Hearts of Iron III PC

User Score
7.1

Mixed or average reviews- based on 233 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 47 out of 233
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
  1. HinhG
    Aug 14, 2009
    5
    While Paradox Interactive has indeed updated the look and feel of HoI:2, they have failed to really improve it. The 10,000 provinces become overwhelming, forcing you to let the AI handle your wars, taking away much of the pleasure of personally directed an armored assualt. The technology screens are a massive step backwards in terms of look and feel. Perhaps the most annoying aspect of While Paradox Interactive has indeed updated the look and feel of HoI:2, they have failed to really improve it. The 10,000 provinces become overwhelming, forcing you to let the AI handle your wars, taking away much of the pleasure of personally directed an armored assualt. The technology screens are a massive step backwards in terms of look and feel. Perhaps the most annoying aspect of HoI:3 is that in some areas it has fewer features than HoI:2, such as the ability to automanage trades and convoys. You can either give the game full control of all production fields or none. I would keep an eye on this game and perhaps in a few patches and update mods consider it, but for now save your money. I wish I had. Expand
  2. Hans
    Sep 3, 2009
    5
    Another game in the line of Europa Universalis 3 and Rome. This publisher releases unfinished games and expects the users to fix them. This game lacks any sense of realism. I am not talking about logical bugs, but who woud expect that Ireland would disembark alone on the german coast? Who would expect Argentina did the same on england? As it is, the game should not be sold linked to WW2, Another game in the line of Europa Universalis 3 and Rome. This publisher releases unfinished games and expects the users to fix them. This game lacks any sense of realism. I am not talking about logical bugs, but who woud expect that Ireland would disembark alone on the german coast? Who would expect Argentina did the same on england? As it is, the game should not be sold linked to WW2, but instead in creating an alternative reality that has very few to do with WW2, at least if one wants to play the full campaign. This publisher got lucky with Europa Universalis 3, when a group of users coded Magna Mundi and solved most of the faults. They had no such luck with Rome, because the Magna Mundi team was not interested in fixing it. And probably they are now praying the Magna Mundi team will fix HOI3. This is terrible, because these games have lots of potential. Expand
  3. ZachG
    Aug 11, 2009
    6
    Although the groundwork is in place, the game needs a huge shot of performance enhancing steroids. Being an avid strategy gamer, and certainly a fan of the Hearts of Iron series, I can see that the potential is huge. Once the bugs are ironed out along with performance issues, it will be a delight to play, and will surely be a great sequel, but until then i have to give it a 6 out of 10. Although the groundwork is in place, the game needs a huge shot of performance enhancing steroids. Being an avid strategy gamer, and certainly a fan of the Hearts of Iron series, I can see that the potential is huge. Once the bugs are ironed out along with performance issues, it will be a delight to play, and will surely be a great sequel, but until then i have to give it a 6 out of 10. Does quality assurance even exist at developers names that don't start with a B and end with an lizzard? Expand
  4. WimH
    Sep 1, 2009
    6
    This version is the first I play so I cant compare with series 1 and 2. Though I have to say that the game detail is impressive and is a platform for a great game. Unfortunately thats it for me, as I cant say I enjoy it. Maybe I need to play longer and go through the learning curve, but there are some things that just dont appeal to me such as: there are certain political leaders you cant This version is the first I play so I cant compare with series 1 and 2. Though I have to say that the game detail is impressive and is a platform for a great game. Unfortunately thats it for me, as I cant say I enjoy it. Maybe I need to play longer and go through the learning curve, but there are some things that just dont appeal to me such as: there are certain political leaders you cant change. Some countries are almost impossible to change the general democracy level which makes it impossible to switch sides (allies vs axis). Depending on the research available only some countries can eg. get to the nuclear weapons. A.I on resources does often give insufficient to consumer goods, which increases revolt automatically. etc etc. Although officially this is not a retelling of Word war 2, a lot of things are programmed to happen as they did. No surprises and a lot of details to manage to get to the same result. I hope I am wrong but this is my feeling after playing around 5 seperate attempts. Expand
  5. JohnC
    Aug 13, 2009
    5
