Positive: 0 out of 2
Mixed: 2 out of 2
Negative: 0 out of 2
Aug 16, 2013I should stop writing reviews like an a-hole. It's great to see the way HOI 3 is gradually taking shape. It's a very ambitious project. It isI should stop writing reviews like an a-hole. It's great to see the way HOI 3 is gradually taking shape. It's a very ambitious project. It is taking a long time but the wait (and price) is easily worth it. A grand game is gradually forming. Buy this! Support the best team making the best grand-strategy WWII game!… Expand
Nov 12, 2012If you are interested in divisional level WW2 operations look no further. TFH is the latest update to Hearts of Iron III (you need to haveIf you are interested in divisional level WW2 operations look no further. TFH is the latest update to Hearts of Iron III (you need to have the HOI3 series up to For the Motherland). Be prepared to spend some time reading player's AAR (After Action Reports). It can seem overwhelming at first. Persevere, as it is the multi-levelled complexity that makes this an intriguing game to play. Re-playability is a strong point. Strongly recommend joining the Paradox forum.… Expand
Mar 1, 2015Five reasons this game is absolute s h i t e !
1. I needed community support to even start the game. 2. Game-mechanics are somewhatFive reasons this game is absolute s h i t e !
1. I needed community support to even start the game.
2. Game-mechanics are somewhat boring. Rather limited options for doing anything, and unless you know the tricks you'll be doing absolutely nothing the first half of the game.
3. This game is drudgery galore. It's main game-mechanic consist of organizing your troops into a proper chain of command. Doing this is about as time-consuming as in real life. A clunky and unintuitive interface makes this chore into your own personal hell.
4. HoI3 is spent waiting for something interesting to happen, but it never does.
5. You have to go online to learn how to play the game.… Expand
Sep 12, 2014Pros: The World War II scenarios are fun at first; the graphics look much better than Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon when the game isn'tPros: The World War II scenarios are fun at first; the graphics look much better than Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon when the game isn't stuttering into a low frame-rate oblivion.
Cons: Worse music than Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon; the AI for the game is quite dumb, very much worse than it was in Hearts of Iron II; game has a much reduced scope from Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon; idiotic "neutrality system"; super-long loading screens; a huge amount of problems with realism and history in the game; the huge amount of tiny provinces destroys the performance and fun of the game; the good graphics destroy the framerate and make the game seem to go by ten times slower than Hearts of Iron II; feels like a huge unnecessary waste of resources to have a 3D graphics engine for what is essentially a 2D board game; game is so so bloated that it cannot run on older computers which could run Hearts of Iron II very well; this so-called expansion is a glorified, paid patch for a broken game.
Score Breakdown: Graphics 7/10, Sound Effects and Music 3/10, Realism 2/10, Game Stability 1/10, Gameplay 1/10, Loading Screens and Frame Rate 1/10, Replay Value 0/10, Game Publisher's Ethics -100/10, Total Score 0/10
Conclusion: Overall a huge step backwards from its prequel Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon. Instead of playing Hearts of Iron III or any of the Hearts of Iron III expansions, buy Hearts of Iron II: Doomsday with the Armageddon expansion and perhaps try the game Darkest Hour.… Expand
- (2 views)