't as crippling, theThis game was certainly an anti-climax upon release, with numerous game breaking bugs and poor design choices. Although some of these faults are still present, CA have put a lot of effort into ironing them out, more effort than people seem to acknowledge anyway. Of course it should have great from the start, and it still isn't without its faults, but not that they aren't as crippling, the beauty of the game can now stand out. It still doesn't have that pick up and play fun factor that previous Total War titles have, as the game seems to have formed some kind of hybrid with management rather than just assault. It feels like one half a total war game, and the other half Sid Meier's Civilizations. Individually the themes are great, but merged in the way that they are in this game, the hybrid isn't so appealing. It is still an intricate and ambitious effort, with enjoyment to be had once you see past the little faults. It's just that it isn't on the scale, or the addictive and time-eating measure of Rome 1.… Expand
  6. Chunderfield
    Mar 24, 2014
    7
    Total War has a long, illustrious history. The pinnacle of which was Empire: Total War. That's is about as fine as they come. Since Empire we've had Shogun 2 and now Rome 2. I found Shogun to be underwhelming and now with Rome 2, the downward spiral into obscurity continues.

    Pros: 1. Phenomenal graphical potential if your hardware can handle it. 2. Cinematic camera mode. Makes it    Total War has a long, illustrious history. The pinnacle of which was Empire: Total War. That's is about as fine as they come. Since Empire we've had Shogun 2 and now Rome 2. I found Shogun to be underwhelming and now with Rome 2, the downward spiral into obscurity continues.

    Pros:
    1. Phenomenal graphical potential if your hardware can handle it.
    2. Cinematic camera mode. Makes it quick and easy to get a glimpse of the action up close.
    3. Strategic camera mode. A nice zoomed-out tactical camera option that's very reminiscent of Supreme Commander.
    4. HUGE world map.
    5. Decent in-game Encyclopedia
    6. "Continue Campaign" option right from the launch screen in Steam.

    Cons:
    1. The UI is unnecessarily huge and impeding
    2. The In game advice cannot be turned off. No matter how many times I click "suppress advice", I still get it. If you turn it on "Audio only advice" to avoid getting the extremely poorly animated advisor from popping up, It still pops up, only with no text.
    3. Animations were underwhelming. Units looked like little paper-doll clones.
    4. WAY too much DLC for extra cash. The only one worth getting (and should've come standard with the game) is the Blood and Gore DLC. Makes me feel like I bought an intentionally bare-bones game with the intent to sell me DLC later.
    5. Standard Total War long load times.
    6. Research trees are small and boring.
    7. Ultra high system requirements. It's a real hog. Crashes and freezes way more than I care to mention. I've been steadily reducing graphics settings in an attempt to improve stability.
    8. Infuriatingly clunky political system controls.
    9. Voice acting became repetitive and corny after the first hour.
    10. Generals have magical. ♥♥♥♥ing. powers. That you have to manually control in battle.

    Conclusion:
    Rome 2 stays true to its Total War heritage. I jumped in and it felt familiar and comfortable. It's a weak and unworthy successor to the original Rome though. The resource management is basic, and the empire building is rather shallow. Empire: Total War felt deep. I felt invested in that masterpiece. I feel very little with Rome 2 other than disappointment at wasted potential. It's a big budget game that's worth no more than $30.    … Expand
  7. TeunisD
    Sep 4, 2013
    6
    Pro:
    - Great campaign map with alot of features.
    - Good foundation if it's moddable.
    - Good battle music.

    Negative:
    - Bugs, alot of bugs.
    - No music in the campaign map.
    - Battles are WAY to fast.
    - Graphics are not as advertised.
    - Very system heavy. Minimal specs are not going to make it. Bad optimilization.
    - Typical things like formation movement still not fixed.
  8. fernandus
    Sep 6, 2013
    6
    Hi guys.
    How to start Well, i am a huge TW fan, i´ve played every single game of the franchise. This one is NOT the biggest f*** up CA did with TW, BUT, i expected more.
    When i started the game for the first time, the first thing i noticed was the POOR graphics... WTF I ran Shogun 2 in the highest quality and now THIS I remember CA people saying this will not need NASA rigs, folks    Hi guys.
    How to start Well, i am a huge TW fan, i´ve played every single game of the franchise. This one is NOT the biggest f*** up CA did with TW, BUT, i expected more.
    When i started the game for the first time, the first thing i noticed was the POOR graphics... WTF I ran Shogun 2 in the highest quality and now THIS I remember CA people saying this will not need NASA rigs, folks who ran Shogun 2 will be fine, lovely BS I´m playing Rome 2 like Rome 1.... very disapointing, the rest of the issues will be fixed.... i hope.
    finishing... CA don´t release a BETA game pls     … Expand
  9. zer0sum
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    I have been a big fan of everything CA for years. I really enjoyed empire and shogun, thinking that they basically did everything correctly in those games. I find Rome II to be disappointing. It's hard to put my finger on why, exactly. I think a major part of the problem is the long wait between turns. It breaks immersion and it is not fun to sit there for a minute while the enemy crunchesI have been a big fan of everything CA for years. I really enjoyed empire and shogun, thinking that they basically did everything correctly in those games. I find Rome II to be disappointing. It's hard to put my finger on why, exactly. I think a major part of the problem is the long wait between turns. It breaks immersion and it is not fun to sit there for a minute while the enemy crunches numbers. This is actually my chief complaint. If the game loaded faster and crunched turns faster, then I would probably be enjoying this game a lot more.… Expand
  10. Einherjar_DK
    Sep 7, 2013
    5
    This is not a game this is a beta. With optimisation issues that make it unplayable more often than not, Rome 2 is so broken it's a disgrace it was allowed to be released in this state. Aside from the frankly game-breaking performance issues, the gameplay is a real step down from previous titles. The AI is as incompetent as ever. The campaign map has been taken in completely the wrongThis is not a game this is a beta. With optimisation issues that make it unplayable more often than not, Rome 2 is so broken it's a disgrace it was allowed to be released in this state. Aside from the frankly game-breaking performance issues, the gameplay is a real step down from previous titles. The AI is as incompetent as ever. The campaign map has been taken in completely the wrong direction, with all areas of gameplay dumbed down, and soul-sapping load times rubbing it in. Battles are simply no fun to play. Combat is resolved in minutes, with units destroying each other near-instantaneously. The array of stupid unit abilities emphasises the arcade-like nature of the battles.

    I won't go into the host of minor complaints with the game. Creative Assembly have released an unfinished product that you SHOULD NOT BUY. Those of us who have bought the game now wait for CA to fix the performance issues and independent modders to fix the gameplay. You decide for yourself if this is the state a game should be in at release, and whether this is the sort of product that you should pay for.

    And last but not least, no SLI Support...    … Expand
  11. stu82r
    Sep 10, 2013
    5
    I love the epic historical battle experience provided by the Total War franchise, but as of now this one has seriously failed to deliver. After 15 game hours; the AI seems broken. It is neither challenging nor a threat on any difficulty. The graphics are not up to the standard that was displayed in development screenshots, and not what I expected from a 2013 TW release. There are some coolI love the epic historical battle experience provided by the Total War franchise, but as of now this one has seriously failed to deliver. After 15 game hours; the AI seems broken. It is neither challenging nor a threat on any difficulty. The graphics are not up to the standard that was displayed in development screenshots, and not what I expected from a 2013 TW release. There are some cool new features, the cinematic camera, the campaign map has improved, but nothing new that has drastically improved or expanded the series. Sure, previous Total War titles also had their own problems, but CA does not seem to be learning or improving from those problems, despite being aware of them. I expected a huge leap forward in all areas, instead it feels like a massive step backwards. What is left is a playable game that had potential, but it is filled with annoying bugs, poor design choices (the battles feel short and confusing, in part due to the horrible AI and a new capture the flag mechanic that makes no sense), and DLC that's simply a slap in the face. You want to play the Spartans as a faction? Please insert $8. The fans have once again paid the price, and it will once again be up to the fans and modders to rescue this mess. Did not pre-order, this is the last CA game I will buy. Not acceptable.
    If you want to buy it, wait a year and buy it with a DLC bundle on sale. Otherwise, get Shogan 2 as it is simply a better game.    … Expand
  12. Stewchops
    Sep 13, 2013
    6
    Very meh when compared to previous titles in the series. Did someone important leave the studio or did they just stop giving a It feels like a step back from the work of art that is Shogun 2. Frankly the $60 price tag is insulting. Even if it were a $40 game I wouldn't recommend it to anyone I valued as a friend as they might think I was nuts.
  13. RKK-SINGH
    Dec 24, 2013
    5
    A huge disappointment and an embarrassment to the Total War series, this game is in need of serious patches because its bleeding really bad, skip this game. Game receives a 5 because the overall concept is amazing, however with all the lag, poor graphics it does not live up to the hype, don't even bother looking at it, instead buy Medieval II Total War or the original Rome Total War, thoseA huge disappointment and an embarrassment to the Total War series, this game is in need of serious patches because its bleeding really bad, skip this game. Game receives a 5 because the overall concept is amazing, however with all the lag, poor graphics it does not live up to the hype, don't even bother looking at it, instead buy Medieval II Total War or the original Rome Total War, those games will not disappoint you.… Expand
  14. Halfmad
    Oct 13, 2013
    5
    Played this now for around 40 hours, most of which weren't particularly enjoyable. I'm a long time fan of the Total War series, going right back to the original Rome and every single one in between these two. I have to say it can look glorious, but as many people who love this franchise know it's how it's plays that matters. Unfortunately it doesn't play very well at all, bugs aside thePlayed this now for around 40 hours, most of which weren't particularly enjoyable. I'm a long time fan of the Total War series, going right back to the original Rome and every single one in between these two. I have to say it can look glorious, but as many people who love this franchise know it's how it's plays that matters. Unfortunately it doesn't play very well at all, bugs aside the game is still a mess with poor strategy shown by the computer during battles even on higher difficulty settings. They have for some reason removed the family tree, which makes no sense to me at all, I don't feel involved in the combat or game the way I did with even older games such as MTWII. Can I recommend it? Sadly I have to honestly say no, fire up MTWII with some mods and play that instead, it's vastly more entertaining. Even if the few serious bugs that remain are fixed this is still a soul-less, vaguely entertaining game and I really can't understand how they've managed to create it.… Expand
  15. beltrazZ
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    After 16 hours played, I suddenly realise during my Iceni campaign on legendary difficulty, that i´m not enjoying the new game in my favorite game franchise. The AI is so defensive it´s ridiculous. Usually a single region state just sits with 2 full armies at their capital and does nothing. Trying to get trade agreements with any other nation is a nightmare. The AI remains the main problemAfter 16 hours played, I suddenly realise during my Iceni campaign on legendary difficulty, that i´m not enjoying the new game in my favorite game franchise. The AI is so defensive it´s ridiculous. Usually a single region state just sits with 2 full armies at their capital and does nothing. Trying to get trade agreements with any other nation is a nightmare. The AI remains the main problem of the franchise. In Shogun 2 it was actually pretty good in my opinion but this is such a downgrade. The flagpoints in the battles are broken. There is no strategy when the flagpoints are active. And don´t even get me started on the naval battles. The ramming and boarding button is broken to me and my units simply don´t follow my orders. And the FPS is always low in the campaign map for some reason. It´s fine in the battles (mostly) but in the campaign map it just isn´t smooth. I really, really hope that they will release some big patches and gameplay tweaks. Please Creative Assembly, fix this mess of a game that you have just released. Make it as good or better then the first rome.… Expand
  16. MisterFro9
    Jun 11, 2014
    7
    The game has come A LONG way since release. It was a huge disappointment at first, and there are still many things that would be nice to be fixed, but it is definitely fun as hell. With a few more tweaks this could have an amazing multiplayer scene.
  17. Tyer032392
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    I will not beat around the bush, this game has several major problems. There are plenty of bugs, glitches, graphics issues, and a horrible AI with UI. I can honestly see where CA was trying to go with this game, but they either did not have the time, or just ran out of budget; my money is on the time. If one can get through the problematic bugs and glitches, horrid AI and UI, you can findI will not beat around the bush, this game has several major problems. There are plenty of bugs, glitches, graphics issues, and a horrible AI with UI. I can honestly see where CA was trying to go with this game, but they either did not have the time, or just ran out of budget; my money is on the time. If one can get through the problematic bugs and glitches, horrid AI and UI, you can find a fairly enjoyable game, if it was better optimized. This game is not optimized and is to be frank, a horrid addition to the series as it currently stands. With all this aside, the design changes has some pretty interesting changes, ranging from more personalized armies on the campaign, to the provincial management. There are also less battles than there use to be, and the AI is still acting like it can create army after army and is to passive for my liking as I can literally siege a city and they won't do a thing about it.… Expand
  18. padrin0
    Sep 21, 2013
    5
    I took a little time with this review, because I did want to have a few hours played, so that my opinion would not be biased by what I had read before the release and directly afterwards. Now I have about 30 hours in the game, played around with almost every faction (be it in a campaign or in battles) and feel like I have gotten a decent feel of the game.

    First off, I have to say that I    I took a little time with this review, because I did want to have a few hours played, so that my opinion would not be biased by what I had read before the release and directly afterwards. Now I have about 30 hours in the game, played around with almost every faction (be it in a campaign or in battles) and feel like I have gotten a decent feel of the game.

    First off, I have to say that I am surprised by the number of terrible reviews. I agree that the game is not perfect, and might even be a step backwards from former titles, but it clearly is not a game that deserves a zero rating. To me, zero would imply that the game is unplayable or was so flawed that you would not want to play it Rome 2 isn't either. But let me begin.

