• Publisher: Sega
  • Release Date: Sep 3, 2013
User Score
4.0

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 3282 Ratings

User score distribution:

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. Sep 8, 2013
    1
    The game is broken. Tons of bugs, very bad AI, the lack of true garrisons in cities is retarded. Just as armies that can only exist and move with general. I recommend buying EU IV or Shogun 2 TW, not this crap.
  2. Sep 8, 2013
    1
    Total War: Rome II does one thing right. It allows you to see which professional reviewers don't play the games they review for any significant amount of time or deliberately lie about their experiences playing them. This game is a hastily thrown together beta, and at least one year of full development away from being playable. The other comments cover the issues in exhaustive detail. Thank god i got to try it before purchasing. For anyone who did purchase it, i recommend asking a refund whenever applicable. Even though Steam policy doesn't support refunds, many European countries legally require a refund option regardless of agreements. For now, it's back to playing the first Rome: TW, with mods of course. Expand
  3. Sep 6, 2013
    1
    A game sold in beta-state. Optimization is awfull. In battle units move waaaaay to fast. AI is dumb. A lots of good features that made the TW series good were removed. Where the hell is my family tree?
  4. Sep 5, 2013
    3
    This game is basically CA lying to us players during all development stage. First of all, they released the "pre-alpha" gameplay footage and said the game would look even better than that. First lie. The game doesn't look like that not even on the strongest PCs. They also kept emphasizing the entire video that they were going for a darker feel of war. What we get is almost a capture the flag, and a bunch of special abilities (known as magical abilities). More of an arcade feel of war.

    There was a video where they talked about the phalanx and said the units would try to keep formation over anything. This is also a joke, since they break the phalanx in a few seconds of combat. Actually, if there is something they DON'T do is keep formation during combat.

    In another video, they said the AI has greatly improved. The AI keeps doing suicidal attacks on the cities during the campaing. I also played a custom siege battle where I was defending a city, and the AI sent some troops and then just stood with 90% of the army doing nothing, so I had to quit the game. You don't need any tactics to win the battles, just charge everyone (maybe use some of the magical abilities if you want) and the opponent will break in less than a minute and you will win the battle, killing 700 troops and losing 70. Even on legendary the AI is not a real challenge.

    They said they were going to have a more complex tech tree than the one from Shogun 2, with 6 different branches. They do have 6 different branches, but surprisingly, the one from Shogun 2 is much more diversified and useful. On Rome 2, you have lots of useless tech tree that grants for example (+2% wealth from agriculture, -2% agriculture construction costs) and the next level exactly the same, but instead, with a 4% bonus. Shogun's tech tree was a lot more creative! It's a stepback.

    Yet another thing they said, was that the interaction and intrigues between the roman houses would improve. You would get to the point where you could chose between overthrown the republic or be it's savior. This time you choose your faction, but you even control generals from the other houses and you already begin the game with full control over Rome. There is hardly even a senate. So what's the point of having a civil war at some point of the game if I already control all Rome? Why should I care? Also, there is not even a family tree anymore, to further ruin the immersion.

    By the way, the new recruitment system doesn't makes sense and just doesn't work well. You cannot recruit troops in cities anymore, unless you have a general inside the city, and you have a very limited amount of generals to recruit. So there are many cities you would like to guard, but you can only count on the city garrison. Also, you cannot send troops from an army to another, because they can't travel alone, so, you gotta get both generals close enough to exchange troops.

    I think they focused to much in small details like giving the soldiers facial expressions when someone dies next to him and they forgot to focus on the gameplay itself. By the way, we can't even notice if they actually added the facial expressions to the game because the combat is just a blob of troops and they actually hide some nice animations that gets hard to notice.

