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. Merwanor
    Sep 25, 2013
    5
    I have been a big Total War fan ever since the first Shogun TW game came out, which I bought on impulse back in the day, having no idea what kind of game it actually was, and I am so happy I did. Shogun 2 is by far the best in the series as it has the nostalgia feeling going for it, and the amazing depth and passion that CA put into the game. Everything was an improvement over theI have been a big Total War fan ever since the first Shogun TW game came out, which I bought on impulse back in the day, having no idea what kind of game it actually was, and I am so happy I did. Shogun 2 is by far the best in the series as it has the nostalgia feeling going for it, and the amazing depth and passion that CA put into the game. Everything was an improvement over the previous games in my opinion.

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

    Let us start with the good parts of Rome 2.

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

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

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

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

    The bad things about Rome 2:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Rome is a big disappointment, so it gets a 5/10 from me.    … Expand
  2. 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.
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. Davohn
    Sep 6, 2013
    5
    I enjoyed the prologue, and the first few turns of the campaign, but the turn times are far too long which basically breaks the campaign before you even start talking about the tech trees etc.

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

    The battles themselves are fun and when some technical issues are fixed I can see the historical battles and multiplayer being worthwhile, but unless there is some serious optimization, the campaign is just an excercise in waiting.    … Expand
  6. 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
  7. CaptainThom
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    Initially i gave this game a 9/10 based on my experience in the prologue which i really enjoyed and i would like to apologise for that beacuse that was far from true, since starting the campaign there are a number of glaring issues which has left me dissapointed and annoyed at how broken gameplay is.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Sadly this is just a list of sum of the issues that i personally have seen and that have really hindered the experience so far for me, there's clearly a great game in there somewhere but it needs a lot of patching and probably a few mods to get it anywhere near the standard that we all hoped for.    … Expand
  8. 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....
  9. 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
  10. 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
  11. SensualPro
    Sep 3, 2013
    5
    Very dissapointing the multiplayer I wanted a interesting multiplayer that when you play you can upgrade your units and your general like Shogun2 but this is very boring and repetitive.
  12. athropos
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    Horrendous performance problems on high end systems plague an otherwise average total war game.

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

    There is no SLI support as of yet and performance is abysmal. There might be a good game under there but in it's current excessively rushed state this game cannot get anything over a 6/10.
  13. bills6693
    Sep 3, 2013
    5
    Not at all compelling campaign map play. Battles have very little tactics. New UI is not useful and much information is obscured. Disappointed in new mechanics. Still a TW game but lost that 'one more turn' addictive quality and in an attempt to simplify it, they have made it much worse.
  14. Red_Oktoberfest
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    Total War: Rome II is a box of chocolates, you don't know which is the good or bad chocolate each time you reach for one.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    I seem to be running out of characters, damn you, 5,000 character limit! So I'll leave you with this mixed review of 5/10. The game is fun, but there's a lot holding it back and it's like Empire all over again, promise things but don't deliver or half-deliver.    … Expand
  15. IICRASHII
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    crash crash crash all what i get i have coreI7 2700K 3.5GHz stock 16GB rams, Radeon HD6870 1GB and i run everything on medium and high no antialiasing no ssao and game crash alot in campaign
  16. icemanerz
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    Having started my Total War fascination with Rome 1, and having played every Total War from then on. I can honestly say Rome 2 is a let down. It's far from a 0 or 1 you are seeing here (overreaction), however, the game needs a lot of work. Optimization is a serious issue, as my well over recommended rig does stutter on high settings; and the visuals don't even look good to be worth theHaving started my Total War fascination with Rome 1, and having played every Total War from then on. I can honestly say Rome 2 is a let down. It's far from a 0 or 1 you are seeing here (overreaction), however, the game needs a lot of work. Optimization is a serious issue, as my well over recommended rig does stutter on high settings; and the visuals don't even look good to be worth the stutter. Computer AI is dreadful, beyond the usual bad of a strategy game AI. But my biggest gripe is the quick/non-strategic combat. If you expect anything from a Total War game, it's strategic combat. And sadly that is sorely lacking here. Combat is usually a giant ball of death that doesn't even last long. No guard stance, unit abilities don't stand true for form (phalanx not holding up to even weak charges), and archers with dreadful range (why bother?). Patches may fix this game.. eventually.. but it's far from being the release it should have been.… Expand
  17. dbyron87
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    I'm starting this review by saying that this could have been an amazing game. Truly, it could, but in the state that it is now, it just isn't. The worst part about everything is that some of the problems, i don't even think willl be addressed.

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

    Let's start with the good, shall we?

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Now, the bad.

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

    Conclusion, there is more good than bad, but...The selling point of the TW series is the cinematic and tactical combat, and as it is, that's not in the game. The battle is shallow and unfun, they need to fix those, or the game is lost.    … Expand
  18. ntkb
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    Go look at Shogun 2 user scores, then look at this game. It's not the fans CA... it's you. Thanks for the Alpha version game. I really wish you pushed the release date back if you still needed to polish and fix the game. I have bought every single TW game since Shogun ONE on release day or preorder. I won't be doing that with your next title. The next title I will wait till theGo look at Shogun 2 user scores, then look at this game. It's not the fans CA... it's you. Thanks for the Alpha version game. I really wish you pushed the release date back if you still needed to polish and fix the game. I have bought every single TW game since Shogun ONE on release day or preorder. I won't be doing that with your next title. The next title I will wait till the modding community fixes your game for you before I buy it. 4/10, 5/10 being average is my initial impression of the game.… Expand
  19. PublicEnemy
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    Needs a lot of bug fixing and graphical performance improvements. All CA releases are shaky, and that is fine, but after so many titles CA did not learn from their mistakes.
  20. Legion_ix
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    Some reviews criticizing the AI very harshly dampen my hopes seriously. But after the very well made tutorial, where it was possible to see that the AI is still not good (like in every Total War game, maybe except Medieval 1), but by far not such a catastrophe as it was described in couple of reviews. So confidently I went to the main campaign. Now some hours of playing later, I have toSome reviews criticizing the AI very harshly dampen my hopes seriously. But after the very well made tutorial, where it was possible to see that the AI is still not good (like in every Total War game, maybe except Medieval 1), but by far not such a catastrophe as it was described in couple of reviews. So confidently I went to the main campaign. Now some hours of playing later, I have to admit Rome 2 is a huge disappointment it feels unfinished, confusing and counterintuitive, castrated and yet overcomplicated, and yes, boring most of the time. The reason for this is not the AI. Rome 1 managed to create a much more enjoyable gameplay with even a worse AI.