    Technical Stuff:
    When I first started Rome 2, it told me that the graphical settings for the game were set to 'Extreme', which is the highest setting available in the game. However, a quick use of the benchmarking tool revealed that my machine wasn't really able to run the game at these settings which is a bit disappointing. Now I am stuck somewhere between 'Very High' and 'Ultra' (which really is Medium and High, but somehow it has to be exaggerated). I get framerate drops every once in a while when a huge battle is underway, but generally the game runs smooth.
    The campaign moves of other factions take a very, very long time unfortunately, and as I have heard it only gets worse the further you progress in a campaign. So far, it usually takes about 30 seconds to a minutes until I get to go again. Annoying? Yes. Gamebreaking? No.
    The real issue are random crashes sometimes the game would just freeze without any obvious reason at all, and could only be killed via the Task Manager. Those crashes are massively annoying, as they force you to restart the game, load a save (which takes a really long time in itself) and probably have you fight the last battle again, because you couldn't save before it went down. Often times when this happend, I just turned of my PC and decided my gaming session was over.
    (FYI: My specs are: i5 3570K, HD7870 /w 2GB VRAM, 8GB RAM)

    TL;DR: (Graphical) performance on a mid-range rig is alright, could be better. Random crashes sometimes kill the fun.

    Gameplay:
    In general, Rome 2 _could_ be a good game. The campaign map is huge, leaving you with almost endless possiblities to expand and develop your empire. However, the UI is simple and you almost immediately have a general idea of where what is, what it does, and if you want to build it or whatever. For instance, when hovering over a building option, it is immediately shown what effects the new building will have.
    However, CA made some terrible design decisions, that can really spoil the game for you (it did for me): For one, the AI is terrible and I am not necessarily talking about battle AI, which is actually not all that bad. What really bugs me are the irrational decisions the AI makes on the campaign map. For example (and this is by far the worst) when you march on an enemy city that is heavily forified, with a full army garsioned inside, very often times the army will leave the city just before you besiege it even when the city you are assaulting is the last city of a faction! The armies that have abandoned the city will then suffer attrition (as they have no home anymore) and have handed you the advantageous position of defending from inside the city. I have not the slightest idea what CA thought when they designed an AI that deliberately but itself at a disadvantage. There are other issues with the AI: mediocre battle performance, unwillingness to accept win/win trade agreements with the player, the fact that they never declare war on you (even if they hate you and you leave cities next to their borders completely undefended... What bothers me the most however, is how the major factions seem to somehow be at a disadvantage when played by the AI. Carthage will usually disappear within the first twenty turns (major bummer, as you will sometimes not even encounter them if you are playing as Rome), and many other factions (including Rome!) never expand more than their original territory. It really is disappointing when in 50 A.D. Rome has not managed to conquer even Northern Italy...
    By the way, I play the campaing on 'Very Hard'. 'Legendary', I avoid, because I do not like the battle realism mode, that is locked in on that difficulty. I have not seen any difference in AI behavior between 'Easy' and 'Very Hard' anyways, so I doubt it makes much of a difference.

    TL;DR: Solid foundation, but horrible AI really spoils the fun in singleplayer. If playing another faction, Rome never grows beyond it's original borders sad for a game that is called Rome.

    Summary:
    As said twice before, Rome 2 is not a bad game. Unfortunately, it is not good either it is simply mediocre. I hope that it gets improved down the road, but as of now, it deserves no more than a mediocre rating.    … Expand
  19. wilm210
    Mar 4, 2014
    6
    Hello, this is my first review I've ever done on Metacritic and on any Review aggregator site for that matter. I'd like viewers to take note that while this is my first public review of a game, it is no less sincere.

    Now as for Rome 2, not a terrible game by any means, but certainly a step backwards from Total War's previous entry, Shogun 2. Putting aside the rocky launch that Rome 2    Hello, this is my first review I've ever done on Metacritic and on any Review aggregator site for that matter. I'd like viewers to take note that while this is my first public review of a game, it is no less sincere.

    Now as for Rome 2, not a terrible game by any means, but certainly a step backwards from Total War's previous entry, Shogun 2. Putting aside the rocky launch that Rome 2 had, it is a visually stunning and decent Strategy game. The campaign map is huge, the faction roster is plentiful and diverse, and the visuals and animations are outstanding. This is where my praise of the games ceases.

    Where Rome 2 falters are in it's far too streamlined gameplay and underdeveloped features. To start off, the new Political System is "Needless" to say the best. The 3 agents variants are redundant as they can all perform the same tasks. Magic boats make the game too trivial .Skill/tech trees are skimp and simplified from Shogun 2. While I am in favor of the new province system, managing settlements have been scaled much too far (i.e. no longer can you build roads or even simple wall defenses such as palisades, buildings trees are skimp and choices are very limited). Wall's are null and void thanks to the ridiculous torches. Multiplayer is very bare-bones in comparison to Shogun 2 and it's general avatar feature. The idiotic decision to add flags in open battles ( I know they have since been remove, but it was such stupid decision I had to bring it up). Abundance of "Magic" abilities for units is also ridiculous.

    A lot of the little details from previous Total War games are completely gone or skimped out on. General speeches are now only 2 brief lines of dialogue. Mini-movies for agents, unit recruiting, faction intros, and events are largely absent. The UI is very generic and uninspired in comparison to previous Total War games. Historical events and info tidbits during the campaign are gone aswell.

    As for Technical issues, the A.I. is extremely incompetent in both siege and field battles and in campaign. Unit-blobbing is still existent as well as optimization issues (the game run just fine for me, but I do not doubt others who have run into performance issues with the game and have adequate machines).

    All in all, Rome 2 is a decent strategy game it's just buried beneath pointless and shallow features and simplification. With the help of mods, the game becomes much more enjoyable. I'm just so disappointed with the game, even with a smaller budget, Shogun 2 achieved much more than Rome 2.    … Expand
  20. allenbsmith
    Jan 8, 2014
    5
    This game is a disappointment for Total War fans, especially the ones who loved the original Rome: Total War game. The game could have been the best in the series, but it is buggy, unoptimized, and unpolished. However, if you're not a fan of the series, and you're new to the total war series, then you might find this to be a fun and interesting experience, especially if you enjoy RTSThis game is a disappointment for Total War fans, especially the ones who loved the original Rome: Total War game. The game could have been the best in the series, but it is buggy, unoptimized, and unpolished. However, if you're not a fan of the series, and you're new to the total war series, then you might find this to be a fun and interesting experience, especially if you enjoy RTS games.

    I believe this game should have had several more months if not an entire year of extra work, and I'll tell you why. Even on a high-end PC, this game runs poorly. Check for benchmarks and you'll see this game only getting 35 FPS average from systems with an Nvidia TITAN GPU. This has bad engineering written all over it. This game also suffers from a tremendous amount of bugs. The AI is really lacking when they can't even make basic decisions such as taking back a victory point from you less they lose in 50 seconds. To be honest, the AI always has been weak, but that's rather understandable. It's probably one of the hardest AIs to program, and being a programmer myself, I can say it would be a rather difficult logical challenge. Most people just don't understand this. Trust me, if it was easy, then the AI would be brilliant, but it's not. However, it does not excuse the AI's inability to perform actions such as climbing a ladder (no, they can't even do that sometimes). Lastly, the game itself just seems unpolished if not lacking a lot of content. The political system is not explained nor is comprehensible. It just seems useless. There are no extra content videos (except for a general death) to give the campaign life as there usually is, and a feature, previous in the Shogun 2 multiplayer, has been stripped from Rome 2. I could be wrong, but it just seemed like the game was rushed and incomplete. It was as though the development had to make some tough decision that would not only leave out content, but cheapen it just so the game could be released on time. This is probably due to an agreement CA made with SEGA. Mike Simpson even mentioned before with the release of Empire (another Total War game) that there biggest customer was SEGA, and that games have to be released on time at the expense of quality.

    On a side note, I am also having trouble understanding how this game got such positive scores from big name reviewers such as Gamespot and IGN. (Actually, if you read the Gamespot review, you'll notice that it is vague and without merit, the reviewer doesn't seem to mention and specifics, and uses "big" words to cover this up. They probably only played the game for a few hours, and called it quits. There are no screenshots or videos by Gamespot to be found post release for that game.) I have just lost faith in those companies.

    Anyway, I don't want to convey anger just disappointment. I was so excited for this game. In fact, I had never been so pumped for a game in my entire life. I pre-ordered without hesitation, and I haven't pre-ordered a game in several years. I'm just saddened by the state of this game. If you're enjoying Rome 2, then I'm happy for you. I just wish I could.    … Expand
  21. The_Shamwow
    Jan 19, 2014
    6
    I have logged just over 100 hours in Rome 2 and I have played at least once every other total war game. I have to say this is not the worst I have played but it certainly is not the best. I have owned the game since its launch date pre-ordering out of my extreme excitement for it but found myself disappointed, if asked then I would have given it a 3 at best but with the patches itI have logged just over 100 hours in Rome 2 and I have played at least once every other total war game. I have to say this is not the worst I have played but it certainly is not the best. I have owned the game since its launch date pre-ordering out of my extreme excitement for it but found myself disappointed, if asked then I would have given it a 3 at best but with the patches it certainly has improved but still not enough to be the game it should have been. Though the diplomacy is still shoddy and honestly the AI has marginally improved the look of the game graphically and the fact that the AI does have it's moments still makes this a decent game but nothing else. Personally I would have still gotten the game BUT I would have to play it mod heavy much like I have for the last month.… Expand
  22. blackbird1
    Sep 21, 2013
    6
    After Patch 3 i Re-Rate this game and give it a 6 cause its finaly playable fps are still sometimes to low but its okay now.

    If you make it better and also dont let the fps fall in late game i came back and give you maybe a 7 8
  23. Theodwulf
    Oct 7, 2013
    5
    After two full campaigns, both on easy, Rome (juno) for a Military victory and Carthage (barca) for an economic victory.
    This Game is a Total Tedium(really could use a short campaign)
    I hate the research mechanic, the new provincial mechanic and the building scheme. The map feels "epic" as do the victory conditions but none of the cities feel all that grand, at the ends they are all    After two full campaigns, both on easy, Rome (juno) for a Military victory and Carthage (barca) for an economic victory.
    This Game is a Total Tedium(really could use a short campaign)
    I hate the research mechanic, the new provincial mechanic and the building scheme.
    The map feels "epic" as do the victory conditions but none of the cities feel all that grand, at the ends they are all basically back waters. The more you develop cities the more likely they are to go down the toilet. Rome I did a much better job Just another awful game mechanic.
    Naval battles are incredibly clunky empire was better here) and you are better off auto-calcing.
    Missile troops (specifically slingers) are just silly OP, rate of fire and damage are way over the top, basic levy units maul real professional troops
    Calvary go real slow and get stuck on infantry, so there is little maneuver once engaged
    Armies of Briton chariots harken back to rome I with their OPness, just don't auto-calc with them that goes for elephants and cavalry as well.
    Auto calc is still awful, it's like they feel you need to be punished for not personally overseeing every skirmish.
    Diplomacy is awful as the AI will ask for 10-30% of your total wealth regardless of power differential for trade agreements.
    The first 10-20 rounds can be tough but once you get past that don't expect to much in aggression from the AI, it gets real passive..
    The AI cannot handle the clunky building scheme so it's settlements will eventually rebel, just wait.
    political system does something..not sure what..i just ignore it everything still works.
    Civil war..i have no idea why it happened but ti was real easy to fix, no outside factions noticed or cared

    It is really too bad, the franchise gets more and more clunky game mechanics with every iteration, which makes it more difficult for an AI any AI) to be effective competition for a human player. Without that the game is a Total Dud. Just allowing the AI to cheat isn't the answer, as we have seen it only makes the problem worse.

    they really need to go back to the beginning, using Rome I as a templete    … Expand
  24. Brawlz
    Oct 21, 2013
    7
    Despite a rocky start, Creative Assembly have managed to fine tune Total War: Rome II, into a game worth of the Total War title, The AI seems vastly improved from launch, with the previous AI battle "Tactics" no longer consisting of running into a solid wall of spears, and actually using the terrain against you. But alot of things were changed from the older Total War games which kindaDespite a rocky start, Creative Assembly have managed to fine tune Total War: Rome II, into a game worth of the Total War title, The AI seems vastly improved from launch, with the previous AI battle "Tactics" no longer consisting of running into a solid wall of spears, and actually using the terrain against you. But alot of things were changed from the older Total War games which kinda hurt the games, with Generals dying really quickly from old age, leaving little incentive to put time into individual generals. The political system has also changed, with faction leaders being absent from the game, where instead you play a House or Party, which has to vie for political power. Not the same as invading a entire nation, your King/Faction Leader at the head of the fighting.

