Metascore
70

Mixed or average reviews - based on 19 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 19
  2. Negative: 0 out of 19
  1. 60
    Trouble is, your computer opponents verge on comatose.
  2. Despite the steady stream of real historical events, Making History seems strangely outside of history, inhabiting some alternate universe where nations go through the motions, behave erratically or simply do nothing at all. It’s hard to feel immersed in such a situation. And it’s hard to really care.
  3. For those looking for a strategy game that matched the Second World War in intensity then you may wish to look elsewhere as Making History fails to storm the beaches of excitement and in the end is driven back into the sea.
  4. Perhaps my highest compliment is that on a beautiful spring evening, I actually succumbed to the dreaded “one more turn” syndrome. This goes to prove that in a niche market that caters to hardcore stats junkies, Making History is a game every World War strategy fan can enjoy.
  5. The game's complex interface (composed primarily of a series of menus) makes it unapproachable to many people. Its slow pace gets exacerbated by the fact that cities can either produce or research, not both.
  6. A complex strategy game, challenging both for its detailed economy and its various spheres of military operations.
  7. While it's a solid turn-based WWII strategy game, the in-depth tutorial and the rest of the game can be pretty challenging and time consuming.
  8. It won’t make history in the annals of strategy gaming, but Making History is a decent enough diversion for those with an interest in World War II strategy on a global scale.
  9. Making History is an interesting, though dry, turn-based World War II strategy game.
  10. It admirably bridges the gap between deep simulation and enjoyable "just one more turn" gameplay and would be a worthy addition to any strategy fan's game collection.
  11. The gameplay and graphics plus the historical accuracy of the game make this game a good choice for the right kind of gamer.
  12. Anyone who enjoys Risk type board games needs to buy this game. Muzzy Lane has done a wonderful job of designing a game that is entertaining and easy on the eyes.
  13. Making History is a good addition to any turn-based strategy fan's library.
  14. 70
    On the one hand, the Hearts of Iron crowd will find that Making History isn't complex enough. On the other hand, the World at War fans will find that Making History gets bogged down in too many unnecessary details.
  15. Making History may not be the deepest historical epic out there, but it is one of the most playable and a good way to whet your appetite for something more filling. [Aug 2007, p.66]
  16. This game could help give people a better understanding of just how fragile the eco system of war is, giving them a sense of realism that is not found in most other strategy games. Unfortunately it's that same level of realism that might make this game unplayable for other gamers.
  17. A decent bit of strategy, but it's hardly treading new ground. [July 2007, p.84]
  18. Stumbles on its primitive user interface. To play a game with 800 sectors the player would need easier access to information straight from the map. The game renders a detailed picture of the economic model of a state, yet the player is left with few meaningful decisions to make. [June 2007]
  19. Not overly complicated or time-consuming to learn, and it was actually incredibly fun to play. The uncluttered interface and visually pleasing design seems to help reduce the information overload that is often associated with this genre.
User Score
8.5

Generally favorable reviews- based on 51 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 25
  2. Negative: 4 out of 25
  1. Inar
    Mar 25, 2007
    3
    This game manages to appear like a good, well-thought out game at first. In the very early stages you really feel like you're making This game manages to appear like a good, well-thought out game at first. In the very early stages you really feel like you're making your country. It feels unique. However, once a large war breaks out (which WILL happen, they scripted the AI so Germany and Britain will always fight), the game quickly degenerates. When the scale of combat goes up, it becomes a mind-numbingly boring game of "build the bigger army." It doesn't seem to matter what units you use, what tactics you have, what tech level each unit is, every battle boils down to one point: Which side has more pointsin strength. However, it appears that the game sometimes randomly decides to change that up, as once I had a 200 point army against an 80 point army, and the 80 point army won without A SINGLE CASUALTY. The game doesn't give you any reason to work your way up in tech. It also doesn't seem to care if you run out of resources, you just get a minor production penalty. Although I'm sure people would be likely to do more than slow work down if they were STARVING TO DEATH. As for diplomacy, it's basically nonexistant. You start with certain countries liking or disliking you or being indifferent. However, you don't seem to have any way to change that. I tried giving aide, no luck. I tried giving them military access. No luck. Finally, I gave them a province under my control This actually brought the diplomacy level DOWN, as if they disliked me because I gave them land. Units sometimes seem to magically appear, as there is no significant alert towards unguarded areas being captured. This puts larger countries such as the USSR at a large disadvantage. If you are focused on fighting in one area, you may turn around only to realize that half your country has been seized by enemy forces. I would reccomend this game to people who either enjoy clicking the "turn" button repeatedly with no significant reward, or people that enjoy staring at maps for lengthy periods of time. Full Review »
  2. JamesF.
    Jun 19, 2007
    3
    Game is supposedly a WWII game and has absolutely nothing dedicated to WWII.
  3. PhilM.
    Mar 25, 2007
    0
    This game should be, more correctly, called "Making UP History" ... it is really WW2 Risk. The economic system ... doesn't work. The This game should be, more correctly, called "Making UP History" ... it is really WW2 Risk. The economic system ... doesn't work. The diplomatic system ... doesn't work. The military system ... is broken. It might as well be set in Slobbovia, for the level of reality it displays. Full Review »