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
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 »