    Overall though a good game, People that didn't like it when it first came out should give it another chance if they were dissatisfied. Your opinions may change after you see the improvements made over the past two months    … Expand
  25. Kackur
    Sep 4, 2013
    6
    The score I'm giving this game reflects it's current state. I feel there may be a decent title hiding here behind the many bugs and performance issues but it is rather hard to see at the moment. Currently the game is very close to unplayable. It is filling with graphical glitches, performance issues and crashes. For the more tech savy of us there are ways to tweak the settings so theThe score I'm giving this game reflects it's current state. I feel there may be a decent title hiding here behind the many bugs and performance issues but it is rather hard to see at the moment. Currently the game is very close to unplayable. It is filling with graphical glitches, performance issues and crashes. For the more tech savy of us there are ways to tweak the settings so the game does run somewhat smoothly and stable, however I feel many people will not get to that point.
    Bugs aside there are other issues with this game that really need to be addressed. The largest of these being the UI. It is complete Don't get me wrong it looks very pretty, but that is all that it has going for it. The biggest grip I have with it is the lack of detail. This is a game with countless stats that you need to manage to succeed at, however there is no way to get a list of the current stats or a description of what they do for either your cities or generals. When your generals or cities gain promotions you get to choose between bonuses such as +1 authority or +10% growth rate. However, since you have no way to check what your current values are or even what these stats do exactly you really can't make an informed decision. I still have no clue what authority does. Searching it in the games online manual comes up with nothing. Additionally the games does not list your cities current growth rates. So how are you supposed to decide if a 10% growth rate increase is a good direction to go in? And this is the same for virtually all the stats. About the only stat that it does show you is food. However it doesn't explain how this affects anything!! Does having more food make my cities grow faster? Or does it affect happiness? Seriously what is the point of all these stats if we can't use them to further the game play...
    Now on to the tactical section. Once again the UI fails here. Every time you reselect a group of units it resets their formation. So you are forced to give them new formation orders every single time you want to move them. Additionally for some reason they decided to do away with the group movement and rotation controls. As far as I can tell there is no way to just tell your troops to walk forward. Additionally when you have multiple units selected you often can't tell them to run as a group. Sometimes you can sometimes you can't. This is true even when all the units are capable of running.
    That being said there are things done right. The best thing that this game currently has going for it is the extreme diversity in troops and cultures. It is obvious the developers put a lot of time in fleshing out the various factions and I really appreciate that. This was one thing that I couldn't stand about Shogun. All the factions were just slight variations of a common set, which made sense for historical reasons, but at the same time deprived it of re-playability.
    Other than that Rome II does right what many of the other titles in the series do, however in many aspects UI especially it is a step backwards.
    I really hope that CA fixes this title. I see potential here, but as it currently stands I can't give this a score higher than a 6.    … Expand
  26. Jingo
    Jan 11, 2014
    7
    I gave this game 4 when it first came out. But now that it's up to build 1.8 it's time for a re-review. It is much better now! Still the AI is hopeless, particularly on settlement defence mode. That is simply not a challenge. All you need to take an enemy settlement is long range units. Line them up, and the enemy will line a target up for you, one after the other until they're all gone.I gave this game 4 when it first came out. But now that it's up to build 1.8 it's time for a re-review. It is much better now! Still the AI is hopeless, particularly on settlement defence mode. That is simply not a challenge. All you need to take an enemy settlement is long range units. Line them up, and the enemy will line a target up for you, one after the other until they're all gone. They will never charge out to get your slingers or catapults or whatever.

    But I'm giving the game a 7 now, because various other things have been improved and I'm enjoying it now.

    The VERY HARD and LEGENDARY difficultly modes give the other factions enormous bonuses, but their AI in the settlement defence battles is the same. It's a poor way to make things difficult.    … Expand
  27. Duckers101
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    Its a good game but its just not quite there the performance isn't very good and the UI is awful its still fun to play but does not quite take off from where Rome 1 left off, i am disappointed but i hope that patches will fix the issue and the issues are things that patches can fix.
  28. Typo
    Sep 6, 2013
    6
    So after logging about 10 hours into the game it is safe to say that there are issues with RTW2 but, unlike some on this board (which I understand after dealing with these issues for all of the recent TW games) I still see a very bright future for RTW2.

    The biggest issue I have is that the learning curve, because publishers have gone away from printed manuals, is very steep. I found    So after logging about 10 hours into the game it is safe to say that there are issues with RTW2 but, unlike some on this board (which I understand after dealing with these issues for all of the recent TW games) I still see a very bright future for RTW2.

    The biggest issue I have is that the learning curve, because publishers have gone away from printed manuals, is very steep. I found myself stumbling about as the Iceni not really understanding or knowing the effects of putting an army in "Raid" would be. I couldn't grasp for awhile how to manage population growth (it makes you choose, essentially, which settlement to expand instead of being able to do every settlement whenever) or how to split armies. However, once you do figure these things out, it becomes apparent what RTW2 was going for, authenticity.

    I know there are skeptics out there who just wanted a more awesome Shogun 2 with Rome or a high end Medieval II with stellar graphics and I'm not excusing CA for not delivering on that end (that being said, my machine, which is not top of the line, has run the game without crashes and enjoyable level graphics. Crashes which, on the same machine, I still experience with Shogun 2) but I think I can see that CA was going for which was a motif of authenticity. Those unit cards you hate? Those are based of black-figure vases from Ancient Greece that were treasured across the classical world. Armies weren't individual units that were recruited and sent out the were raised en masse and meaningful, empire defining clashes were mammoth affairs, not dozens of smaller armies running about (that is what the Raid stance implies). Contending with internal political rivals was a way of life for nearly every political unit from those times. These were choices CA made to convey a sense of realism and reality of many of the classical world's most prominent leaders.

    Again, if we want to talk about AI, bugs, and disappointing graphics, I couldn't agree more. CA most certainly should've put more time and effort into those areas to make sure they were the best they could be. But did anyone really find the AI that atrocious its worthy of a 0? I still command my armies with the same sense of ability as I have in any other TW iteration (minus Empire's of course) and with just as much enjoyment.

    What I'm saying is this game makes you put in the time. You aren't going to get high end units within 50 turns. You aren't going to wipe out half of the Eastern Mediterranean and start a new campaign because you are bored (admittedly, aided by the army and fleet cap limits) you will have to build trust with allies slowly throw NA pacts, trade agreements, defensive alliances, etc. RTW2 is about actually building an empire not flexing muscles instantaneously.

    In the end does this game have its issues? Yes. Should these have been resolve prior to release? Absolutely. But I can't sit here in good conscience and bash a game where I was able to crush Epirus with a fleet based army while my Athenian allies attacked from land. I can't bash a game where I was able to defend my Iceni city from two armies but pulling them into a choke point, watching them break on my shield wall, and then run them down with skirmishers and chariots. Where my generals are in just as much danger from the enemy as they are, truly, from rivals within their own faction. Or where you have to make a snap decision as a leader about a celebrity citizen. Or a game that allows me to "Raid" and destabilize an entire hostile region inciting civil wars to soften it up for my true thrust.

    Rome 2 is a flawed game but, when, not if, these issues get corrected I think the players who stick around, learn, and dig are going to find a very enjoyable gaming experience. Its these gems of gameplay mentioned above that have left me with a sense of hope for RTW2 future and, hopefully, you revisit it and see some of them for yourself as well.    … Expand
  29. CptCasual
    Sep 4, 2013
    6
    Whilst the game certainly isnt without fault, i would give it a six. Not great, but not awful. One of the major complaints seems to be that there wasnt a beta test, but that we are now the beta test. Is that not a good thing? to all those waiting until Xmas, but i bought my game 33% off on steam, i get to play the game now, find the flaws and have a part in their remedy. You complain atWhilst the game certainly isnt without fault, i would give it a six. Not great, but not awful. One of the major complaints seems to be that there wasnt a beta test, but that we are now the beta test. Is that not a good thing? to all those waiting until Xmas, but i bought my game 33% off on steam, i get to play the game now, find the flaws and have a part in their remedy. You complain at the lack of an organized beta and yet shun the opportunity for an unofficial one. That said, the AI is awful. I can assault a town with a garrison stronger than my army, defeat that, and then defeat their 1000 reinforcements.… Expand
  30. OverdueReview
    Sep 18, 2013
    5
    I've been lucky enough to actually play this game from day one and boy what a dissapointment. The AI is stupid, the family/faction/politics system is totally forgettable, diplomacy is still broken (was it ever fixed?) and battles are short, very short. It becomes painfully clear that there is NO QA at Creative Assembly and Sega. They've never played their own game otherwise 90% of the bugsI've been lucky enough to actually play this game from day one and boy what a dissapointment. The AI is stupid, the family/faction/politics system is totally forgettable, diplomacy is still broken (was it ever fixed?) and battles are short, very short. It becomes painfully clear that there is NO QA at Creative Assembly and Sega. They've never played their own game otherwise 90% of the bugs would have been found before they released this. Paying for beta testing a game. This has sadly become a trend with big titles and this game is no exception.
    There is a good game in here somewhere but it's going to take a lot of digging to bring it to the surface.    … Expand
  31. Eviltoast
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    First off there are some really great things about this game. The factions are really well done and I like that you have sub-factions (Roman Houses, Carthaginian dynasties etc.) within. I like the unit cards and I enjoy adding items to your household. Diplomacy is slightly better, but could use more polish. My biggest praise goes to the campaign map, which is simply gorgeous.First off there are some really great things about this game. The factions are really well done and I like that you have sub-factions (Roman Houses, Carthaginian dynasties etc.) within. I like the unit cards and I enjoy adding items to your household. Diplomacy is slightly better, but could use more polish. My biggest praise goes to the campaign map, which is simply gorgeous.

    However, there's a lot of stuff that is lacking and just plain confusing. Creative Assembly has removed the Family Tree and basically taken a huge source of enjoyment out of the game. The family system matters little when your generals don't have any really connection to your family tree other than recruitment telling you they do. The AI is simply not good and that's sad because it was hyped up to be amazing. The turn system takes FAR to long to actually get back to your turns. It removes immersion from the game and leaves you feeling frustrated. The battles and units devolve into a blob, the Units simply dont maintain formation or act like units as in previous TW games. Lastly, the politics and factional intrigue are vague and simply not fun. They had the right idea but they just missed the mark.

    Is this game fun? Yes. Is it the best Total War game ever? Not even close. This game had some great ideas but it really missed the mark on a lot of them.    … Expand
  32. Rethmeier
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    I'm a longtime fan of the Total War series and have been with them since the first Medieval Game. However, Rome 2 left me disappointed. The wait time in between turns and loading screens is prohibitive to game play and I often find myself leaving the room in between turns. This has the effect of ruining immersion and leaving me dreading the next time I have to press "end turn".

    The    I'm a longtime fan of the Total War series and have been with them since the first Medieval Game. However, Rome 2 left me disappointed. The wait time in between turns and loading screens is prohibitive to game play and I often find myself leaving the room in between turns. This has the effect of ruining immersion and leaving me dreading the next time I have to press "end turn".

    The AI leaves a lot to be desired and while I love the replacement of the old style Rebel faction with independent 1-2 province factions, I do not agree with Creative Assembly's choice to level the playing field between all factions. I look forward to facing Macedon, Carthage, Rome, and Parthia in the future and it is upsetting to find Carthage has fallen to an unknown Celtic tribe 10 turns into the game (This has occurred in all three games I've played so far).

    Much of the game has been streamlined/simplified to the point where most of the things that I loved about the previous Total War Titles has been removed. On top of this, the online encyclopedia is both difficult to maneuver and tedious to try and use, leaving me to trial and error when it comes to new game mechanics. At this point, while I actually like several changes made to the game, like the provincial system, the information and explanation necessary to enjoy these mechanics is either absent or too difficult to find. The political factions and intrigue are a nice touch, but the 1 year 1 turn and lack of a family tree make it hard to understand and hard to get involved with. By the time I've figured out who is who and attempt to increase the level of my characters they're dying of old age.

    The battles have also been changed and not for the better. It is now rare to experience a battle over 10 minutes long, which might seem nice, but in reality it's frustrating. Units rout/ are decimated at such a rate that flanking maneuvers, ambushes, and other prolonged tactics become impossible to execute. Additionally, unit behavior in battle is frustrating as melee quickly devolves into a large blob until one army routs 20 seconds later. Other changes such as the removal of the guard button, fire at will for non-skirmishers, and the tendency for units not to pursue broken enemies makes battles less entertaining than in other Total War Games. Add in the immense amount of time spent in loading screens and I find myself auto-deciding battles much more frequently than I have in the past.

    Overall, while Rome 2 is not a "bad game", it has lost many of the aspects of previous Total War games which made them entertaining. I found mods for the first Rome: Total War (like Rome Total Realism) to be more enjoyable and would wait to buy Rome 2 until it's on sale. It is bound to be more enjoyable after CA makes some game play tweaks and modders have a chance to overhaul it.    … Expand
  33. Lord_Slop
    Sep 9, 2013
    6
    I pre-purchased the game, first pre-purchase for me ever. I'm also an old TW player since the days of Rome, started in 2004 more or less.

    The game has one keyword, potential. There are a lot of possibilities for the game, but they're mostly not working or buggy. Pros: 1. Very nicely made campaign map overall. 2. The new province system is an improvement. 3. Unit roster from the    I pre-purchased the game, first pre-purchase for me ever. I'm also an old TW player since the days of Rome, started in 2004 more or less.

    The game has one keyword, potential. There are a lot of possibilities for the game, but they're mostly not working or buggy.

    Pros:
    1. Very nicely made campaign map overall.
    2. The new province system is an improvement.
    3. Unit roster from the few factions I've played seems diversified.
    4. Replayability is high, given the number of playable factions.
    5. The limit on the number of armies and agents you can field depending on your empire's size adds a lot of depth and strategic planning to the game.

    Cons:
    1. Waiting time between turns is simply too long, starts with around 30 seconds at the start of the campaign and goes as far as 3 or 4 minutes around turn 50 as more of the map is revealed (While disabling the show AI movements option).
    2. Naval battles are broken, the units won't obey commands when told to board unless you babysit them and re-issue the command, even then it might not work.
    3. Land battles turn into a brawl once the initial cross fire is over and it's down to melee. The units seem to congregate in the center losing any semblance of being anything than angry mobs fighting it outside a tavern.
    4. The game is laggy, both on the strategic and battle views.
    5. Diplomacy needs improvement, they won't agree to most negotiations (Including trade agreements) unless you're way stronger than the AI faction you're negotiating with.
    6. Region resources don't add any bonuses as far as I could tell,
    7. Land armies can traverse oceans by turning into transports, which makes fleets rudimentary if not obsolete.
    8. Campaign AI is too passive, not to mention that the game seems to be cheating, even on easy, I've seen one province factions fielding 3 full stacks, regardless of the impact of upkeep.

    So, overall, the game has a lot of options to explore, provided they patch up the errors. Given proper patching and fixes, the game could be brilliant. But in its current state, it's nothing really special.    … Expand
  34. Dralord
    Sep 10, 2013
    5
    I'm disappointed by Rome 2. This game should have been better than Rome 1 but only the battle map and graphics has been improved the rest is worse.

    -There is a stone age Multiplayer -Almost no city management -No family tree and ruler information -Very hard diplomacy -Now we have land AND naval army(better than the navy we recruit) -And very confusing units cards system. I    I'm disappointed by Rome 2. This game should have been better than Rome 1 but only the battle map and graphics has been improved the rest is worse.