    I'll stop here, but those are not the only bad things about the game. It's still pretty much a beta version, and I don't think that many of the bad things about the game are patchable. They can patch the AI, the graphics, the animations, but for the content, I guess we'll have to wait for mods. They said over and over again that it was going to be the best total war game ever. They created a huge hype over it. They set our expectations extremely high. I bought it on pre-sale, and it wasn't cheap. I feel really disrespected.
    Expand
  5. Sep 5, 2013
    1
    AI is horrible. A huge amount of bugs. I hope there wil be hope with future patches and modding or else i will probably be done with that company. they should have invested in beta testing because this is like alpha version.
  6. Sep 6, 2013
    1
    rome total war 2 is like windows vista. It needs patching (and promises will be made) but mostly people will have much lower expectations when next game in series will be released.
  7. Sep 6, 2013
    1
    lag, bad optimization, idiot AI, suck graphic etc... what happen CA?? and when release fix patch? this game beta version?? in the history of Total war series very horrible
  8. Sep 6, 2013
    1
    As a long time follower and enthusiast of Total War serie, i must admit that this is the worst "thing" i have ever seen. The devs had a splendid opportunity to make ROME 1 better....they instead were only able to destroy its glory. Cons: - Sci-fi UI, without ANY sort of differences between cultures (No Immersion, it's all like controlling from your speaceship...), and way too many abstract subslidingmenus.

    - No Family tree, no story to create, and in the end all armies will be the same.

    - 3 minutes battles???????

    - Capture the flag???????

    - Brain Dead AI???????

    - i don't enumerate all the technical bugs and glitches...there are too many and in every aspect of the game.....

    - this game lacks any "spirit" and any real challenge, you can actually see online casual players burning through Legendary difficulty like hot knife in butter.......

    CONGRATS CA AND SEGA, you were able to utterly destroy and annihilate one of the Glories in PC gaming history.

    I fear this is my last Total War.
    Expand
  9. Sep 6, 2013
    1
    In past times, when you buy game, that is that. You know what you get for your money. Today, every game must release patch in 2 week period. What that tell us? They build games for profit now, not for the gamers. They all have sweet advertising, buy our game it is the best. This game just sucks. I have monster pc, but i cant play it on high, frps drops everywhere, even on campaign map, the longest battle was 6 min, that is just funny and not good. You cant have trade agreement with no one, even if you are "same blood" people. Maybe some people dont have problems with graphics, but everyone have problems with in-game setup. People who say this is good game simply lie, maybe they are paid from SEGA to talk such lies, but core of the problem is simply this game isnt FINISH Expand
  10. Sep 6, 2013
    1
    I really looked forwards to the release of the Rome 2 Total War game which promised a great experience, new features and a challenging game. However, what I discovered was instead a really unstable game that crashes several times, a stupid AI, many bugs like ships going through land or the AI simply standing around, soldiers that can't leave their boats, land invasions that cannot be made because a ship is blocking their port (WTF?), etc. etc. etc.. To me it seems that all their promises with this game were not held, and for this a think a bad review is in place. Expand
  11. Sep 6, 2013
    1
    I've been a supporter of the TW franchise since it's inception, and this installment has been the biggest disappointment of the series.

    It seems, like so many other companies making games these days, that all the development money was spent on nice looking trailers and PR to hype the game, and the actual game was ignored. It plays like an alpha stage game. The battles are messy, the
    amount of bugs is ridiculous. The user interface is awful, I have a hard time understanding how some people enjoy this game. First Rome has much better gameplay. Expand
  12. Sep 6, 2013
    1
    When will gamers learn? There have been dozens of huge disappointments just like this (SimCity comes to mind recently on PC) yet you people keep buying them. This is a terrible, glitch riddled, derivative game, released WAY WAY too early.

    The only way to change this horrible trend in the industry is to STOP BUYING THE GAMES.
  13. Sep 5, 2013
    1
    As someone that is following TW franchise from first release, i was unpleasantly surprised with RTW2. Past experience with Warscape engine sent clear warning many times. I guess i believed that they can't let their biggest title fail in such a horrible way. Rome Total war was a game that allowed them to expand and experiment with rest of sequels. MTW2 followed that line on great level and combined with mods its one of the best games ever.

    Problems started with Warscape engine. Empire Total War. There is no need to talk about this product. It was a clear example how not to make an rts. Warscape is probably one of the most unfinished and strategy unfriendly engines ever. It was bad presenting gunpowder units but much worst in melee combat.

    After few more titles released in the last couple of years, they managed to pull the best of this software. It was far away from perfect, but Napoleon and Shogun were much better. They mastered the look of campaign map. New role-play elements with Generals and agents were welcomed by all fans.