    Not finished

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

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

    Music

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

    Click orgy

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

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

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

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

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

    UI Uber Interface

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

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

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

    Conclusion

    I’m a bit angry but also very, very sad what happened with Rome II because I had such an expectation for it and especially shortly before the release very optimistic about the result. For sure it will be better through patches and mods, though due to some fundamental reasons even with that won’t be a game that a lot of us expected.    … Expand
  21. bzdt1
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    The main problem of this game is that no provide "wow effect" anymore, nothing new, just shogun 2 with some new animations and skins, very boring technical problems
  22. tomhardy
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    The worst gaming experience in my life. Played only few battles, but graphics look worse than tetris and AI sucks. For some reasons game crashed 2 times.Definitely unfinished product

    Now I will give it 4/10 because game needs a patch.
  23. Naku
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    I've been waiting for this game with hope since i'm Total War fan, i played all titles in series since first Shogun. I would not tell that this is worst launch in Total War series history but it's close to Empire. But since CA have so much experience now in 2013 im suprised that this game came in such terrible contition. I cant point out pros for this game becousei just can't enjoy playingI've been waiting for this game with hope since i'm Total War fan, i played all titles in series since first Shogun. I would not tell that this is worst launch in Total War series history but it's close to Empire. But since CA have so much experience now in 2013 im suprised that this game came in such terrible contition. I cant point out pros for this game becousei just can't enjoy playing it right now, there are so many bugs and glitches that eh...

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

    Big, big disapointment...    … Expand
  24. jseph1234
    Sep 4, 2013
    5
    This game was not ready for release and requires a lot of changes to make it worth playing:
    I gave it a score 5/10 due to the following:
    1. Capture point concept in general: Causes the A.I. to sit back and just guard those points and not properly reinforce their beleaguered troops that are under fire. Plus, sometimes you get the A.I. just camping those points, very frustrating. 2.    This game was not ready for release and requires a lot of changes to make it worth playing:
    I gave it a score 5/10 due to the following:

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

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

    4. User Interface Cards for Battle are ridiculously obstructive, hard to read and don't provide nearly enough information    … Expand
  25. 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
  26. 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
  27. vic_travers
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    Well, there's a few positives (Agent's, some politcal intrigue, Art direction, prettiness of the map etc) but....This game does not seem to build on the foundations of Shogun 2 or even Empire before it.

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

    My issues:

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

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

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

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

    End turns take way way too long.

    3D advisors waste of CPU and memory

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

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

    In closing. Get Shogun 2, play it for a few months whilst CA fix Rome 2 and then get Rome 2 and get the MODs.    … Expand
  28. alQamar
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    Hello everyone,

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

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

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

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

    "Total Unplayable: Rome 2".

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    - many taunts on enemies and accents

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

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

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

    - no sword shield skilling anymore only chevrons but compared to Rome 1 you can see the impact of skilling on a seperate unit stats tab. - CA stated there is no mulitmonitor support, but with some tweaks, I've seen it working. So no support seems to be they do not support it on issues, but basically it works. NEGATIVE: - new tactical map (tab key) and unit grouping modes but units do not keep formation like in Rome 1 when advancing. This is a basic warscape issue, that won't be solved. - Eventough you can pick a free location for the battle, you cannot enlarge the terrain thumbnails and they are very dark, low res. You cannot see much details of the terrain esp. hills and obstacles. - I am not a fan of ladders, as I am oldschool player and better stick to tourneys, but the ladders are really too plain now. - no "free for all mode (FFA)" anymore poor Prince of Macedon - no unit or avatar customisation anymore, not even colors or skins - only basic MLAA antialiasing - no DX 11 tesselation support anymore - no HDR light support anymore - the chat lobby and common chat is still not working globally like in Rome 1. You cannot see players online in the global window, rooms are limited to 100 players, and rooms are limited to your setup download region in Steam preferences. So only "local" chat partners. No community this way! - the performance of the game is a -3 10 bummer: while a AMD X3 with a 5870 runs with 40 FPS avg. on high settings, a i7-4770K with a GTX Titan does only have 44 fps on maxed out settings. Both running at 1920x1080 - the game is lagging even on high framerates (about 40) and occasionally you get FPS drops to 9 or 10 with no clear reason. The FPS are not very stable going up and down all the time. - The included "forest" benchmark is not intense enough to give you a good feeling if the graphics settings are choosen well or too high. - The pilae trails are HORRIBLE. Romans throwing them alltogether and it looks like lasers from certain point of views. They throw them while running not stopping like Rome 1 for that, which was more realistic, trails just pop up over their head. Sil    … Expand
  29. sifuxu
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    I would describe my feelings about this game as huge disappointment. For 5 years after release of Empire CA promises us a good AI. However when we play final product it all looks like a marketing lies. I am very unhappy about this game because of bad optimization, horrible AI, ugly ui, removal of family tree. Developers should stop treating their customers as beta testers and listen moreI would describe my feelings about this game as huge disappointment. For 5 years after release of Empire CA promises us a good AI. However when we play final product it all looks like a marketing lies. I am very unhappy about this game because of bad optimization, horrible AI, ugly ui, removal of family tree. Developers should stop treating their customers as beta testers and listen more to community when they make very controvercial decisions.… Expand
  30. 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
  31. kersal
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    Actually the game lack on his most important goal: the challenge. The AI, even at legendary mode, is terrible, especially on campaign map. No challenge means not fun. Now is like playing Sim City and not TW!
  32. Malorix
    Sep 8, 2013
    5
    Earlier I gave a score of 8 for this game. I played for 40 plus hrs now and have to lower that score. This game is not finished. I was extremely excited for this game, but at this stage it is simply not fun to play.