    -There is a stone age Multiplayer
    -Almost no city management
    -No family tree and ruler information
    -Very hard diplomacy
    -Now we have land AND naval army(better than the navy we recruit)
    -And very confusing units cards system.

    I suppose that I'll get back on Rome 1 after 1 or 2 more try on Rome 2 campaingn    … Expand
  35. ymakushin
    Sep 10, 2013
    6
    I was very excited for this game as many were, but after finishing the main campaign things have changed.
    So here are a couple of things wrong:
    AI doesn't care about anything. It either goes for the flag behind you even in retreat or doesn't even attack. The graphics are horrible in today's standards. Lots of cool features were stripped out. Fps drops Though despite all those    I was very excited for this game as many were, but after finishing the main campaign things have changed.
    So here are a couple of things wrong:

    AI doesn't care about anything. It either goes for the flag behind you even in retreat or doesn't even attack.
    The graphics are horrible in today's standards.
    Lots of cool features were stripped out.
    Fps drops

    Though despite all those features I quite enjoyed the game so from me it gets a 6/10.    … Expand
  36. VOP2288
    Nov 5, 2013
    6
    As the game stands now I would've given it an 7 or even an 8 but since I bought it on release I have to dock it down to a 6 for its less-than-stellar launch.

    First and foremost I just want to throw out there that this game doesn't deserve its current 3.9 user score. 75% of the reviews giving this game under a 5 are nothing more than butt-hurt children and/or man-children who got caught    As the game stands now I would've given it an 7 or even an 8 but since I bought it on release I have to dock it down to a 6 for its less-than-stellar launch.

    First and foremost I just want to throw out there that this game doesn't deserve its current 3.9 user score. 75% of the reviews giving this game under a 5 are nothing more than butt-hurt children and/or man-children who got caught up in the hype and truly believed that Rome 2 was going to be an absolutely (and unrealistically) flawless game that was going to cater to every single one of their personal fantasies and desires.

    Truth is Rome 2 isn't actually that bad of a game, in fact it's easily one of the better strategy games out there on the market right now and I'd be willing to say that it's also one of Creative Assembly's better Total War installments. Don't get me wrong though, the game has its flaws and its launch issues and apparent lack of proper testing was a travesty but by now they've squashed the most significant issues and fixed/tweaked a lot more.

    I honestly could gone on for quite some time about the game but in the interest of being straightforward I'll just list off the game's positives and negatives.

    Pros -

    - Fantastic looking campaign map that really captures the scope and size of the ancient world.
    - Noticeably different culture-based faction groups that each have their own strengths/weaknesses and play styles (economically and militarily).
    - Individual soldiers are no longer carbon copies of one another and feature different faces, hair colors/styles, clothing/armor types, and other small differences that make them feel like actual people.
    - The changes to city-building and introduction of the province/region system adds a nice layer of strategic depth in how you grow and maintain your empire.
    - The new military tradition system.
    - Though disliked by some, the army/navy limit puts greater emphasis on how you use your military forces, adds gravity to your victories and defeats, and for the most part keeps the TW AI's long running disposition towards force spamming in check.
    - Battle maps are large and vary in environmental details, the cut-and-paste city siege maps are thrown out and replaced by unique ones that actually feel like true urban environments.
    - A LARGE assortment of unit types spread out amongst all the factions.
    - Battles have never looked better in a TW game.
    - Slightly better consistency between campaign map and diplomacy AI (was a BIG issue in all past TW games).

    Cons -

    - Units tend to rout too easily in battle, leading to some battles taking no longer than 3 or 4 minutes.
    - Ranged units (Slingers, Archers, Javalinmen, etc) are just as overpowered as they were in Shogun 2 and some battles can be entirely won with three or four units of them.
    - Naval battles are simply broken. Seems to be a massive bonus granted to the AI during sea engagements even when you're fighting a fleet of the same size and composition. Too much micromanaging needed and ships can be unresponsive much of the time.
    - AI in general can be at times too passive, too aggressive, and just all-around quirky in general. Pretty much a common factor in ALL Total War games that CA has yet to really master and perfect.
    - Absolutely terrible manual and tutorial that only explains the very basics of the game but NOT the list of small and large changes made to the gameplay, reminds me of Paradox tutorials...
    - The "War Target" feature just plain doesn't work very well (you're supposed to be able to target enemy military forces but you can only target settlements).
    - The politics aspect is broken and unfinished. A true shame as it could've brought even more strategic depth to the game.

    I'm not going to bother mentioning the little bugs and glitches b/c CA has been cleaning those up pretty consistently since launch as well as the more glaring performance issues. And that's another thing that I'm not going to acknowledge performance issues given that TW games have ALWAYS been GPU and CPU hogs that will just plain not run or look its best on release unless you have a top of the line PC (which many incorrectly presumed they had).

    Overall Rome 2 is the not the disaster that many here have claimed it to be (it's also not the pristine 10/10 that many "professional" critics painted it as either). Much of its significant launch issues have been tackled by now and CA continues to clean up the smaller bugs. Fact is, this game is definitely a good time and one of the best current strategy games out there.    … Expand
  37. Garloz911
    Oct 24, 2013
    5
    I really like the art. It's pretty. Sadly that is just about it for this game. The battlefield AI was recently made slightly more intelligent which is always nice. However the world map AI is garbage. I really wish we the players were given as good a copy as the "professional" critics. They seem to have gotten a good working version.
  38. Boney_N
    Jun 17, 2014
    5
    On the plus side: the graphics that are really cool and....that's it. The rest, especially when you have played the original Rome before, is rather mediocre. Battles are over in a minute after all units entangle into a large blob, no real roman tactics like coordinated pilum throwing available. AI really (empirelike) baaad, Battles take place often in cities that for some reason not fullyOn the plus side: the graphics that are really cool and....that's it. The rest, especially when you have played the original Rome before, is rather mediocre. Battles are over in a minute after all units entangle into a large blob, no real roman tactics like coordinated pilum throwing available. AI really (empirelike) baaad, Battles take place often in cities that for some reason not fully walled. Battlefleets are not useful and too expensive since transport fleets not really much worse in combat, I could go on but that should give an impression. The game could be so much better but is just average… Expand
  39. Alienpope
    Oct 20, 2013
    6
    As a hardcore TW fan even since rom 1 i can say that this game is good. It is not amazing, not mind blowing... Just... Good. The game released with hundreds of problems and i am not talking about the minor problems. The AI was horrible. I've played all factions by now on very hard and breezed through it all.

    But now... 5 patches later.... Things are looking better. Much better i have to    As a hardcore TW fan even since rom 1 i can say that this game is good. It is not amazing, not mind blowing... Just... Good. The game released with hundreds of problems and i am not talking about the minor problems. The AI was horrible. I've played all factions by now on very hard and breezed through it all.

    But now... 5 patches later.... Things are looking better. Much better i have to say.

    It went from the worst pd release of the year (not including sim city) to a decent game. The AI will still make the worst possible decisions at times... But overall it will challenge you.

    The real reason to buy this game however is not because of the campaign. If you want that you can try crusader kings or maybe civ5. The battles are what makes this game good. Realistic looking fighting with a quite deep strategy depth to it. So the multiplayer really brings this game up to a 6.0 instead of a 3.0    … Expand
  40. DrPancakez
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    Well this game is a buggy mess. Does it mean that it deserves a zero score? No! These people giving it 0/10 scores are just hate band wagoning, yes it's a horrible mess in its current state but go play Ride To Hell, or the release version of Sword in the Stars 2 for a game deserving a 0/10 score. On the same token I won't even play his game at its current state, but most likely by the endWell this game is a buggy mess. Does it mean that it deserves a zero score? No! These people giving it 0/10 scores are just hate band wagoning, yes it's a horrible mess in its current state but go play Ride To Hell, or the release version of Sword in the Stars 2 for a game deserving a 0/10 score. On the same token I won't even play his game at its current state, but most likely by the end of the month, it should be fixed, or already in a more payable state. But why do I give it a 6? Because minus the glitches it's a very good 4x strategy game. Excuse poor grammar/ spelling, writing this on phone.… Expand
  41. g4br1x
    Oct 13, 2013
    5
    Not as I expected.
    Confusing UI and unit card
    You cannot un-zoom the map
    Not optimized for any hardware/ GPU Awful performances.
    Audio not completely translated from English
    Bugs and glitches everywhere.
    Fortunately i spent only 30€ to buy this badly-done game....
  42. BuddyNugget
    Sep 26, 2013
    5
    Ok so first off i HATE metacritic. Having said that there needs to be some truth in these reviews from users and this is why Metacritic should be demolished. Now i have been playing Total War since Shogun I. Im a huge fan and although Creative Assembly has always released games a little buggy the majority of their games have been pretty damn good. Rome II is the WORST of the series. BugsOk so first off i HATE metacritic. Having said that there needs to be some truth in these reviews from users and this is why Metacritic should be demolished. Now i have been playing Total War since Shogun I. Im a huge fan and although Creative Assembly has always released games a little buggy the majority of their games have been pretty damn good. Rome II is the WORST of the series. Bugs and performance issues aside (which there are many) the game is barebones. They cut so many immersive features and a lot of the things that added depth to the game. I have yet to finish a campaign over my 170+ hours of gameplay because the game is just so repetitive. The game now is very much playable for most but its the core gameplay that is severely lacking in depth. The political system is a travesty. It doesent have any real value and most people just ignore it because it doesent have any real relevance to managing your provinces, armies, and doesent add to the storytelling of the game (which has been damn good in the past). They did ass some cool things too of course. The new cinematic camera in battle takes you to an overhead zoomed in view of a unit and you can watch them as they fight. The province system (although streamlined) is much easier to manage and will be great for newcomers to the series. Army traditions add a new line of depth to the game (not nearly enough to make up for the cut family tree though). Really thats about all it added aside from better graphics which most people cant enjoy because of performance issues (that will be fixed at some point though). This game was overhyped and the marketing was a straight up lie to the fans and future buyers. Trailers and gameplay interviews look nothing like the game. Its sad really because this could be the greatest TW game to date but they streamlined it too much and cared way too much about Metacritic Critic Reviews (which actually turned out horrible with a 79, should be lower). They need to fix the bad design decisions in the game. We need to see a proper family tree, maybe a timeline, a total overhaul of the political system, more turns per year (generals/agents die way too fast for you to care about them), they need to add more skins to units/generals/agents (they all look exactly the same), they need to bring some immersive features into play, and they need to finish fixing the bugs. Once these things happen we will be on the right track and these game could be at an 8/10. As of now i do NOT reccommend buying the game in its current state. Wait for some expansions to drop that add actual features with immersive and depth adding qualities otherwise youll be bored to tears after a dozen or so hours of gametime. This is the most dissapointing TW game ive ever played. If your looking for an even fresher view and some footage goto YouTube and check out AngryJoes review of Rome II he hits the nail on the head beautifully. Really its sad when companies push so hard with lies just to make sales. CA has let all their fans down by making this game the way they did. Pay NO attention to the 0/10 10/10 ratings from users those people are flat out lying to your faces. Thats my 2 cents on this game. I hope this small review can help someone out whos thinking about buying the game. P.S. Metacritic needs to die a fast death lol.… Expand
  43. firemoth
    Sep 16, 2013
    5
    I have played this game with multiple factions and I must admit the AI is awful the map and political aspect is good however with the use of spies, dignitaries and Champions is good. I think they need to patch this game to improve it but as it stands this is distinctly average
  44. jase1974
    Oct 15, 2013
    5
    Is a real shame that one of the finest makers of strictly PC games has let us all down. Of all the complaints to make, I feel this is the most important. Certain aspects have been streamlined. Just as certain pockets must have been streamlined in mainstream media to get the reviews it got at release.

    Hopefully CA will learn a lesson from this. Also, professional reviewers, actually play    Is a real shame that one of the finest makers of strictly PC games has let us all down. Of all the complaints to make, I feel this is the most important. Certain aspects have been streamlined. Just as certain pockets must have been streamlined in mainstream media to get the reviews it got at release.

    Hopefully CA will learn a lesson from this. Also, professional reviewers, actually play the game before you bend over and drop your pants for Sega.    … Expand
  45. sirxchrish
    Nov 15, 2013
    5
    The game isn't bad but it's not good either and it certainly can't hold a candle to it's predecessor Rome 1. So here are a couple of things I liked and didn't like. This is just my opinion, so it's all debatable.

    Thing's I didn't like- -Dumbest AI. (Self-Explanatory.) -Shallow Campaign and Questionable In-game Design. (No Family Tree, Bare-boned Political System, Meaningless    The game isn't bad but it's not good either and it certainly can't hold a candle to it's predecessor Rome 1. So here are a couple of things I liked and didn't like. This is just my opinion, so it's all debatable.

    Thing's I didn't like-

    -Dumbest AI. (Self-Explanatory.)

    -Shallow Campaign and Questionable In-game Design. (No Family Tree, Bare-boned Political System, Meaningless Objectives/Victory Conditions, No cut-scenes or unique transformations with agents, Too many unplayable factions make conquering the world a very tedious task, Bland User-Interface, Unnecessary limit on how many generals or agents you can have, No general's speeches, etc.)

    -Inferior Music Score. (It's predecessor, Rome 1 had a way better soundtrack.)

    -Horrendous Multi-player. (No avatar system, Constant Crashes and Desynchronizations.)

    Things I liked-

    -Custom Battles. (Gives me the option to fight where I want, with the units I want.)

    -The Blood and Gore DLC. (I'm sanguinary.)

    -Military Traditions/Edicts/Expanding Cities in Campaign. (I loved making each of my individual armies unique with it's own traditions which add bonuses to their fighting ability. I liked the edicts cause they saved my men from starving to death with the Bread and Games edict. I also loved that animation where the city changes in appearance before your very eyes while on the campaign map.)

    -The Modability. (The Best Part of Total War Games are the creations that it's fans come up with.)    … Expand
  46. reviewobsession
    Jan 21, 2015
    5
    First, I agree with negative reviewers because they are right to be angry as customers who had to wait about one year to get their expensive game fixed.

