Imperial Glory Image
Metascore
69

Mixed or average reviews - based on 28 Critics What's this?

User Score
8.4

Generally favorable reviews- based on 74 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Summary: Imperial Glory promises to be the most extensive strategy game ever, offering an in- depth management model along with graphically stunning real-time land and naval battles in full 3D. Choose which of the five great 19th century Empires to lead: Great Britain, France, Russia, Prussia orImperial Glory promises to be the most extensive strategy game ever, offering an in- depth management model along with graphically stunning real-time land and naval battles in full 3D. Choose which of the five great 19th century Empires to lead: Great Britain, France, Russia, Prussia or Austro-Hungary, each with their own unique attributes. Command your troops in large-scale battles across the globe, from the green fields of England to the icy wastes of Russia and sweeping deserts of Morocco. However, ultimate glory will depend on your utilising politics, trade, diplomacy, resource management and technology research. This is an age of change ? be at the leading edge of the modern world or your civilization will crumble and fall. [Eidos Interactive] Expand
Buy On
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 11 out of 28
  2. Negative: 2 out of 28
  1. The implementation of controllable sea battles and the interactive environments certainly develops the gameplay of the combat RTS sub-genre and it’s sure to be a feature that a certain developer called Creative Assembly will be looking out for.
  2. 85
    The campaign's tedious start is a significant obstacle to gamers who want to "get to the good stuff" without going through the motions of developing a massive resource base and drafting an army from scratch.
  3. 80
    The empire-building gameplay is surprisingly compelling and fast-paced, while the battles themselves give you a taste of, well, glory. Hugo be damned; this empire building is fun stuff.
  4. The campaign mode is good fun for a while, but the unsatisfying battle element will leave strategy buffs begging for more.
  5. PC Gamer UK
    64
    When half a battalion decides to leave your borders undefended while they wage their own private suicide-o-war, it's more than a little galling. [May 2006, p.96]
  6. The graphics are slick and I can tell a lot of historical research went into making this game, but I can’t shake the feeling that the Pyro designers are still using muskets while the competition has moved on to assault rifles.
  7. For if I would not play the game more than ten seconds if I didn’t have to review the game, why would I recommend any voluntarily play this game?

See all 28 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 23 out of 35
  2. Negative: 5 out of 35
  1. Ano
    Jul 10, 2005
    10
    It's clear that the ratings from the different game sites and magazines (the mass) differ a lot. It's also clear that the user It's clear that the ratings from the different game sites and magazines (the mass) differ a lot. It's also clear that the user ratings are much higher than the mass gives. In the reviews the game is way too much compared with RTW. Many times is being said that this game isn't as good as RTW (graphically and gameplay) so it automatically gets a low grade. First of all, the graphics are much much better than RTW. Lay two screenshots of both games next to eachother, and you have the proof. Secondly, the gameplay the game has has much more potentional than the mass says. At first it might be a bit boring, but later in the game, when you have access to more things to develop and build, you will understand the true power of this game. Also, the mass says the battles are too slow, while the community more complains that they are too fast and wishes this to be fixed in a patch (I myself don't really care.) So it's better to trust the 9+ the users have given. And of course, this game has playable naval battles, which RTW doesn't have. I would give this game 3 points more than RTW, but unfortunatelly you don't go higher than a 10... If you plan to buy the game, but first want to try the demo, take note that Pyro could have done a much better job on the demo, because it's a tenth as good as the full game!! Expand
  2. TasteeC.
    Mar 18, 2006
    10
    Yes nice game wowy omg neat'o awsome i love it i love playing it.
  3. Vladimir
    May 31, 2005
    10
    I love it. The graphics are great. You've got 3 games in one (management, RTS and naval battles) and it makes me feel like a real I love it. The graphics are great. You've got 3 games in one (management, RTS and naval battles) and it makes me feel like a real general of that age. Great work. Expand
  4. Dec 7, 2015
    9
    Campaign: 10/10

    Real-time battles are nothing out of the ordinary, but the campaign mode is very addicting. Don't let the lack of nations
    Campaign: 10/10

    Real-time battles are nothing out of the ordinary, but the campaign mode is very addicting. Don't let the lack of nations scare you, there are dozens of ways to beat the campaign.
    Expand
  5. LouisP.
    Sep 13, 2005
    8
    A good game to replace cossaks, kinda da same thing if u no what I mean. apart from da graphics and stuff, this games like rome total war, kinda.
  6. DaveF.
    May 23, 2005
    7
    A good attempt to mimic the Total War series and take the concept into the world of Napoleonic firearms and cannons. Whats good about it ? A good attempt to mimic the Total War series and take the concept into the world of Napoleonic firearms and cannons. Whats good about it ? The whole game has a real polished look to it and oozes class. Diplomacy plays a real part and alliances now are more meaningfull than in the TW games where alliances meant little. Sea Battles, a double edged sword this one, its great to see sea battles arrive in a game of this type, but read on for issues. So Whats not good ? Well the stragey map feels like a dumbed down version. There seems to be far less you can do in your provinces, which unlike TW are now just one square on the map. The location of units isnt relative to their postition and the detail is pretty sparse. AI - Sadly lacking in a lot of cases. I saw my heavily defended province attacked by a force a quarter of the size, and the build of the enemy army (4 cannon units and 1 infantry) was laughable as my army decimated them. Interface - feels very clunky and often irritable trying to move units, sometimes you have to hold a unit above a province adjacent to where you want to drop it. Battles - Battles look impressive on the eye. AI is again questionable, I attacked a small army who instead of staying in a fortified position on high gound decided to charge my army that outnumbered them 6 to 1. Slaughter city. Sea Battles- The battles whilst a great idea arent well implemented. If you have 5 shis you have to kep changing from one to the other or they wont fire, in a packed battle the enemy has 5 ships firing at once whilst you clamber between each one firing one shot at a time. Ships often stray off of the "game area" and disappear. Surely the ocean is big enough ? Sea battles are a key selling point of this game and whilst I was looking forward to them they prove to be disappointing, dull and in the end an irritation. Overall this is a good lookng game which is certainly worth a look, but if you are used to the TW series you may well find it lacking in detail. Expand
  7. Grievous
    Jul 17, 2005
    0
    Ano, you talk like you work on Eidos or Pyro. You talk like a member of the development team.

See all 35 User Reviews