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

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

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

    I doubt whether CA can fix these issues they purportedly couldnt with Empire but I keep an open mind.    … Expand
  33. 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
  34. jimjamesjim
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    I have loved this game from the start, but as I played (completed a campaign now) I took note of many problems.

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

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

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

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

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

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

    There are a bunch more bugs that I know they will eventually fix. But I hope they re work some of the game mechanics in the future as well. I am having fun but the game could be much better, and should be. It feels like they wanted to reach a bigger crowd so added in "popular" game mechanics from other games. Which just don't really fit in a Total War games (like the flag capturing and the micro abilities of units).    … Expand
  35. 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
  36. Viva_Fanta
    Sep 6, 2013
    5
    Looks Good. Plays Bad. New province system is rubbish, absense of walls makes city defence ridiculous, unit cards are example of poor game design.

    This game has potential and probably after 2 years of patching it will be great game. Unfortunately at this moment this game is awful beta with poor optimization, retarded AI.
  37. KickingMo
    Sep 6, 2013
    5
    Horrible. Gameplay is extremely dumbed down, lack of family tree in campaign is obvious mistake and the greatest disapointment is the lack of online modes. Also, removing walls from cities is a horrible idea.
  38. Hamishduncan
    Sep 6, 2013
    5
    I have a middle of the range computer like most of you will and this game just doesn't run as well as the rest of the series,i love total war and have all of them but this beta of a game is a let down,the game lacks substance and the draw in factor of other titles,its sad and hopefully they will fix it but i have no trust in the game any more you can see me playing Rome 1 or empire overI have a middle of the range computer like most of you will and this game just doesn't run as well as the rest of the series,i love total war and have all of them but this beta of a game is a let down,the game lacks substance and the draw in factor of other titles,its sad and hopefully they will fix it but i have no trust in the game any more you can see me playing Rome 1 or empire over this until its fixed… Expand
  39. astralheights
    Sep 6, 2013
    5
    On first impulse, I was going to give this game a 0. But, after some thought, I decided to give the game a 5. Why? Because it is an average RTS game. As a Total War game it deserves an even lower score.

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

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

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

    Will never again pre-order a Total War game.    … Expand
  40. Morogath
    Sep 6, 2013
    5
    Just to clear it up: I've been a TW fan since the start.. In all honesty: this is probably the worst title in the whole series. Why? Good question.... Extrem performance issues on my high-end PC, the AI is stupid as bread.. every round there is some single unit attacking one of my gigantic armies... I mean really... Even the campaign-map AI is too dumb for this world on hard difficulty.Just to clear it up: I've been a TW fan since the start.. In all honesty: this is probably the worst title in the whole series. Why? Good question.... Extrem performance issues on my high-end PC, the AI is stupid as bread.. every round there is some single unit attacking one of my gigantic armies... I mean really... Even the campaign-map AI is too dumb for this world on hard difficulty. What was CA doing while developing? This is the first time that i regret having paid for a TW game. The politicial plunder is unmotivating, not really well explained and straight up boring. Sorry for the harsh words, but I'm just so extremely disappointed.… Expand
  41. crokotay857
    Sep 6, 2013
    5
    Not worth buying. I don't know why but this game bore me so much. Removed family tree and adding army cap was a bad move in my opinion. I think they really need to make patch fast. Graphics and UI look much worse than Shogun 2 and that piss me off too.
  42. Caesar_Flavus
    Sep 6, 2013
    5
    Well I believe that all the positive reviews were written by company employees or some test group guys? most positive reviews state nothing and look like advertisement: "buy it buy it buy it!" Now about the game, IMHO Napoleon and Shogun were much better. There is no more good old TW experience here, I just don't know how to describe it. Game design looks bad and they removed many goodWell I believe that all the positive reviews were written by company employees or some test group guys? most positive reviews state nothing and look like advertisement: "buy it buy it buy it!" Now about the game, IMHO Napoleon and Shogun were much better. There is no more good old TW experience here, I just don't know how to describe it. Game design looks bad and they removed many good things such as family tree. I d recommend to play Rome 1 with Roma surrectum 2 mod, you ll get more fun.… Expand
  43. Agriphal
    Sep 7, 2013
    5
    I prior ordered the game in expectation of the kind of visuals likely to knock my socks off. The hype was very effective and I was suckered in, like the fool I am. I checked my computer specifications against the list provided by Creative Assembly and to my joy I found that I met the recommended specifications. Wonderful, I thought, I'm going to get the close to the top graphics. On MondayI prior ordered the game in expectation of the kind of visuals likely to knock my socks off. The hype was very effective and I was suckered in, like the fool I am. I checked my computer specifications against the list provided by Creative Assembly and to my joy I found that I met the recommended specifications. Wonderful, I thought, I'm going to get the close to the top graphics. On Monday I started playing. Well, tried to play. Strained my eyes trying to look at the screen that looked more like a slideshow than a computer game (frames for each second at ten or less). It turns out that you need the very best computer on the market to get anywhere near attractive graphics. Sad of heart I turned down the graphics and unit size to the lowest settings. Visually it looked worse than the first Rome game. Then I encountered the worst part. The units had almost zero weight. So, this game still carries on the tradition of floaty combat established by Empire Total War and perfected by Shogun Two. Back in Medieval Two time units felt like they actually had mass. They clashed with a crunch. It was the most satisfying part of the game. That is now ancient history (ironically). Overall this game is both unfinished and underwhelming. Even when all the patches are out, this game wont be worth the effort it takes to click "purchase". Or the time wasted downloading it. If you're a fan of this franchise, and you want more, get Medieval two Total War, and download one of the many excellent modifications out there.… Expand
  44. ozozio
    Sep 7, 2013
    5
    I Wanted to like this game.. I wanted to,, so Bad. But it has been a letdown. The problem with Rome 2 has less to do with the fact that it feels like a title from over ten years ago and more to do with the fact that it is full of poor design decisions, simplified game mechanics, and horrible UI. Overall, the game suffers from a lack optimization and tones of bugs.
  45. 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
  46. 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
  47. Deavon
    Sep 8, 2013
    5
    Apart from the bugs there are some serious game breakers for me; not in the least the capture points during battles. Don't too be tempted by the critic reviews, most of them aren't TW players anyway.
    Wait before you purchase.
  48. zarule
    Sep 9, 2013
    5
    Rome Total War 2 does not live up to either advertismen/marketing or even earlier games in the series standards. It does bring some innovative ideas and concepts but the execution is so poor, the bugs are so many that the only explanation is they released a BETA and charged for the full game using buyers as testers. Unacceptable!
  49. ocelot1300
    Sep 9, 2013
    5
    This is an okay game with the potential to be a great game. Numerous UI and AI issues, lag and graphics issues, prevent it from being what it could be. To illustrate the point, let me give an example:

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

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

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

    Like most CA games, it's not so great out of the box. Hopefully they'll patch the game, and modders will improve the game (by eliminating stupid things like the army cap), and then it will finally be a great game.    … Expand
  50. 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
  51. 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
  52. zethar
    Sep 10, 2013
    5
    STOP trying to make it a casual game its a battle A LONG BATTLE GAME not a casual Rome 1 was better (111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111) just to fill the rest of the characters
  53. R3DSOXN4TION
    Sep 10, 2013
    5
    This game is only half made. Before the patch the glitches were game breaking. There is no unit balance elephants for the win if the A.I. even sends more the one or two army units to attack you at all. The A.I. is incompetent doing nothing even if your troops are standing right out in front of them. The game stripped many features and had many half baked features this game was clearlyThis game is only half made. Before the patch the glitches were game breaking. There is no unit balance elephants for the win if the A.I. even sends more the one or two army units to attack you at all. The A.I. is incompetent doing nothing even if your troops are standing right out in front of them. The game stripped many features and had many half baked features this game was clearly rushed. Even after all of that its still a Total War game and it is still enjoyable, but not $60 enjoyable. Either buy Shogun 2, a far superior Total War game, or wait until a Steam sale to get this. Or skip it all together you wouldn't miss much except for a broken game.… Expand
  54. 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
  55. Yazilliclick
    Sep 10, 2013
    5
    Has a lot of potential but falls completely flat due to bugs, poor AI and questionable UI decisions. It's amazing that a developer would go backwards on so many items in a series that they've worked on for over a decade. Shogun 2 had pretty good UI for presenting information in a lot of cases, not perfect but OK; Rome 2 goes backwards with battle UI not presenting proper information, notHas a lot of potential but falls completely flat due to bugs, poor AI and questionable UI decisions. It's amazing that a developer would go backwards on so many items in a series that they've worked on for over a decade. Shogun 2 had pretty good UI for presenting information in a lot of cases, not perfect but OK; Rome 2 goes backwards with battle UI not presenting proper information, not showing skill trees, settlement details about order and such being hidden in mouse over popups etc... The AI is probably amongst the worst in past several games which is incomprehensible how they can go backwards. Performance is poor, turn wait times are very very long even on decent hardware. They've sped up combat both by making units run faster and making units die and break morale sooner which takes away the ability to really feel like your in command of the battle and turns it more into an arcade action game of trying to control units.