    If you're not a Total War fan, buy this game. Don't be afraid of bad user reviews, CA fixed the game with too many patches and it's playable now. If you're a Total War fan, there are two things you should consider; "arcade campaign    First, I agree with negative reviewers because they are right to be angry as customers who had to wait about one year to get their expensive game fixed.

    If you're not a Total War fan, buy this game. Don't be afraid of bad user reviews, CA fixed the game with too many patches and it's playable now.

    If you're a Total War fan, there are two things you should consider; "arcade campaign gameplay" and "succesful battle mechanics"(after many patches and tons of scripting). Arcade campaign is too easy because there is no time limit, logistic planning, senate politics and complex city management. I think it's not bad to try new mechanics as a game developer but they lost depth in these systems. On the other hand I have to say diplomacy is much better than older games in the series. Battle system works very good. Battle AI is better than old ROME. Campaign AI is broken so you have to install mods. Nothing to say about graphics and sound, they are great. But UI is still terrible and I'm afraid they won't change it. In spite of problems I'm sure you won't regret when you buy this game because of its epic battles (but don't except challenging campaign and get ready for strange frustrating bugs) Just wait for 70% discount    … Expand
  47. SchnitzelPoof
    Nov 4, 2015
    5
    After stubbornly giving the game another chance, I've decided to update my review.
    Even after all the patches up to the Emperor's Edition, many of the design decisions make little sense: the way armies or fleets move, how they engage (or rather don't, thanks to a ludicrous cat-and-mouse game that never ends); a single agent able to stop your entire army turn after turn after turn after    After stubbornly giving the game another chance, I've decided to update my review.
    Even after all the patches up to the Emperor's Edition, many of the design decisions make little sense: the way armies or fleets move, how they engage (or rather don't, thanks to a ludicrous cat-and-mouse game that never ends); a single agent able to stop your entire army turn after turn after turn after turn; a land army destroying an entire fleet because it happened to be inside a port city (without any option to withdraw); random diplomacy; endless back and forth wars, in which cities are easily captured (and recaptured), while armies "force march" out of your reach; and this really annoying thing, where different cultures cannot use any buildings of each other - even something as basic as a farm; so when you or an enemy take a city, everything must be razed / replaced. As a result, if a critical food producing city is taken by an AI that can move more than you, for just ONE turn, even when you retake it, you must rebuild from scratch, suffering many turns of starvation penalties.
    Most pre-battle screens show either you, or the AI, having overwhelming force superiority, so there's almost no point in playing the battles yourself. I've gone through almost my entire campaign clicking only on auto-match.
    As a result, the early game is nothing short of frustrating, instead of being an intense competition to break-out against capable rivals. Afterwards, when you become powerful, many of those design choices are mitigated, simply because you can afford losses. What follows is mostly a race to conquer as much of the map as possible, which, while interesting, isn't exactly the epic confrontation between civilizations you might expect.
    Bottom line, there is a lack of excitement in this installment of Total War, despite all the potential that exists in the covered period.    … Expand
  48. Ender1183
    Nov 13, 2013
    6
    I would figure I would finish a Campaign before I made a recommendation. I just didn't know it would take 80 hours to finish. If you a fan of the Total war series chances are you have already have this game and have either been blinded by your fandom or the hype that this would be the best TW to date. It didn't take me long to quickly realized this was a rushed game, put out several monthsI would figure I would finish a Campaign before I made a recommendation. I just didn't know it would take 80 hours to finish. If you a fan of the Total war series chances are you have already have this game and have either been blinded by your fandom or the hype that this would be the best TW to date. It didn't take me long to quickly realized this was a rushed game, put out several months before it was ready. I can only imagine that CA was forced by Sega to get the game out before some of the other big titles of the holiday season got out. There are several features that where in previous TW games such as the political and family system that where not even half as complete in past games. I completely didn’t care what happened to my family if someone was being bribed or shamed, I just didn't care. I was really happy when I won my civil war and could be an empire so I would not be bothered by the family bs.
    As for the campaign map you end up building the same 3 builds to have enough food and keep public order under control. This makes it almost impossible to upgrade your army or economy and very boring since you can't specialize a providence until late in the game. I'm sure if I started a new campaign I would have an easier time but since there is no building tree that is easy to compare buildings, even of the same type, there is a lot of trial and error before you can get the balance right. An other problem I ran into was that the auto resolve doesn’t seem to take into account the quality of your units. There where several battles where I would lose in the auto but crush the AI in a battle. The research is also out of balance even after 200 turns unless you focus on one tree you can't even upgrade to the best builds. Which is also impossible because you will have bad pubic order of lack of food because you ignored those trees. Over all I would say once you beat your civil war that is a good place to stop. After that it is a steam roll over the AI who is to passive or has so horribly manage there own providence they are starving to death. Its too bad there weren’t options to have a short campaign and start later so you could see some of the late builds and units when they would matter.
    It has been a common theme that the AI in the TW series has always been bad but this game takes it to a new level. Don't bother with sieges just auto resolve. The AI will run to there death when attacking or sit there and get pounded by your artillery until they are so softened up that sending in a few units in will make them rout. After been told that is was going to be the best AI yet it is actually worst then any other. There have been some improvements with the patches but it is still easy to beat the AI in a battle and on the campaign map... unless you play on a harder setting but all that does is buff there morale, armor and income.
    Tried a few MP battles but it seems that is has come down to who can macro the fastest and press a units special ability buff the most. There is no chance to sit back and watch the units fight it out or use much more of a strategy then rush your units in spamming the special ability and flanking your cav around to the back to make units rout. Well it was fun to play against friend and make your own rules you can't really do that against pubs.
    Overall I did enjoy the era and the workshop looks like it is starting to fill up with some interesting mods and tweaks. Hopefully CA can patch up this game but I have a feeling they will save any changes for the expiation pack. If you haven't played TW before I would look and see if you can pick up Empire up for cheap before getting this game. If you are a fan and just held off buying(good for you) I wouldn't pay more then 30 bucks. By then it maybe patched up enough to make it enjoyable and with the workshop there maybe a few decent mods to fill in the games.    … Expand
  49. Hellmut34
    Nov 8, 2013
    5
    Been a fan of TW games since the first Shogun came out. Although i have enjoyed this more than Empire TW i just can't justify giving the game a decent mark.
    So much about it is done badly and i can't for the life of me understand why the dev's would have ever have thought that it was the best direction for the game to go.
    I worry for the upcoming impending Warhammer Total War now. For me    Been a fan of TW games since the first Shogun came out. Although i have enjoyed this more than Empire TW i just can't justify giving the game a decent mark.
    So much about it is done badly and i can't for the life of me understand why the dev's would have ever have thought that it was the best direction for the game to go.
    I worry for the upcoming impending Warhammer Total War now. For me i play Shogun 2 again, its much much better than this.    … Expand
  50. Lopsang
    Nov 14, 2013
    5
    Rome 2 has an awesome concept and I've been a fan of the series for a long time. Unfortunately, SEGA wanted the devs to rollout the game maybe some 6 months to a year too early. As a result, the game is incredibly slow for no purpose, and bugs are rife. Buy this game during a sale.
  51. DatGamingCritic
    Nov 17, 2013
    5
    Rome II... A good game but first one is the better of the two. In this TW you can only choose I think it is 12 factions from what I remember. In the old one it was 24. However the graphics are stunning but the gameplay is lousy. It's just basically troops go there. They attack for 2 minuets. In the old one it's more Troops go there. Wait fall back! Because there are like 400 odd troops onRome II... A good game but first one is the better of the two. In this TW you can only choose I think it is 12 factions from what I remember. In the old one it was 24. However the graphics are stunning but the gameplay is lousy. It's just basically troops go there. They attack for 2 minuets. In the old one it's more Troops go there. Wait fall back! Because there are like 400 odd troops on the other side. I don't know. This one just seems a bit meh to me.

    Overall
    -Amazing Graphics
    -Not enough Factions
    -Easy gameplay
    Score 57/100    … Expand
  52. DarkMandalore
    Nov 18, 2013
    7
    After 90 hours I can say I like the game quite a bit although I'm somewhat disappointed in it. They made a bold move trying the new system's out but some have come out tedious or limiting by quite a bit. I miss that in the first Rome you could have as many troops as you could afford and split them into as many "armies" as you liked general or no general, the only limitations were did youAfter 90 hours I can say I like the game quite a bit although I'm somewhat disappointed in it. They made a bold move trying the new system's out but some have come out tedious or limiting by quite a bit. I miss that in the first Rome you could have as many troops as you could afford and split them into as many "armies" as you liked general or no general, the only limitations were did you have enough available population and do you have the income to sustain your armies. I also miss being able to fully develop cities and towns with all upgrades based on population rather than having 3-6 slots to work with total. In most towns you can't have any walls, not even a simple defensive palisade. There are definitely some nasty bugs, though the worst I've personally encountered is when the enemy is coming from the sea they tend to have at least one ship lock up where your forces cannot hit it without siege weaponry. Troops cannot board vessels on the shore to go and deal with them even if the ship in question is one they themselves came ashore on. The AI has been really tame in the world map and is purely driven by capture points in many battles. The AI will regularly try to run right through multiple phalanx formations to go right for the capture points making battles no longer about the fight so much as watching your troops murder hundreds of unthinking AI troops hell bent on taking that point regardless of what's in the way. The food and squalor system is somewhat obnoxious. You'll have entire town building sets dedicated to one or the other. There's a command console, but it doesn't do anything aside from closing the game when you type "quit". The AI has a nasty habit of demanding money from you for ALL diplomatic agreements, even for non-aggression treaties to keep you from attacking them, yes, that's right, they want YOU to pay THEM to keep you from attacking and conquering them. Auto-resolve can be quite inaccurate on occasion, some battles you'll walk up to say you would lose almost all your troops but then you fight it and lose almost none of your men while others put you in favor when the enemy actually has a notably superior force. That doesn't happen often but it does happen enough to be mentioned. There is no demand surrender button in battles for use when you've got a notable upper hand, only "Concede Defeat" meaning that if you have a bug like I mentioned earlier and no battle timer then you cannot hope to win courtesy of a stupid glitch.

    That all said there are a lot of positives. The graphics are great, especially if you get a mod to remove the grainy, always afternoonish effect. When there's no capture point combat seems to be MUCH better, the AI actually tries to fight instead of running right through your lines. The map looks great. I LOVE the new line of sight features. Even though, like I said, the AI is fairly tame to the player, you'll see the borders of nations change frequently, wars happen quite often and can be vicious often completely devouring entire nations. New nations rise and fall often. There's several ways to make your money and if you do it right you can run your nation tax free with the maximum in full flag armies. Cities look nice and are usually pretty well built. No nation is immune to defeat. HUGE world map. I'm really liking the spy agent capabilities, no campaign is complete without them really. It's pretty darn fun to play once you snag the right balance mods from such places as the steam workshop or TWCenter. There are many mods you can get and if you like you can mod it yourself for a custom balanced game tailored to your idea of a proper balance.

    If there was one major addition I'd like to see it would be something along the lines of a big continent expansion allowing you to play all of Africa and Asia as well as Europe complete with local factions of the time. I hope with the future they can fix the issues I've listed and put out some awesome expansion grade content at the same time. The game will take work to be perfect, but it's not bad. It's not a typical Total War game, but it's still one I'd recommend.    … Expand
  53. Creardo
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I am a fan of Total War series and of Rome Total War in particular for a long time... and since Empire Total War that not just me but many people expects a Rome II that would retrieve the greatness and unique masterpiece that Rome I achieved in its time. Rome II, with sadness we can say, didnt get that.

    Believe me, Creative Assembly AND SEGA, Everything on score below 8.5 is a shame for a Total War Title. Yes, we are very demanding as fans of Total War... Creative Assembly made us this way.

    I begun playing the game on release and checked the first reviews but preferred to wait, play a little more to decide and to be just, as a fan paying money for what i thought would fulfill what me and everybody were expecting, so i waited until at least 10 hours playing to make an opinion.

    We have to be just. Graphically, the game improves almost every aspect we could imagine they could improve. The historical research was well made too, at least to an acceptable point. And the positive points may not be rated bad because we dont like other things in the game. Positive points to other things too. For this reason, a give it a seven.

    But CA, what did you to gameplay? 1 TURN PER YEAR, since it was revealed, everybody is criticizing it but you didnt hear... and now you have a broken piece of a game with an old great idea that is just crap now, with this thing of 1 turn/year that disgraces since historical accuracy of events to game pace, heavily injured by this.

    Settlement manage? Hurtful, shameful, weak, boring. Taxes that you can not specify to each settlement with some special idea? Boring. The GUARD MODE button disappeared, and other simple but efficient things in battle? Bad... AI badly stupid at many moments? Bad... Glitches in Multiplayer with crashes to desktop? Ugly...

    A harm is made to the image of something that we expected greatness, not routine, standard. If CA and Sega want to fix this, they still have a way, with patches. Toilsome, but viable. But please dont put more shame on it and forget to at least try to fix this... you have a work to do, if you care with the business aspect of Total War future sales.

    SEGA, the great market power of CA is their hardcore Total War fans. They convince newcomers to play Total War franchise, not game ads. And you all hav to do better.    … Expand
  54. NecroMnemic
    Oct 24, 2013
    7
    I rate it a 7 out of 10, as it is a decent game, but does not live up to the Total War standard and doesn't even come close to the original Rome 1.

    I'm writing this after patch 5 has been applied and sadly the performance is still... not atrocious but not good either. The battles are still somewhat too short and AI does some really weird things. But actually these are not the issues    I rate it a 7 out of 10, as it is a decent game, but does not live up to the Total War standard and doesn't even come close to the original Rome 1.

    I'm writing this after patch 5 has been applied and sadly the performance is still... not atrocious but not good either. The battles are still somewhat too short and AI does some really weird things.

    But actually these are not the issues that I found saddening, I much rather regretted seeing that still all factions somewhat play the same and there has not been done enough to make them distinct from each other.