    In all Warscape titles, one thing was heavily missing to make those games worthy successor of RTW or MTW2. Battles. From the very start, its was clear that this engine cannot produce interesting and fun battles. Not on the level that previous one could. Not even close. Every melee battle looked like hooligan street fighting after a very bad derby. No tactics. No Strategy. Just a mess with a lot of movement and different colors.

    What CA did is that instead of working on new engine, they decided to build Ancient RTS on engine that doesn't support melee combat and strategy at all. Complex formations like Phalanx or Cohort pilum attack that were made 10 years ago now don't exist. This software simply can't follow ancient warfare. Basic rts elements like "guard mode" are erased from game. There is no flanking with cavalry cause flanks don't exist no more. Everything is over in a 3 minutes.

    I will not even enter into bug/crashed/freezes subjects. They exist, and game is far way from finished.

    Once again, CA repeated same story. They exploit warscape so many times with different set of models and textures that they didn't feel any guilt to do this again. They perfectly calculated that investing in marketing branch and recycling the old stuff cost much less that building new engine. Then, as always before every major release, Laurel and Hardy shows their funny faces, hyping you to death with fake images and gameplay shots. Material that's always somehow deleted from official game cause it didn't fit. They are actually presenting that as they did a favor to fans cause it would hurt gamplay or make game unstable, bugged....

    Total War Rome 2 is a school example of false advertising and CA fraud.

    After this one, I just hope that the franchise is done and they're finally done milking the title that made them great many years ago.

    Rating 1 Just because campaign map still looks beautiful
    Expand
  14. Sep 4, 2013
    1
    The new studio has ruined this game.

    -Graphics: I have a newly updated gfx card and good system that I can run every other game on highest settings like Grid 2, however in Rome 2 I get 20fps, seriously? This may be worth it if the gfx were good but the textures and gfx are horrible. Each unit is unique which isn't worth the sacrifice. The world map is also horrible I have no idea why it
    looks so bad compared to games like Crusader Kings 2 or EU4.

    -The voicing and character models is bad

    -AI and such is the same as always, so is gameplay.

    Sadly it is just the graphical performance that makes this game completely unplayable. Another new studio has ruined a good franchise they are just using the name to get sales
    Expand
  15. Sep 4, 2013
    1
    I wanted to like it but in this state I cant. I cant beiieve the differnce in scores of the pro reviewers and the fans such broad spread you know something is up when all the pro reviewers think so much of a game. wonder how much they got paid on prop up one of those streamlined games as such. I had two crashes and I've never had crash problems before with any game. I actually after a short session wanted to play something else like The Sims 3 how terrible. I even thought of playing the origional RTW but remembered how bad the ai was in that one and all the rest up to Shogun 2. I'd play Shogun 2 but I don't like asian games that much, but I do like challenge so I'd play SPARTAN or SACRIFICE. This one didn't make my interested list though I wanted it to so bad. Needs lots of work. Collapse
  16. dup
    Sep 5, 2013
    1
    This is not Total War this is Total Failure.
    To start with the most obvious: turn time takes FOREVER. You make your turn in 20 seconds and then have to wait for almost a minute until you can play again. And during the wait time you can just do nothing. You can not check you settlements or fill production queues. And my PC is well equipped and plays almost every game perfectly. The next
    big thing is the AI. It is not just total stupid, but simply non-existing. Both on the world map, but foremost in the battles. Horse archers dismounting their horses and charging you walls equipped with bowmen?? This is too bad to be just stupid. Another thing is the lack of immersion. You do not get the feeling that any of your choices matters in some way. Somehow things are not well stitched together. More related things are: bad user interface, totally mis-formatted in-game help, and a general lack of polishing.
    Related to the previous games this is not a step backwards, but it is just an incomplete game full of bugs which totally misses the point of grand strategy. Rather play Empire, Shogun 2 or Rome 1 you will actually have fun with theses game.
    Without the bugs and playable game turns I would give it a 6/10 but like this the game is almost junk.
    Expand
  17. Sep 5, 2013
    1
    This game is a complete disappointment. You can try to ignore the fact that the game has several serious technical issues (no crossfire/SLI support, occasionally crashes, extremely long load times). You cannot however ignore the fact that the game play is completely lacking: extremely dumb AI, no sieges (cities can simply be assaulted and taken instantly), 500 units that are mostly copies of each other, bad music, and a horrible UI.