    Ultimately there's potential here for a decent game if they can patch this stuff out but at this point the developer deserves no respect for handing the game out in it's current state. These are all common and very apparent issues which would not have been missed in Q&A and thus were deliberately shipped with the game.    … Expand
  56. uizueite
    Sep 11, 2013
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Its a nice beta test! Has tons of bugs. I feel disapointed with this game, its almos like a fraud.
    Good thing is the producers are working hard to solve its issues, they say so...    … Expand
  57. Southers
    Sep 12, 2013
    5
    After playing for 45 hours through a brilliant prologue, some great historical battles, a few (very laggy/ desynced) quick matches and two 100 turn in progress campaigns as Rome and Iceni, I feel like it is time to give my opinion. I have read some real troll reviews, and some real hype reviews, and it may look like i'm sitting dead in the middle but this is my honest opinion so pleaseAfter playing for 45 hours through a brilliant prologue, some great historical battles, a few (very laggy/ desynced) quick matches and two 100 turn in progress campaigns as Rome and Iceni, I feel like it is time to give my opinion. I have read some real troll reviews, and some real hype reviews, and it may look like i'm sitting dead in the middle but this is my honest opinion so please bare with me.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    I wish CA the best of luck for it will be a massive undertaking to reinvigorate what they have lost. Sadly in its current state as of 12.09.2013 its a mediocre 5/10.    … Expand
  58. hardingman
    Sep 12, 2013
    5
    Awful UI, systems explained incredibly badly, multiplayer is unplayable. AWFUL FPS, and the AI is beyond broken. Thank god the time period and epicness of the campaign can carry it off. JUST
  59. nitetrax
    Sep 14, 2013
    5
    Over hyped and under delivered, day 1 DLC for some of the most interesting factions (preorder or pay additional $8 to play as Sparta? F that), bugs, lag, glitches, and crashes (even on a friend's computer running a GTX 780), no seasons like in Shogun 2 leaves the campaign map looking very static, you don't feel an attachment to your generals as they come and go like drops of water during aOver hyped and under delivered, day 1 DLC for some of the most interesting factions (preorder or pay additional $8 to play as Sparta? F that), bugs, lag, glitches, and crashes (even on a friend's computer running a GTX 780), no seasons like in Shogun 2 leaves the campaign map looking very static, you don't feel an attachment to your generals as they come and go like drops of water during a rain, units just magically generate their own transport ships which can defeat actual navy warships in a fight (needed to use autoresolve to fix this), none of the "mechanistic, meat-grinder" combat that CA promised because melees (even between highly disciplined troops like Romans or Greeks) devolve into blobs as units break formation and cohesion, AI is absolutely retarded (will charge archers and slingers into your spearmen, will suicide rush map objectives such as flag capture and have entire force annihilated, etc.), immersion-breaking graphical effects (such as red skies, warped faces or textures), horribly inefficient UI (unit info, overlays, financial/economic information, etc), ridiculously long AI turn times (even if you turn "show AI movements" off, because there's too many factions and even the shortest move takes a second for each faction)

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

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

    This is a 5/10 game when judged after playing all the other Total War games that came out before it. When the bugs, glitches, and lag are fixed, this may be a 6/10 game...to people who've never played a Total War game, it may even be 7/10. If you are new to strategy, wait several months or until an expansion to give this a go. If you are a long-term, hardcore Total War fan...this is a far greater disappointment than Empire, and I recommend skipping it completely unless the fundamental gameplay mechanics are reworked (not to mention AI, blob-like zero-unit-cohesion combat, AI, etc.)    … Expand
  60. 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
  61. 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
  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. triarii3
    Sep 24, 2013
    5
    Unit AI....I win 9/10 battles due to the AI's own stupidity.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    CA really has to earn my trust a second time.    … Expand
  65. norwaydude
    Sep 26, 2013
    5
    The first Rome game was good; people accepted the bugs and had fun with it despite the meaningless gameplay in campaign mode and the oddities of the battles. It was the graphics, the epicness and grand scale of the game that made us look past its uglier sides. Now, 9 years and 4 Total War games later, it becomes hard to be so forgiving, especially when the uglier side of the Total WarThe first Rome game was good; people accepted the bugs and had fun with it despite the meaningless gameplay in campaign mode and the oddities of the battles. It was the graphics, the epicness and grand scale of the game that made us look past its uglier sides. Now, 9 years and 4 Total War games later, it becomes hard to be so forgiving, especially when the uglier side of the Total War series have become more pronounced with time.

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

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

    All in all, there hasn't been much progress in the Total War series. Sure, there are new cool features, like units now being able to raise their shields to protect themselves from missiles and some really cool amphibious assaults, but you cannot build a game on cool features alone. It has to have a fundamentally good core to it, and this is where Rome 2 fails. In addition to all the bugs, unfinished features and lack of polish we are used to with games from the Creative Assembly, of course.    … Expand
  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. SaintJames012
    Nov 4, 2013
    5
    Coming off of Shogun 2, the only word you can use to describe Rome II is utter disappointment. This game took out a lot of what made Shogun 2 so fun. There are bugs that cause it to become just an annoying PoS, and overall after about 10 hours you will stop having fun. the game feels more like a chore than a fun strategy. Family trees and rulers have become completely irrelevant and whenComing off of Shogun 2, the only word you can use to describe Rome II is utter disappointment. This game took out a lot of what made Shogun 2 so fun. There are bugs that cause it to become just an annoying PoS, and overall after about 10 hours you will stop having fun. the game feels more like a chore than a fun strategy. Family trees and rulers have become completely irrelevant and when one of your generals dies the game just spawns another one almost equal to what your last general's stats were. victory is too easy and battles seem to be rushed as I have run into epic battle of 1500+ armies win in 15 minutes flat. The only thing I think the game added that is useful is auto pilot. There is a move you can do in battles where you can tell specific units to attack an enemy unit, then that unit will be set on auto pilot and attack the unit you ordered, once the enemy is killed the auto pilot unit will then go and attack another enemy where it is needed. This is nice as it allows for you to set a couple units to autopilot and eases the burden of running a massive army in battle, as you can set some units to auto pilot then set them back to manual once you need them. Other than that Rome II is a major step back and not worth the $60 pricetag. Game is worth a $20 tag maybe, but beware, this game sucks. Go back to Shogun 2… Expand
  68. CanOmer
    Oct 7, 2013
    5
    I played Rome II more than 230 hours. Rome I was my all time favourite game. So I have huge expectations on Rome II.

    Battles are great, they put so much in here. But campaign is near empty. You can get bored on campaign. In Rome I campaign was far more detailed. They should add more content to the campaign. Campaign map is distorted also. Map projection is the worst projection I have    I played Rome II more than 230 hours. Rome I was my all time favourite game. So I have huge expectations on Rome II.

    Battles are great, they put so much in here. But campaign is near empty. You can get bored on campaign. In Rome I campaign was far more detailed. They should add more content to the campaign.