    All in all I recommend buying it for 25€ or less.    … Expand
  55. mjohnsimon
    Sep 10, 2013
    5
    I'm not going to write a full fledged review because most of the complaints you see here are the main problems and reasons why people hate this game so much at the moment.

    In the end, despite some of the issues, I did have fun and in no way does this game deserve a "red" score. Heck, once patched up, this game has the potential to be great, but until then, it truly deserves a "yellow"    I'm not going to write a full fledged review because most of the complaints you see here are the main problems and reasons why people hate this game so much at the moment.

    In the end, despite some of the issues, I did have fun and in no way does this game deserve a "red" score. Heck, once patched up, this game has the potential to be great, but until then, it truly deserves a "yellow" score.

    In the end, just buy Shogun 2 or the original Rome Total War, or just wait until everything is fixed by next year...    … Expand
  56. jaydi
    Sep 7, 2013
    5
    ive played over 1000 hours on both STW2 and ETW both with darthmod. This game is an insult to the TW core fans and an insult to grognards the world over. They have removed key features that made the old games grand strategy like the four seasons, guard mode and fire at will for roman legions. The AI is the worst of any TW game to date. The strategic game plays more along the lines ofive played over 1000 hours on both STW2 and ETW both with darthmod. This game is an insult to the TW core fans and an insult to grognards the world over. They have removed key features that made the old games grand strategy like the four seasons, guard mode and fire at will for roman legions. The AI is the worst of any TW game to date. The strategic game plays more along the lines of CIV and they added magic spells to commander abilities... perhaps in prelude to the fantasy series they are working on for the next game. Rumors abound that it was dumbed down for a port to the XBOX1 and CA's attitude is "So what. You dont like it to bad. You dont need those features now deal with it." I dont like spending money on falsely advertised products and will never do so again. This is the end of the series. They even had the hubris to admonish darth whose many mods ressurected past titles and inspired an entire community of modders to give a hoot about this lame duck franchise.… Expand
  57. total
    Jan 27, 2014
    6
    First off I am a big fan of the Total War series so it hurts me to say this. Sega stop putting Betas out on steam for at full price. you did it with Empire Total War and now you did it with this game. I am going to give this a 6 just because going back to that time time period is so much fun by it self.
  58. BigDegs29
    Feb 24, 2014
    6
    All these 0/10 ratings are ridiculous. This is a game flawed on many levels, but still enjoyable.

    Pros: (1) A deep strategy game that combines turn-based strategy with real-time tactics. Has the potential to be great, if not for the below cons. (2) Gorgeous on ultra. I haven't had any problems with frame rate, though I admit my computer is relatively powerful. Cons: (1) Naval    All these 0/10 ratings are ridiculous. This is a game flawed on many levels, but still enjoyable.

    Pros: (1) A deep strategy game that combines turn-based strategy with real-time tactics. Has the potential to be great, if not for the below cons. (2) Gorgeous on ultra. I haven't had any problems with frame rate, though I admit my computer is relatively powerful.

    Cons: (1) Naval combat is frustrating as hell. Whenever there's a joint naval/land battle, I always immediately dump my troops on land. (2) The AI. I don't mean the skill of the AI components (that seems to be relatively good post-patch), but the system's response to your own actions. Often I'll be issuing orders and the units will either ignore me, or do something else instead (especially naval in naval combat). (3) The UI could be a lot more intuitive; it's incredibly confusing for newcomers.    … Expand
  59. Pandakiller984
    Nov 1, 2013
    6
    Well lets start off by saying this game has a TON of potential.....and I'm sure that it could be delivered if the game was actually finished...which it is clearly not. The reason this horribly unfinished game a whopping 6 is because it has obviously given us a lot things such as simpler city management, Cool battle animations with a sweet camera, and various other things such as buildingWell lets start off by saying this game has a TON of potential.....and I'm sure that it could be delivered if the game was actually finished...which it is clearly not. The reason this horribly unfinished game a whopping 6 is because it has obviously given us a lot things such as simpler city management, Cool battle animations with a sweet camera, and various other things such as building unique armies and navys and having a lot of various things to do within your faction.....But boy oh boy is this game flawed with an enormous amount of glitches and bugs, the game's AI is LAUGHABLE some of the dumbest I have ever seen, and I said the city management is simpilar but it gets rid of so much control that we loved in the first Rome Total war, While the battles are cool the graphics and UI are a little bad considering the 40% bigger budget than all the other games. There is many more Cons and a few Pros I missed as well but I hope this gets you to think about possibly waiting until the price drops or the game is actually...Finished… Expand
  60. PCgamesreviewer
    Jan 20, 2014
    6
    As a long time fan of the series i was extremly hyped for the release for Rome 2 and never have i been this disappointed with a total war game. Luckily i didnt pre-order at the time because of a holiday in england. The shock that hit me when i checked metacritic at release day was enormous. I could'nt believe what i was seeing. Never have i seen a total war game with such a low score!As a long time fan of the series i was extremly hyped for the release for Rome 2 and never have i been this disappointed with a total war game. Luckily i didnt pre-order at the time because of a holiday in england. The shock that hit me when i checked metacritic at release day was enormous. I could'nt believe what i was seeing. Never have i seen a total war game with such a low score! Despite the warning i bought the game in the steam winter sales. While the lag and crashes seem to be fixed the ai and game mechanics are broken. The only thing that stops me from giving this game a 3 is the modding scene that has done a wonderful job to try to fix the game with some exellent improvements. All-in all only get the game if your a fan of the series and can cope with the horrendous ai and broken campaign mechanics.… Expand
  61. Fredwitt
    Sep 16, 2013
    6
    Rome 2 is a disappointment, however not a travesty. All those giving it 0's and 1's are just in the heat of the moment about how much of a disappointment it was. I can play this game for 66 hours, because i want to experience Rome like i experienced it all those years ago. It doesn't bring anything new to the game, it is just a streamlined new looking box, with the content being hollow andRome 2 is a disappointment, however not a travesty. All those giving it 0's and 1's are just in the heat of the moment about how much of a disappointment it was. I can play this game for 66 hours, because i want to experience Rome like i experienced it all those years ago. It doesn't bring anything new to the game, it is just a streamlined new looking box, with the content being hollow and annoying. Please don't give this game a extremely low score because if you compare it to, for instance, ride to hell redemption, i would play Rome any day of the week over it. Rome can be saved here with patches, but its going to leave a nasty scar… Expand
  62. Pie47
    Sep 21, 2013
    5
    This game is good. but sucks compared to Shogun 2 and Medieval 2. The graphics, AI, and FPS have got some series issues but if you can look past those issues you can have a lot of fun with the game. I would say stick with Shogun 2 until this game is fully patched.
  63. leoriela
    Nov 1, 2013
    5
    Total ripoff. Developers did not complete the game but released a bunch of DLC expecting us to pay what should have been in the game in the first place. This is the last TW game i am going to buy
  64. Murphmeister
    Mar 21, 2014
    6
    Really bad launch but good support from CA are now getting this game back on track. The reviews here just go to show why it's important that a developer be given time to finish and polish their product rather than release early just for the sake of hitting a deadline.
  65. TheGamer31
    Nov 3, 2013
    5
    They up this game so bad. Quite possibly the most disappointing game this year. Let us talk about how this game was disappointing, hm? Horrible in game character face models compared to the screen shots, laughable face animations, atrocious AI, painfully stressful loading times for both the single player campaign and multiplayer campaign with the more than 100 factions in the game, andThey up this game so bad. Quite possibly the most disappointing game this year. Let us talk about how this game was disappointing, hm? Horrible in game character face models compared to the screen shots, laughable face animations, atrocious AI, painfully stressful loading times for both the single player campaign and multiplayer campaign with the more than 100 factions in the game, and unbalanced units. I could take ONE group of twenty-four elephants and wipe out an opposing army of 2000 TROOPS!!! Yet I LOVE this game! Why? Because... it's Total War.… Expand
  66. GaiusAugustus
    Sep 28, 2013
    5
    I've played all of the Total War games, and let me just say that this is definitely the worst of them all. It's like they've taken a huge step backwards in innovation an design. The game isn't horrible, though their are a good deal of game breaking bugs (my army got stuck on a ship in the middle of the Mediterranean.) This should not become the standard for Total War games. Disappointment/10.
  67. Pandasareevil
    Oct 15, 2013
    6
    Did not give me that same feeling as previous Total war Games. The UI is terrible, the release was far below average, though I do quite like the unit cards, once the optimization issues were fixed the game was playable-ish.
  68. Driftic
    Jan 6, 2014
    7
    At launch, it was more enjoyable to electrocute your eyeball with a stun gun than play this game. But now there have been a lot of patches that have semi-fixed the ai and performance. I have found the game fun after these patches, and with mods that make the textures better and enhance the campaign Rome 2 is very addicting if you are a fan of the genre.
  69. mikey6854
    Sep 3, 2013
    7
    I made an account to review this game because wow some people are really crazy. 10s? 0s? Really?!

    First of all: If you liked the other Total War games you will like this game. The history is cool and the number of sheer factions in the game along side the map is incredible. The combat itself is similar to the other guys although it seems a little bit sped up. I suppose some will like it    I made an account to review this game because wow some people are really crazy. 10s? 0s? Really?!

    First of all: If you liked the other Total War games you will like this game. The history is cool and the number of sheer factions in the game along side the map is incredible. The combat itself is similar to the other guys although it seems a little bit sped up. I suppose some will like it more some less but it's not THAT different than it was. Certainly nothing to get upset about.

    The game itself is very pretty. The water looks great and the sounds are also amazing. The individual soldiers really, really, really make it seem photo realistic when you get close to the action. There are some weird frame rate issues but my PC is 2 years old (I'm on an i5 and a HD6970) and the game runs pretty well. It isn't 100% optimized and I noticed it maybe 10-15 times over 5 hours. That is quite a bit but not "0" worthy and I'm confident it will get fixed eventually. A game the size of this I can understand the lack of polish.

    I can't really comment of the campaign mode more than 5 hours but it looks good, I like the region-based city management. The world is HUGE. Almost overwhelmingly so. The intro campaign is useful as a refresher even for a veteran player like myself.

    I don't want to blab your ear off. The game isn't a 10.. and it's not a 1. At launch: a fair and honest 7. Once (if) they fix the issues so it runs more smoothly and fix the AI (which is pretty bad but hey.. it's never been good) It could realistically go up to a 9. People need to keep it real when reviewing especially on day 1. Jeez. :)

    Thanks for reading,

    -Mike    … Expand
  70. Rogan
    Oct 14, 2013
    7
    I really like this game, it might not be as good as Shogun, but it isn't as bad as Ride To Hell Retribution, seriously giving this game a 0 out of 10? With some patches the annoyances in this game will be fixed.
  71. SethP2343
    Sep 5, 2013
    6
    I have to say that if you are giving this game a rating of 4 or below, you obviously have never played other games such as Citadels or Space Marines...be fair in your reviews and don't rate 0 just because you are bitter.

    I am, however, containing a little bit of my own resentment towards Rome II. THE BAD: The game just feels clunky, as a summary. The AI is very unsophisticated and    I have to say that if you are giving this game a rating of 4 or below, you obviously have never played other games such as Citadels or Space Marines...be fair in your reviews and don't rate 0 just because you are bitter.

    I am, however, containing a little bit of my own resentment towards Rome II.
    THE BAD: The game just feels clunky, as a summary. The AI is very unsophisticated and predictable, in both the campaign map and the battlefield. The city management UI is bothersome, as it doesn't allow one to micromanage his own cities individually in order to react to regional dynamics. Being unable to move units around freely without a general is annoying while being able to recruit soldiers into an army from pretty much anywhere is unrealistic. The amount of time it takes for each turn to being is MUCH too long, as the game cycles through every single nation instead of just the ones in your immediate vicinity. A few historical inaccuracies as well, such as the Iceni were located in Northern Britain until they revolted to Roman rule, with Boudicca's forces driving the empire all the way to southern Britain until their final defeat in what was to be the last battle for the English Isles.

    The Good: The graphics are quite beautiful on stronger PCs. The progression and upgrading ability of experienced armies, as well as the ability to name individual armies is pretty badass. The sheer span of the cities on the campaign map as well as the stances your army can have while moving or defending is pretty awesome as well. Some units are pretty darn interesting as well, such as War Dogs. The ability to promote your generals and statesmen was also a cool idea.

    Summary: Though there are some cool new aspects to the game, most of them are overshadowed by serious drawbacks. I look forward to patches being released as well as what the modding community has to offer to the table.    … Expand
  72. Jeicobu
    Sep 4, 2013
    7
    Rome 2 is a good game, but not without flaws. The UI inn the campaign map is good, the UI inn the RTS battles are still a bit easy and never tries to outflank you or do anything to not get flanked. The map is a lot bigger then inn shogun 2 and might confuse thous that joined the series back then. It doesn't look half bad ether the new Province/settlement functions is great for gameplay andRome 2 is a good game, but not without flaws. The UI inn the campaign map is good, the UI inn the RTS battles are still a bit easy and never tries to outflank you or do anything to not get flanked. The map is a lot bigger then inn shogun 2 and might confuse thous that joined the series back then. It doesn't look half bad ether the new Province/settlement functions is great for gameplay and adds a lot to the game.
    The free DLC's is also a pluss, since all the new factions costed real money inn shogun 2.
    What brings the game down for me is the AI and the missing content/bugs. There is no winter season rotation. Some city walls float inn the air and some more i haven't seen myself but heard other talk about.

    Conclution: The game is great and brought me what i expected.. a grand game where i could outsmart my enemies and change history, a not perfect AI and some great battles. what i did not expect was the problems that could have been avoided with a bit more play testing and the cheep solution to some of the problem (refering to the seasons).    … Expand
  73. Kipman2000
    Sep 24, 2013
    6
    Both good and bad aspects in this game. I personally like the new campaign map, how the regions and the provinces are done and how you must balance the food, squalor/happiness, growth and economics of it.