    Hearts of Iron 3 promises much, but delivers little. The diplomatic mechanic is broken and severely unbalanced, so the German AI cannot help avoiding the entire world to side with the Allies. Ministers do not die of old age nor get otherwise replaced, this means you will NEVER see WINSTON CHURCHILL take power in Britain. Naval transports have unlimited range, which means Finland can Hearts of Iron 3 promises much, but delivers little. The diplomatic mechanic is broken and severely unbalanced, so the German AI cannot help avoiding the entire world to side with the Allies. Ministers do not die of old age nor get otherwise replaced, this means you will NEVER see WINSTON CHURCHILL take power in Britain. Naval transports have unlimited range, which means Finland can easily invade Korea, and the Pacific war makes no sense, as islands can be invaded at random and not in sequence. The AI does not research military doctrines, which means the player will always surpass them in efficiency. Also, many features from HoI2 were removed, such as Claiming Provinces and auto-production-sliders, demanding from the player daily attention to the sliders. Plus, the game has severe performance issues and crawls at a very slow pace. Will HoI3 still be played years from now, as HoI2, once the novelty wears off and only the bugs and issues remain? Only time, and many, many patches will tell. Expand
  6. jamie
    Aug 23, 2009
    7
    Looks to be a great game so far. It needs patches, but it's hard to make something this complex that doesn't. However, I'm subtracting one point for the moronic tutorial, that introduces me to each of the six buttons across the top of the screen - and then forgets to tell me HOW TO MOVE UNITS OR ATTACK !!!
  7. Feb 20, 2013
    6
    The idea is good and interesting, but the execution still has a LOT to develop. With a lot of patching the problems can be repaired (There are quiet a few problems at the moment, like balance issues -German units are almost invincible-, performance issues -The game start lagging no matter what PC you are using...-dumb and unbelievable diplomatic moves...maps are not matching realThe idea is good and interesting, but the execution still has a LOT to develop. With a lot of patching the problems can be repaired (There are quiet a few problems at the moment, like balance issues -German units are almost invincible-, performance issues -The game start lagging no matter what PC you are using...-dumb and unbelievable diplomatic moves...maps are not matching real borders...etc..). I do not know if they will ever fix these, but if they do you will have a great strategy game.… Collapse Expand
  8. AnonymousMC
    Aug 12, 2009
    7
    Bad game as it stands now. Like most games by this developer they get better and better with patches and expansions. I have no doubt this game will be a 9-9.5 but not yet. Do youself a favor and wait for them to fix all the crap wrong with it and dont buy it now. The problems will get fixed eventually, i have no doubt
  9. oso
    Jul 18, 2013
    6
    After finally getting multiplayer running and haveing alot of fun there are still a lot of stupid and frustrating gameplay elements. For example if you play as democracy there is no option to declare war without haveing to wait like 10 years for reducing the potential enemies neutrality. At early game versions you were able to declare war on anyone at any time with the latest patch appliedAfter finally getting multiplayer running and haveing alot of fun there are still a lot of stupid and frustrating gameplay elements. For example if you play as democracy there is no option to declare war without haveing to wait like 10 years for reducing the potential enemies neutrality. At early game versions you were able to declare war on anyone at any time with the latest patch applied this isn't possible anymore.
    The whole intelligence system is also quite pointless. For example if you manage to coup a nation what is quite an effort there is no direct benefit for you. It is not possible to control puppet nations like it was in previous hoi games.
    Some unit movement mechanics are extremely stupid f.e. every air unit or flotilla has a limited range but you can easily outpass it by 'rebaseing that unit to any other friendly airbase/naval base.
    overall its fun to play but unfortunately has some major issues and unlogical mechanics that can quickly destroy your or your buddys game that been carefully prepared for many hours.
    Expand
  10. Dec 29, 2012
    5
    The game is a complete mess, missing many of the things that made HOI 2 fun. Far too many provinces to work with, way too much micromanagement. Nation specific tech teams and unit models are gone; you're stuck with generic research and technology. The game feels like a generic war simulator moreso than a WW2 grand strategy game. The game suffers from performance issues as well even on highThe game is a complete mess, missing many of the things that made HOI 2 fun. Far too many provinces to work with, way too much micromanagement. Nation specific tech teams and unit models are gone; you're stuck with generic research and technology. The game feels like a generic war simulator moreso than a WW2 grand strategy game. The game suffers from performance issues as well even on high end PC's. Expand
  11. AWG
    Jul 30, 2013
    5
    I'm not into strategy games (I get bored almost immediately if I have to read tons of text and data just to move what I suppose is a soldier from here to there) and this one seems really complicated anc complex. Not really my piece of cake.
Metascore
77

Generally favorable reviews - based on 23 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 23
  2. Negative: 0 out of 23
  1. Hearts of Iron 3 is by far the most complicated and in-depth strategy game I’ve ever played. My big issue with it is that I didn’t have much fun with the game after delving through hours of menus: it wasn’t until I actually experienced some combat that the game stopped feeling stale.
  2. 70
    Everything is in place for an absolutely great game that's unfortunately bogged down in a mess of bad design decisions, bugs, and some odd gameplay changes.
  3. Reduced micromanagement and streamlined automation make Hearts of Iron III an absorbing game of grand strategy.