    Campaign map is distorted also. Map projection is the worst projection I have ever seen; tiny Arabia, compressed Persia, oversized Gaul and Germania, shortened Italy..etc    … Expand
  69. 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
  70. Master-of-War
    Nov 29, 2013
    5
    At first completely unplayable. After 7 patches boring, uninspiring and unchallenging. Very disappointing total war game. Very disappointing sequel to the first Rome game. Too great an emphasis on graphics and changing core elements. Should have focused on gameplay and immersion. And should not have released a game in such a state. Everything Rome II now has a foul stench about it. But itAt first completely unplayable. After 7 patches boring, uninspiring and unchallenging. Very disappointing total war game. Very disappointing sequel to the first Rome game. Too great an emphasis on graphics and changing core elements. Should have focused on gameplay and immersion. And should not have released a game in such a state. Everything Rome II now has a foul stench about it. But it does look great.… Expand
  71. 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
  72. Onebadbasterd
    Nov 19, 2013
    5
    At this point 2 months and a few days after it's release it's beggining to be ''playable''. (Thanks to some mods also)

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

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

    Thanks SEGA for making our greatest expectation this year become our worst deception ever.    … Expand
  73. 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
  74. NobbyNobbyBoy
    Nov 7, 2013
    5
    I dearly wanted to love this game. I have enjoyed every Total War so far (except Empire and Napoleon that wouldn't work on my computer!) and especially Shogun 2. I felt as if this game might bridge the gap between the dated but undeniably fun Rome and the beautiful, tactical game that Shogun 2 is.
    Unfortunately, the failure to release this game in a playable state has ruined the fun for    I dearly wanted to love this game. I have enjoyed every Total War so far (except Empire and Napoleon that wouldn't work on my computer!) and especially Shogun 2. I felt as if this game might bridge the gap between the dated but undeniably fun Rome and the beautiful, tactical game that Shogun 2 is.
    Unfortunately, the failure to release this game in a playable state has ruined the fun for me. I can see the potential and I fully expect this to be a great game in a year or so. But, (and this is a big but) you cannot release games in such a poor state and not expect a customer backlash.    … Expand
  75. 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
  76. 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.
  77. dyselehrt
    Nov 2, 2014
    5
    I have some 600 hours put into this game at the moment, and I will play it for many more to come. However, I would not recommend others to buy the game for the vanilla version since I do not think it is that much fun. It has improved in the latest patches yes, but it is still really not that good. If you do get this game though, do it for the mods. There are some incredible mods out thereI have some 600 hours put into this game at the moment, and I will play it for many more to come. However, I would not recommend others to buy the game for the vanilla version since I do not think it is that much fun. It has improved in the latest patches yes, but it is still really not that good. If you do get this game though, do it for the mods. There are some incredible mods out there which lifts the game immensely. But no matter what the AI will still be dumb as ****

    I suggest waiting for Attila since it feels like Rome 2 has been test-version of something greater to come. However, make sure not to pre-purchase it. You never know with Creative Assembly nowadays...    … Expand
  78. 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
  79. Operative13
    Dec 1, 2013
    5
    It is obvious there has been a ton of work put into this title. However, it does not excuse the fact that the game is virtually broken, with buggy AI, clunky graphics performance, questionable design decisions, and current game price of $60. When a game is released, it is expected to, at the bare minimum, function. It is even more so that these problems be fixed as soon as possible afterIt is obvious there has been a ton of work put into this title. However, it does not excuse the fact that the game is virtually broken, with buggy AI, clunky graphics performance, questionable design decisions, and current game price of $60. When a game is released, it is expected to, at the bare minimum, function. It is even more so that these problems be fixed as soon as possible after release. However Rome II so far has failed to provide any of these even in the few months after its release. The game obviously was not ready to be released and does not bring the Total War experience as much as previous titles have in its current state. Unless drastic measures are taken to improve the game's current quality, it will be riddled with poor gaming experience.… Expand
  80. Parkateer
    Dec 1, 2013
    5
    Now that the game has been out a couple of months you would think it would be solid, but unfortunately glitches remain. It is still possible to get stuck in a screen with no option but to ctrl-alt-delete out of the game. The battles, while fun, can become tedious as enemy forces stand off, forcing you to run out the clock to victory. This has all the feel of the Empire Total War engineNow that the game has been out a couple of months you would think it would be solid, but unfortunately glitches remain. It is still possible to get stuck in a screen with no option but to ctrl-alt-delete out of the game. The battles, while fun, can become tedious as enemy forces stand off, forcing you to run out the clock to victory. This has all the feel of the Empire Total War engine (which I loved), however, everything they tried to improve on is seemingly broke. Rome 1 was great and I, for one, am sorry they could not improve on it.… Expand
  81. JBOer
    Dec 3, 2013
    5
    Until now I played 48 hours of Rome II. And to be honest, it was a fight to get this time. This game is just disappointing. Don't get me wrong, I love the Total War franchise, but to play this game isn't fun at all.
    OK, the graphic is awesome, but that's pretty much it. The AI fails time after time after time, the UI is horrible and the big announced home policy doesn't effect anything.    Until now I played 48 hours of Rome II. And to be honest, it was a fight to get this time. This game is just disappointing. Don't get me wrong, I love the Total War franchise, but to play this game isn't fun at all.
    OK, the graphic is awesome, but that's pretty much it. The AI fails time after time after time, the UI is horrible and the big announced home policy doesn't effect anything. Generals are completely changeable and their "portraits" look like sh**. Oh and the music... I muted it after 5 min.
    After all I have to say this Total War is a big disappointment and not the game CA announced. If they won't fix it, this will be the last Total War I ever bought.    … Expand
  82. ApexPanda
    Dec 6, 2013
    5
    So I've played about 200+ turns and about 55 hours of play time into this game. Did CA up with the release? Yeah! BUT a lot of the problems you guys seem to have encountered have been fixed for the most part. And don't complain about a game this big crashing. All big games do when they first releases bad if you play any game enough it's bound to crash eventually. I got this game a fewSo I've played about 200+ turns and about 55 hours of play time into this game. Did CA up with the release? Yeah! BUT a lot of the problems you guys seem to have encountered have been fixed for the most part. And don't complain about a game this big crashing. All big games do when they first releases bad if you play any game enough it's bound to crash eventually. I got this game a few days ago and it seems like a lot of the issues are patched/fixed. But seriously! No family tree?! Wtf!?
    For content I give this game a 3/10
    For playability I give it a 8/10
    For CA/Sega being such and releasing this too soon without proper testing 1/10. Bad show    … Expand
  83. spartan1008
    Dec 5, 2013
    5
    absolutely painful to play for any total war vet in its current state. how and why this was released as it is, no one knows, but it is lackluster and boring. the ai doesnt do any thing, completely non aggressive on the battle field and campaign map. and once you grow just a bit, its next to impossible to lose, you pretty much just steam roll every thing in front of you
  84. 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
  85. 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
  86. 2d_beanbag
    Feb 15, 2014
    5
    I'm writing this short review as of patch 9.