    On the downside the new politics system is shallow and feels half-way done. The graphics are all right, but I've experienced some bugs through my time playing. UI is not good and some    Both good and bad aspects in this game. I personally like the new campaign map, how the regions and the provinces are done and how you must balance the food, squalor/happiness, growth and economics of it.

    On the downside the new politics system is shallow and feels half-way done. The graphics are all right, but I've experienced some bugs through my time playing. UI is not good and some features feels half-done and rushed.

    Gameplay wise there are some features which have been added which are not good and upsets the balance during battles and other features which worked very well in previous TW games are removed for no apparant reason.

    No more than a 6 on the scale from me, even though the game is fun and entertaining it feels half-done and rushed. Worth playing if you like the TW series and the era of Rome, but you can also live perfectly well without this game.    … Expand
  74. Porkenstein
    Sep 8, 2013
    7
    This game is fun, atmospheric, epic, and just generally awesome. However, it is hopelessly broken.
    Technical issues aside, the battle and campaign AI are completely nonfunctional, removing all challenge from every difficultly level. Also, many changes to gameplay in favor of appeasing the more "casual" customer base have destroyed much of what made Rome I great.
  75. sams0knite
    Sep 4, 2013
    7
    This game did not meet m expectations but It's a good game and made improvements to the series, added features we've been waiting a while for, and overall is a beautiful and enjoyable game worth every penny spent. Sure there's some bugs, optimization is poor but you can only blame so much on Creative Assembly. The sheer scale of Rome 2 makes it very difficult to optimize for the hundredsThis game did not meet m expectations but It's a good game and made improvements to the series, added features we've been waiting a while for, and overall is a beautiful and enjoyable game worth every penny spent. Sure there's some bugs, optimization is poor but you can only blame so much on Creative Assembly. The sheer scale of Rome 2 makes it very difficult to optimize for the hundreds of current configurations, Operating System's, specifications, manufacturer's, drivers, and all sorts of other factors that come into effect when designing a game for Windows that utilizes a powerful game engine, high quality graphics, and allows you to play battles with thousands of individual units rendered at once, running countless scripts. I do believe the AI isn't bad, it's the same as Shogun 2. It's not amazing, I know, but I still think that the game provides its challenges and provides one of the best experiences in all singleplayer and cooperative strategy games out there; not to mention that Total War is just unique in its own right.

    I am disappointed by the lack of features I was hopping for and those that were promised which is really the only reason I took off appoints but other than that I think they did a good job with Rome 2 and I can't wait to see what comes next in the Total War series which has never to this day let me down.    … Expand
  76. dans221
    Sep 18, 2013
    7
    I pre-ordered the game and I was a little bit disappointed at some of the release bugs. To be sure, it is a TW game and it follows the same old formula so if you like the formula, the game is actually pretty solid underneath; it just needs to some more polish. And after two patches, it's been running a lot better so I have hopes it's going to keep improving.
  77. darkcerb
    Sep 5, 2013
    6
    I figured the no graphics drivers from nvidia/amd/ati would give this game a low score.

    Everything about the actual game play is fine guys. in one or two patches...and with minimal effort from graphics card company's it'll be fine.

    This exact situation is why metacritic is considered a giant joke.
  78. Romafar
    Sep 4, 2013
    7
    Looking at some of the negative reviews given to this game I feel that some people need to get their entitlement in check. CA did a great job on this, and I'm sorry your 8 year old pc is having trouble but that's how gaming tech works. There are some load time issues with this as there was with Shogun 2, but luckily they aren't nearly as bad as it was originally with Shogun's issues, andLooking at some of the negative reviews given to this game I feel that some people need to get their entitlement in check. CA did a great job on this, and I'm sorry your 8 year old pc is having trouble but that's how gaming tech works. There are some load time issues with this as there was with Shogun 2, but luckily they aren't nearly as bad as it was originally with Shogun's issues, and they are already releasing a patch for it.

    The game is beautiful and the AI has improved, though its still AI and needs some tweaking. Ive already logged a little over 20 hours into it and I havent had any fps issues except for it chuggs for half a second when I pan over the siege animation on the campaign map.

    As for UI complaints, I really dont get it. It's a great UI. The unit cards are are interestingly designed and the general and legion development is a great additive. You really have to be challenged to not be able to understand this UI.

    Once the patch goes in for fixing the load times I'll give this an 8/10 for now its a solid 7. I put blood sweat and tears into my rig and I'm running ultra at 60+ fps at all times. Have realistic expectations with the machine you work with    … Expand
  79. TomPD
    Sep 10, 2013
    6
    I have now put in 40 plus hours to the game playing the single player campaign on legendary. Initially I rated a 9/10 but I was too hasty.
    Bottom line is this game has so many issues, so many bugs. The AI presents very little challenge. Optimization is poor. Somwhere underneath it all is a game worth playing and that's why it doesn't score lower. Nowhere to go but up now.
    Check out    I have now put in 40 plus hours to the game playing the single player campaign on legendary. Initially I rated a 9/10 but I was too hasty.
    Bottom line is this game has so many issues, so many bugs. The AI presents very little challenge. Optimization is poor. Somwhere underneath it all is a game worth playing and that's why it doesn't score lower. Nowhere to go but up now.

    Check out the Angry Joe review of this game on YouTube. It captures the sentiment most of us have I would argue.    … Expand
  80. Astrith
    Sep 17, 2013
    7
    I understand all the guys disappointed by the newest Total War. I really do@ This game should be Brilliant, Legendary and Epic. It is just good (well, very good for me). It has it's problems graphics are not as good as those shown by CA's PR guys, I don't understand why I can build so limited amount of buildings and why I don't have a family tree available (the same is withI understand all the guys disappointed by the newest Total War. I really do@ This game should be Brilliant, Legendary and Epic. It is just good (well, very good for me). It has it's problems graphics are not as good as those shown by CA's PR guys, I don't understand why I can build so limited amount of buildings and why I don't have a family tree available (the same is with agents/generals lack of skill tree). Rome 2 is a solid game, great piece of strategy, highly addictive but with bunch of problems. Problems that should be resolved months ago. Maybe I'm a bit lucky because of all the problems I have only occasional CTD's. Fractions are very well designed, all the Greek states are very interesting on the campaign map and during the battles. The game is a bit too easy at the beginning however it gets more and more demanding later on. Worth playing, worth buying. One last thing this is a PC game, therefore can be modded!!! Modding community in TW games is one of the best ever and already there's a bunch of great stuff that will alter the Vanilla experience … Expand
  81. mortendc
    Sep 20, 2013
    7
    This game is very good. I just created a profile to enter this review. Because of all the bad reviews. I have more than 25 hours played and I agree at first there was several issues that was annoying but the 2. patch has improved the gameplay dramatically.
    It still needs some tweaking but all in all I recommend strategy fans to buy the game.
    Thats all
  82. miyadaman
    Sep 4, 2013
    7
    There sure are a lot of whiners around on the internet. Look, I understand being frustrated about the game not playing correctly on your machine, but at least acknowledge that it's different for every machine and try to review the actual game after getting that out of the way. For the record, I run the game on Ultra settings and it runs perfectly fine. My friend has bad lag but stillThere sure are a lot of whiners around on the internet. Look, I understand being frustrated about the game not playing correctly on your machine, but at least acknowledge that it's different for every machine and try to review the actual game after getting that out of the way. For the record, I run the game on Ultra settings and it runs perfectly fine. My friend has bad lag but still enjoys it.

    There are many negative reviews with people saying things like "I don't know what authority does and it doesn't say ANYWHERE!" or "There is no 'fire at will' button for ranged troops". Rest assured, the game does tell you EXACTLY what all stats mean and there is a button for fire at will (among all others). The problem is the UI is pretty shoddy and people are too moronic to search for 3 seconds without throwing a hissy fit. You can find 90% of the information you need with the tool-tip pop ups on the campaign map.

    The UI is spectacularly bad. It has everything you need, but as others have said it's a bit un-intuitive. There are a lot of ambiguous terms and numbers thrown at you and you will have to do a little pointing around with the mouse to find out what they do. Or hit F1 for times that doesn't work and open up the in-game encyclopedia.

    The AI, as all Total War games, has bouts of good play and bouts of baffling play. Patches will help here and there's no reason to think the game won't be a standout game after a number of promised weekly patches. The AI is a problem at the moment but I have some confidence patches and mods will fix this. You will sometimes find the enemy overly aggressive and other times overly passive. There's no nice middle ground.

    The battles are better than ever (forgetting the AI for a second). The battle maps are huge and have a ton of things scattered around them for looks and strategy. When troops walk, they walk slowly unlike the Benny Hill motions from previous games. There's a lot to like here. Factor back in the AI and it can be frustrating at times.

    Some of the campaign ideas have poor implementation. Politics is supposed to play a big part but most people are still struggling to figure out exactly what it does. They took out family trees but they tried to expand the political part of things. It's a game of minor subtractions filled by minor additions. It's not worse, it's just different. Most people seem to be complaining because they can't figure out the new system. That doesn't mean the system sucks, just that you're an idiot. Rest assured, there is nothing that breaks the traditional way Total War games are played. In fact, if you've constantly felt like the campaign side of TW games felt a bit shallow and flat, Rome 2 might be your thing. There are many things added to add complexity.

    Overall, there's a great game here with technical issues. I would give this a 9/10 but one can't overlook the technical issues. Therefore, it should be around a 6-7 on what it currently is. Personally, I view the problems it has as completely fixable so I side closer to a 7. Ignore the children screaming bloody murder over a few bugs.    … Expand
  83. someguy8896
    Sep 4, 2013
    7
    this game is buggy and imperfect but it's amazing anyway. the long load times and UI I keep seeing people complain about aren't a problem for me. the UI is great and simple to use when you get used to it. and if you have a powerful enough processor the load time and AI turns aren't a problem. it runs fine on high with my Nvidia gtx 550TI and Intel core I7 3930K. like I said it's buggy butthis game is buggy and imperfect but it's amazing anyway. the long load times and UI I keep seeing people complain about aren't a problem for me. the UI is great and simple to use when you get used to it. and if you have a powerful enough processor the load time and AI turns aren't a problem. it runs fine on high with my Nvidia gtx 550TI and Intel core I7 3930K. like I said it's buggy but I found nothing game breaking and it has yet to crash on me. It was worth my money and I expect that like most total war titles most of these problems will be fixed at some point with patches. 7/10 as it is. I'm not disappointed.… Expand
  84. Dairko
    Sep 4, 2013
    7
    I have to say... I don't really understand the crap-storm that this game is getting.

    Past that I will say this: Despite poor optimization, and some strange and seemingly confusing and somewhat unfinished features and AI, this game is anything but terrible. Get past its problems that others can't seem climb over, and you will still have massive fun on a (slightly less) massive scale.    I have to say... I don't really understand the crap-storm that this game is getting.

    Past that I will say this:
    Despite poor optimization, and some strange and seemingly confusing and somewhat unfinished features and AI, this game is anything but terrible. Get past its problems that others can't seem climb over, and you will still have massive fun on a (slightly less) massive scale. The new army and agent features are great, however generals die very fast compared to the other games, unfortunately due to the 1 year turns. While the interfaces are rather shuffled, learning them doesn't necessarily take that much time. Also the diplomacy is a bit more usefully equipped compared to its original.

    As far as Skirmishes are concerned, the AI does seem rather off in terms of ability to coordinate its army properly. While it does seem like its trying to do something sometimes, it seems rather mindless. Obviously the AI programmer was either lazy, not given enough time to finish it, or simply did not have enough to work with. The enemy AI seems to only attack head on, trying to end the battle as soon as possible, no flanking maneuvers or anything really to out maneuver the player. However, it does seem to keep them in formation rather well, but because of the fast style of game-play compared to the previous games, battles are rather short, all units seem to lack proper armor ratings, or they simply rout when they suffer a few casualties, same with stronger units as well. Difficulty doesnt seem to change this very much, if at all. On top of that... there seems to be a lack of single faction unit diversity. Though I must say, when the highest graphics settings do work, the battlefield looks astonishing. Arrows and stones are bouncing off shields, and armor design look fantastic. Textures seem to not work properly though (a fairly quick fix is hopefully incoming... and for all these problems).

    Even with the poor AI, and poor optimization, the game does offer a lot for your purchase. The online/LAN coop works nearly as good as the single player campaign. There are plenty of factions to fight and trade with, though most of them are small and and only seem to be there to fill up empty spaces. The map is absolutely enormous, but it will take a rather long time to conquer all of it. I do feel though that CA was lying about a "more epic scale," as the game no longer offers a "Campeign Unit Multiplier." And the voice acting seems a bit silly, and sort of out of place.

    While its got its many problems, the game is not quite broken. All ports checked, this game is a must buy for total war fans. But it may be best for others to wait until a few of the weekly patches are made. This game deserves a bit less than it got from critics, but deserves much more than a bunch of quickly thrown out 0/10s from mindless drivel when the game hasn't been fully experienced. As a release, this game gets from me: 68/100    … Expand
  85. bantad87
    Sep 24, 2013
    7
    As a Total War addict, I give the game a 7/10. The core design is solid; a strong gaming engine, good environment art, character art is fairly decent given the scale of the game, and the UI is pretty solid. The campaign has been streamlined to focus less on micromanagement, and more on macro in order to allow the player to focus more on battles and strategy. Unfortunately, Rome 2 suffersAs a Total War addict, I give the game a 7/10. The core design is solid; a strong gaming engine, good environment art, character art is fairly decent given the scale of the game, and the UI is pretty solid. The campaign has been streamlined to focus less on micromanagement, and more on macro in order to allow the player to focus more on battles and strategy. Unfortunately, Rome 2 suffers from bugs, glitches, and laziness in design. The battle and campaign maps suffer from transparency overdraw which results in massive FPS losses unless you lower grass, trees, and particle effects to low, The AI (at least for me) generally performs acceptably, but occasionally will glitch, fail, or make dumb decisions. Diplomacy towards the player is acceptable, but there is little-to-no diplomacy between AI factions. The AI factions are extremely intimidated by the player, and almost never declare war or assault the player. The result is a campaign AI that is easier to defeat when compared to Shogun 2's launch AI. Overall, given the scope of the game I recognize that Creative Assembly attempted a large overhaul of the series, but they failed to successfully implement the new features. Not being a pessimist, I rate the game as "average" at launch, and hope that CA will continue to patch and improve the game over the coming year. Lastly, I'd like to add that Creative Assembly has never successfully implemented a "good" AI. If we as total war fans expect good AI, we should turn to the modding community, which has always been the case with Total War games. Should all the "issues" be ironed out, I think this game would be well deserving of a rating between 8.5 and 8.8.… Expand
  86. Schmidte
    Oct 3, 2013
    5
    Okay, I originally thought the game was an 8.5 but reviewed this game as a 10 to offset the 0's...but after having it for a full month, I can't honestly say it is even an 8.5. I'm simply NOT enjoying the game like Shogun 2. I've played every single total war game there has been. All the way since the original shogun. This one currently feels like a chore to play though. The turn times getOkay, I originally thought the game was an 8.5 but reviewed this game as a 10 to offset the 0's...but after having it for a full month, I can't honestly say it is even an 8.5. I'm simply NOT enjoying the game like Shogun 2. I've played every single total war game there has been. All the way since the original shogun. This one currently feels like a chore to play though. The turn times get sooooo long. Which makes things very tedious. Generals die too quickly because it is only 1 turn per year. 30 turns and your general is dead. So many UI failures that make things way harder than they need to be.

    IT'S LIKE THEY DIDN'T PLAY THEIR OWN GAME! There are seriously features (like not easily being able to go to characters that need leveling up which was a feature in Shogun 2 but not here) that you couldn't POSSIBLY not notice or want.

    If what they said it true and Tim Heaton designed this game for metacritic it is a shame and horrifying. I honestly I can't rate this game higher than a 5 right now. I hope they can release large patches and really overhaul this game, but that's all on them. I'll edit my score up if they do and I won't if they don't.    … Expand
  87. Defengar
    Sep 15, 2013
    7
    I did not have as many issues as everyone else seemed to have had on launch, but i did have several glaring ones (mutilated textures, retarded AI, ships thats would glitch out of control, and of course ridiculous lengths of time being taken up by AI turns). This is really unacceptable from a company thats been making these games for over a decade now and themselves said they had a farI did not have as many issues as everyone else seemed to have had on launch, but i did have several glaring ones (mutilated textures, retarded AI, ships thats would glitch out of control, and of course ridiculous lengths of time being taken up by AI turns). This is really unacceptable from a company thats been making these games for over a decade now and themselves said they had a far larger budget for this game than any they have done in the series so far, and that it was the best TW yet. I wish I could give this game a 9-10, but i just cant.… Expand
  88. MorkSal
    Sep 5, 2013
    7
    Don't listen to the people who rate this game at the bottom or at the very top.

    The game is fun, it has been stable for me. I'm playing on ultra/extreme settings with little lag (except occasionally during big battles in cities) For people complaining about lackluster AI. This is a total war game. In the history of total war games there has never been stellar AI opponents. *There    Don't listen to the people who rate this game at the bottom or at the very top.

    The game is fun, it has been stable for me. I'm playing on ultra/extreme settings with little lag (except occasionally during big battles in cities)

    For people complaining about lackluster AI. This is a total war game. In the history of total war games there has never been stellar AI opponents.

    *There are problems right now (at the top of the list for me is that there are no drivers optimized for the game). I would recommend waiting a month before getting the game. I imagine most of the bugs will be ironed out by then and I expect drivers for the game at any time that will improve performance.    … Expand
  89. fbtsjxl
    Sep 11, 2013
    7
    The game looks great graphically and we can really feel the atmosphere as armies clash. The campaign map is visually stunning, units move and cities expand in beautiful detail. Overall, we feel that the graphics when on a computer that can handle it are fantastic, yes the engine needs optimisation to cater for the as many people as possible, however with some tweaking we have had a greatThe game looks great graphically and we can really feel the atmosphere as armies clash. The campaign map is visually stunning, units move and cities expand in beautiful detail. Overall, we feel that the graphics when on a computer that can handle it are fantastic, yes the engine needs optimisation to cater for the as many people as possible, however with some tweaking we have had a great experience on a mid-range laptop as well with a combination of low/med settings the game still looks good (obviously not to the extent of ultra or extreme settings).

    Some parts of the game need tweaking and there are some features that still need to be sorted out. However, random bugs aside (and this seems to be varying for a lot of people, we haven't had any game breaking bugs as of yet), the game is a fun experience. The AI will need tweaking, fixes and improvements, until that happens there are a few good mods that help this area a lot!

    There are other mods available that will tailor the gaming experience for you (and we enjoy these mods a lot too!), however the core features of the game are solid but needing some work to either improve or fix in some cases. This doesn't stop us (myself and partner) from having fun! We're enjoying both single player campaigns and co-op campaigns: be forewarned, right now the turns take quite awhile to finish in multiplayer (30 seconds to a minute or two) but this should be optimised eventually, with the amount of factions battling it out on the campaign map this an understandable, but still somewhat annoying, facet of the experience.

    The UI? We like it, it's streamlined for ease of use and quickly conveys information and lets you quickly make things happen on the campaign map, however the details deeper in the game information should be easily accessible as well like with the seperate windows in Shogun 2. This streamlining is at its most useful in the new system for managing regions that centralises city information and upgrades in an easy to use and intuitive panel that allows building decisions to be made quickly and easily.

    What we miss most though is family trees and more a more in-depth character development system like that present in previous titles with many traits, ranks, and even roles for characters to take. The new army traditions systems is fantastic and can only get better through development, we quite like naming our armies too!

    Overall, Rome II offers a lot of fun, and a streamlined user experience that hides a surprising amount of depth. While there are bugs, the ones we have encountered have been minor, and haven’t noticeable detracted from our gaming experience.    … Expand
  90. jadereviewer
    Oct 6, 2013
    7
    The overall concept is sound, and a large improvment for total war. On release, this was poorly executed but three patches later this game is very good fun. Bugs aside, this game is good fun- but a step backwards for SHOGUN 2: Total War.
  91. Daneoid
    Sep 5, 2013
    7
    Fickle, fickle people, the game is exceptional, It's a Total War game, of course it's going to have bugs, they're no where near as bad as you people are making them out to be.
  92. BrianU
    Sep 5, 2013
    7
    Overall, a rare misstep from the Total War team. I've been a Total War fan since the first Shogun, and I can't help but feel slightly disappointed. That said, there are a number of plusses, too.

    Pros: Lots of factions to explore, tons of replayability as per usual. Naval battles are streamlined (thank God), plus the addition of naval vessels disgorging troops into the land battles is    Overall, a rare misstep from the Total War team. I've been a Total War fan since the first Shogun, and I can't help but feel slightly disappointed. That said, there are a number of plusses, too.

    Pros: Lots of factions to explore, tons of replayability as per usual. Naval battles are streamlined (thank God), plus the addition of naval vessels disgorging troops into the land battles is awesome. Everything looks great (if somewhat brown). The strategic (that is, big map) AI is much better than before: you won't have weak one-city factions suicidally declaring war on your enormous empire anymore, a major problem I've had for a while. The perma-Legion system is cool, though I'd like to name them myself. The province UI system, while taking some getting used to, is actually not that bad after a while.

    Cons: I have no idea how to work the politics part of the game. The new strategic UI is confusing at first, even for a veteran player like myself. Tutorial is lackluster and poor at acclimating the player to the UI. Tactical AI remains poor, actually a step back from Shogun 2, *especially* when they are attacking or defending a town; enemy missile troops will as often run straight into your cohorts as throw their javelins at you. AI is still bad at creating balanced armies, making most of the battles pushovers if you have a balanced force. Occasional lag. Rather long end-turn sequence, 2+ minutes at worst (there's a lot of factions, so this may be unavoidable. Still, I've found myself alt-tabbing to do something else after I hit the "End Turn" button). When you take the last town of a faction, what remains of their armies will bash themselves repeatedly against whatever towns you have near them, chicken-with-its-head-cut-off style, until they run out of troops.

    I think this game needed a bit more polish, and feels rushed in places. I'm going to blame this one on the publisher, unless someone informs me otherwise. I don't regret my purchase and will continue to play, but I can't help feel let down, and look forward to some patches at the very least.    … Expand
  93. RedBlueThunder
    Sep 16, 2013
    7
    While the initial game is still fun and enjoyable, i do feel that Rome 2 is slightly bare-bones. A huge amount of features have been removed and replaced by simple mechanics that make the game feel simple.

    During my time playing Medieval 2, i was indulged in politics and creating glorious family "dynasty's". It actually felt like i was running an empire. In Rome 2 it feels like your a    While the initial game is still fun and enjoyable, i do feel that Rome 2 is slightly bare-bones. A huge amount of features have been removed and replaced by simple mechanics that make the game feel simple.

    During my time playing Medieval 2, i was indulged in politics and creating glorious family "dynasty's". It actually felt like i was running an empire. In Rome 2 it feels like your a band of raiders conquering city after city with no real purpose or motivation.

    Land battles are a more like two mobs clashing into one another rather than two unique armies using advanced tactics to outwit one another. Naval Battles are hugely dull, more like lots of floating bowls clumsily knocking into one another.

    Overall, Rome 2 is still fun, but can barely be considered to be a proper "Total War" game. I hope after this, creative assembly will learn from their mistakes and create much much better and feature filled games in future.    … Expand
  94. MarcusManus
    Nov 12, 2013
    5
    I originally gave this game a 10 after 14 hours....
    I need to revisit that score and now give it a solid 5.
    Too many errors and design flaws to list here, please review the official forums for more information, or better yet, angryjoe. AI is the primary concern, along with stripped down features that make this game sad. Very sad. Breaks my heard. I uninstalled it until they do some    I originally gave this game a 10 after 14 hours....
    I need to revisit that score and now give it a solid 5.
    Too many errors and design flaws to list here, please review the official forums for more information, or better yet, angryjoe.
    AI is the primary concern, along with stripped down features that make this game sad. Very sad. Breaks my heard. I uninstalled it until they do some serious work on it.    … Expand
  95. Ukgamer
    Sep 5, 2013
    7
    The game is great but a lot of bugs and lag at the min that's the reason for a 7 maybe ill give it a 9 or 10 when they sort the game out i don't see why all the hate is on the game i think is not too bad the way it is now
  96. TheOnlineGamer
    Sep 17, 2013
    6
    For what it's worth, it's a decent game. It does however, have a fantastic foundation and one I hope gets expanded upon in the future.

    Full of dull moments and gameplay mechanics really brings this otherwise good game down. Some of the pop-ins and lags also drag things out and the execution for the game is EXTREMELY lazy! Hope things get better in Rome 3.....
  97. Ayestes
    Sep 30, 2013
    6
    Given mod and patch support I see the game turning out very well, but at the moment just like with most Total War games you pretty much need to wait out the initial period of issues. That said, I did enjoy a full campaign already so it's not horrible by any means it's just a disappointment compared to Shogun. This game does carry a bunch of improved features though which removed a lot ofGiven mod and patch support I see the game turning out very well, but at the moment just like with most Total War games you pretty much need to wait out the initial period of issues. That said, I did enjoy a full campaign already so it's not horrible by any means it's just a disappointment compared to Shogun. This game does carry a bunch of improved features though which removed a lot of the tedium, which I liked. Just wait a few months if you are interested and I'm sure the game will be fine.… Expand
  98. Maiser
    Sep 5, 2013
    7
    This is not a rage review, i can play it without any lag. I will omit all rage critics because of crashes(even tough they are several atm), because i expect they will solve it. I will just review it as a "non-poluted" game.

    -Worse graphics than shogun 2 total war. -AI, as bad as always. -Commerce destroyed. You can only commerce from your capital, if you have not sea near(or even    This is not a rage review, i can play it without any lag. I will omit all rage critics because of crashes(even tough they are several atm), because i expect they will solve it. I will just review it as a "non-poluted" game.

    -Worse graphics than shogun 2 total war.

    -AI, as bad as always.

    -Commerce destroyed. You can only commerce from your capital, if you have not sea near(or even if you have it and can not build a port for god´s know why) forget it.

    -City improvement system destroyed. How is this that the avarage of buildings for a city are 4 fully improved and can never be more? Ridiculous.

    -Battle system destroyed. The longes battle you will play will last 10 minutes. Units just route in about 20 seconds at most. No blood or nothing, you do not realise if units have fought or not. Also the "epicness" of cities you expected, forget it.

    You are paying for "the popularity" of the franchise, not for the game itself. Did not expect this from CA taking in account it has been the most financed game of all the franchise. They must have spend it in publicity or something, as otherwhise i do not understand how did they got up with this.

    Neither the UI neither the battles makes you feel like "yes, finally i managed to capture this! It is just so arcade and feeling less.

    To sum up i would say a mediocre-good game, but a bad game to be from total war saga. Entertaining but without getting you enthusiastic on it.

    P.D: I have played all total war games since rome total war.    … Expand
  99. toredevir
    Sep 8, 2013
    7
    Lets play statistic: 1285 ratings vs 93k people playing the game right now not caring about metacritic
    753 say it sucks, but only 433 show they like it.. LETS BANISH THIS GAME
  100. Makko_Mace
    Sep 15, 2013
    7
    Rome II is an amazing game, unfortunately it is deeply bugged at the moment which is unacceptable at release yet sadly common in this day and age. I would spend much more time writing out what I honestly think about every aspect of this game, but since everyone votes 0 or 10 on this site, I won't waste my time.

    In a few months it should deserve something like a 9/10 right now, it simply    Rome II is an amazing game, unfortunately it is deeply bugged at the moment which is unacceptable at release yet sadly common in this day and age. I would spend much more time writing out what I honestly think about every aspect of this game, but since everyone votes 0 or 10 on this site, I won't waste my time.

    In a few months it should deserve something like a 9/10 right now, it simply is lacking.    … Expand
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 »