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

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

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

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

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

    Build watch towers with your generals

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    A lot of people have rated this game between 2- 3 I think this is harsh. After 9 or so patches the game is so much more playable now stability wise. I give it 5 simply because I still believe it is an unfinished product and that it is very much watered down in many instances. This game is a huge disappointment.    … Expand
  87. Kazakdum
    Apr 7, 2014
    5
    Nostalgia was the greatest selling feature that this game had going for it. To compare the first to the second, witnessing how far the gaming industry has come in a decade of innovation and development. What was actually received from Creative Assembly, bought from paying customers, was a game that was broken, mechanically flawed and had unsuitable computer expectations from the averageNostalgia was the greatest selling feature that this game had going for it. To compare the first to the second, witnessing how far the gaming industry has come in a decade of innovation and development. What was actually received from Creative Assembly, bought from paying customers, was a game that was broken, mechanically flawed and had unsuitable computer expectations from the average consumer. Months later and the game is still getting ridiculously large patches to fix gameplay issues that should have been resolved in Alpha. Consumers have the right to high expectations from a developer who have: 1. high experience in the creation of games; 2. Have worked on TW games for over a decade and should be developing, innovating and perfecting the genre; 3. Have released a game that was broken, awful mechanic decisions (1v1 fighting) and have further released DLC that was already in the game.

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

    Its positives? This is a Total War game, and in the end they are fun. I just feel that this game has frustrated me now, beyond return. Will seriously have to consider whether to buy one in the future. And don't get me started in pre-release DLC. Cause that is another post WAITING to happen.    … Expand
  88. smeeeee
    May 27, 2014
    5
    Total War: Rome II was a bit of a disappointment, to say the least. The game lagged quite a lot on my computer, the epic battles Creative Assembly promised weren't all that great, and I found it hard to implement strategy when I could hardly figure out what the heck was going on. Plus, OP units like the Italian Noble Cavalry of the Etruscan League/Samnites are a) easy to get, b) probablyTotal War: Rome II was a bit of a disappointment, to say the least. The game lagged quite a lot on my computer, the epic battles Creative Assembly promised weren't all that great, and I found it hard to implement strategy when I could hardly figure out what the heck was going on. Plus, OP units like the Italian Noble Cavalry of the Etruscan League/Samnites are a) easy to get, b) probably the most powerful cavalry in the game.… Expand
  89. Groundducky
    Aug 28, 2014
    5
    I have been playing the Total War series since the original Shogun. Often with each game there has been at least to some extent a jump in features, graphics and gameplay as each new game has been released with so far the pinnacle of the series being Shogun 2. Rome 2 however has been a major disappointment. The gameplay trailers originally shown made the game look much better than theI have been playing the Total War series since the original Shogun. Often with each game there has been at least to some extent a jump in features, graphics and gameplay as each new game has been released with so far the pinnacle of the series being Shogun 2. Rome 2 however has been a major disappointment. The gameplay trailers originally shown made the game look much better than the version we have even now, even with mods. Everything was hyped about the content of the game, the graphics, that the game will actually perform well. Almost all of this turned out to be a total lie by CA with them taking ~14 patches just to get the game to a state that it should have been on release. But of course while they have been making the game playable they haven’t stopped giving us lovely DLC to buy from new units to mini campaigns.
    Many people point to Empire being the worst of the total war games but at least with Empire the game had the excuse of being the first Total war to be set in the gunpowder age. The mechanics in Rome 2 are not that different to the ones used in Shogun so I do not understand how they managed to get it all so wrong. Although I am now enjoying the game this is mainly due to mods I suppose on consolation is at least CA are supporting mods again.
    If it is your first Total War, get Shogun 2. If you loved Rome 1 just don’t buy this.    … Expand
  90. citizen-ychoux
    Feb 12, 2015
    5
    Rome 2 at release was a shame. A broken product, served by an even more shameful DLC policy and PR management. It deserved all the hatred it got.

    More than 1 year after, 16 patches in, game is much better, but still not great. It has good features, is technically okay (not good, just okay), but its has just to many issues: 1/ AI far from good 2/ Politics useless and worthless 3/    Rome 2 at release was a shame. A broken product, served by an even more shameful DLC policy and PR management. It deserved all the hatred it got.

    More than 1 year after, 16 patches in, game is much better, but still not great. It has good features, is technically okay (not good, just okay), but its has just to many issues:

    1/ AI far from good
    2/ Politics useless and worthless
    3/ Terrible music
    4/ Way too much focus on units "magic abilities". Stop it CA, Total War is NOT a micromanagement game.
    5/ No atmosphere, no historical facts, no family tree, no description. Just barebone gameplay, and nothing more.

    Rome 2 could have been the best Total War ever. Without mods, it's one of the worst. With Divide et Impera, it's enjoyable, but it could have been so much better.    … Expand
  91. Wraithcat
    Dec 4, 2014
    5
    After playing nearly 60 hours on this game, I can say that it is really an enormous disappointment. Having bought the Emperor edition (which represented the FIFTEENTH major patch to the game!), I figured that all of the bugs would have been ironed out and that there would be a decent core game. The diamond would have been polished.

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

    How wrong I was.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    For example, Romans have no archers, so if you want those Cretan Archers, you have to either send your entire army over to Crete to get them, or assign a general specifically to take them to armies that need them. Either way its a micromanagement nightmare.    … Expand
  92. grandmasterchef
    Mar 11, 2015
    5
    Rome Total War is a good game with one major drawback cause as much as I love to play as Rome they do not have their own unique Archer unit so you are forced to conquer someone who might have archer units and then if you want to build military out of Rome you then have to move army to location that has archer units cause Javelins suck and war dogs get hammered when you auto resolve andRome Total War is a good game with one major drawback cause as much as I love to play as Rome they do not have their own unique Archer unit so you are forced to conquer someone who might have archer units and then if you want to build military out of Rome you then have to move army to location that has archer units cause Javelins suck and war dogs get hammered when you auto resolve and that should not happen… Expand
  93. Heaves
    Aug 10, 2015
    5
    If you played the original rome total war and were expecting a near perfect strategy game, you will be disappointed. The game is flawed on many levels (although some have been fixed with updates) but the AI for instance is still very hit and miss. Having said that, it is still an enjoyable game you will get into if you like then genre. The reason it has got so many red ratings is thatIf you played the original rome total war and were expecting a near perfect strategy game, you will be disappointed. The game is flawed on many levels (although some have been fixed with updates) but the AI for instance is still very hit and miss. Having said that, it is still an enjoyable game you will get into if you like then genre. The reason it has got so many red ratings is that simply, it is not the game it should have been.… Expand
  94. Redwarrior1up
    Sep 11, 2015
    5
    Short and sweet this game improved a lot visually and in its controls, however it also went rampant tearing apart such simple things as the family tree system, the army building, just to name a few.

    I went to great lengths to give this game a chance out of my love for the series. CA has done a great job of trying to save this game from the depths but it sometimes feels like there are    Short and sweet this game improved a lot visually and in its controls, however it also went rampant tearing apart such simple things as the family tree system, the army building, just to name a few.

    I went to great lengths to give this game a chance out of my love for the series. CA has done a great job of trying to save this game from the depths but it sometimes feels like there are two parents fighting over one child amidst a divorce, one parent wants to stay in touch with the community and improve, meanwhile the other wants to make a game separate it into dlc packs and drain the series until its a lifeless husk of a game.    … Expand
  95. Cree26
    Aug 19, 2020
    5
    What a mess. Even with all the fancy mods. Sure, I put in close to 200hrs, but most of that time was spent trying to get my units off a siege tower without falling into the wall and disappearing. Also, the family tree and politics stuff is terribly optimized and a waste of time. Etc etc. See Reynald Sanity's youtube video to get my drift.

    Buy on super sale only.
  96. xesmi
    Nov 3, 2016
    5
    Could have been better. Should have been better. The game still faces random crashes and bugs even after so many patches.
    I like the variety of factions and events but battles are very weak in comparison with previous total war titles
    I have been playing Total War since Shogun 1 and Rome2 is the worst of the series by far.. ...and its so annoying to buy a game and during first 2-3    Could have been better. Should have been better. The game still faces random crashes and bugs even after so many patches.
    I like the variety of factions and events but battles are very weak in comparison with previous total war titles
    I have been playing Total War since Shogun 1 and Rome2 is the worst of the series by far..

    ...and its so annoying to buy a game and during first 2-3 days realize that in order to end one turn you need to wait 10-15 mins...    … Expand
  97. GJA
    Jan 30, 2020
    5
    One of the better MODERN total war games, but that doesn't say much does it? Compared to earlier games it has nothing to offer except better graphics. Even the old Rome total war beats this game out of the water.
  98. chingchangwalla
    Jan 5, 2019
    5
    Creative Assembly always finds a way to bugger up a game. In this case you cannot trade/gift regions and you cannot stop a war between an ally and a vassal. After a while, you lose interest in the game and give up.
  99. Graham67722
    Mar 5, 2019
    5
    I was really disappointed by this game. I pre-ordered it and was ready to experience the greatness of rome total war. All battles boil down to giant blobs and there are no tactics involved in the bottles. The naval battles are even worse.
  100. gdwitt
    Jan 19, 2014
    4
    Uhhh. I played the game before I read the reviews.
    I bought all the DLC's before trying it.
    I didn't encounter too many battle bugs because I autoresolved due to graphic issues. I believe CA knows everywhere it's broken. The campaign map is awesome, a wonderful work of programming and graphics. I would urge then to loosen up the city-province options and let us empire build. All the    Uhhh. I played the game before I read the reviews.
    I bought all the DLC's before trying it.
    I didn't encounter too many battle bugs because I autoresolved due to graphic issues.
    I believe CA knows everywhere it's broken.
    The campaign map is awesome, a wonderful work of programming and graphics.
    I would urge then to loosen up the city-province options and let us empire build.
    All the new petty restrictions break the game.
    Penalize unhappy civilizations like CIV5.
    Let us leave standing armies.
    Just let this game be like Medieval 2TW.
    Please don't give up yet.    … 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 »