    It is pretty. But pretty will only get you so far.

    DO NOT BUY THIS GAME UNTIL THEY FIX IT. This is a beta release for money. Don't let them fool you, and don't buy what they professional critics are saying. No idea what game these guy played, but it wasn't this one.
    Expand
  18. Sep 5, 2013
    1
    Having been a dedicated fan of the Total War series since 2006, starting off with the original Rome, this is likely to be where I leave the series that I used to love more than any other game. Up to Napoleon, every game felt like an improved experience.
    Every title was unique, and enjoyable at the very least. Shogun 2 became my first disappointment, the battle pace did not feel
    comfortable (after 1000+ hours of multiplayer), although they did nail many other nice features in the game.

    I can hardly see how some other players have given such a positive feedback on the game that was meant to be the sequel to the original Rome let alone how 'professional' reviewers could choose to ignore to mention so many flaws to the customers. Rome 2 has one of the best campaigns in the game although many features are dumbed down far too much. When it comes to the core of the series that is the battles, the story is very different.
    Going from the disappointing battles to Shogun 2 to this was shocking the average battle lasts 3, sometimes 4 minutes. Battles with 5000 men on each side are over within 5. The tactical depth is no longer present, and the battles feel more pointless than ever before. They are nothing worth to play.
    Expand
  19. Sep 5, 2013
    1
    Please, please DO NOT buy this game if you are a TW fan! As a TW fan from the beginning Rome 2 has come as a complete disappointment to me (and a waste of £30 that I could have made much better use of). Setting aside the release bugs the game's real problems rest deeper within the battle and campaign AI. CA for some reason have decided to remove nearly all of the tactics, management and strategy aspects that gave depth and a long-term challenge to older TW games.

    Battles:
    Battles have degenerated into an arcade-like tic-tac-toe competition with no apparent impact from terrain or tactical positioning. They nearly always degenerate into a mass melee around the newly added 'capture points' in themselves one of the daftest inclusions to a strategy game, as they are placed completely without consideration to the terrain. The AI is woeful and the biggest attraction of the TW series its battles and your ability to snatch victory from defeat by intelligent generalship has now become its biggest downfall, as you watch yet another mass brawl erupt in the middle of the battle-field, where your input has little to no effect on the outcome.

    Campaign:
    Although some of the new features of Rome 2 are welcome agents are now much more interesting and some of the city management is a lot more streamlined the overall campaign is now both massively over-simplified. Many of the ability to manage the details of your cities are now gone and city management has been so pared down that you just don't feel engaged with what is going on, or able to act decisively to effect a change when a problem arises. The AI opponents are largely passive and are ridiculously easy to defeat (even on the most difficult setting). At the same time the multitude of minor factions mean that you wait for ages at the end of each turn for the computer to process their actions (I resorted to reading a book while waiting).

    In sum I cannot believe the same company that gave us the first Medieval and Rome Total Wars can in all good conscience release this game. After around 4 hours of play I realised that it wasn't getting any better, gave up and returned to Medieval 2. I doubt that I will play Rome 2 again, as there is only so much the independent modding scene can do to improve it (you can't polish a turd!!). In all honesty I therefore cannot give Rome 2 a score of more than 1/10. There are some good points nestled in there among the bad, but the game as a whole is a massive step backwards and represents a missed opportunity for CA.
    Expand
  20. Sep 5, 2013
    1
    No SLI/Crossfire support at release. It's 2013; catch a clue game developers. Make games that support multiple GPUs and can support more than one core of a CPU.
  21. Sep 5, 2013
    1
    Do not buy this product. It is unfinished, and is simply a re-skinning of a game that launched many, many years ago. The bugs and issues with the old game (Rome 1) have not been fixed some of them have actually gotten worse!

    This was an over-hyped product that was never finished, properly tested, or suitable for release. Perhaps a year from now it might be worth looking at again.
  22. Sep 5, 2013
    3
    Well where do I begin? Its hard to put my utter dissapointment into words here really! Have been playing the TW Series since Shogun all those moons ago and have been playing games much to my wifes disgust since 86. I LOVE my games! And nowadays consider myself to be more picky about where I spend my money, so RTW2 was seen by myself as an essential purchase, more fool me, shame on me to be honest!

    The game is very good looking yes and unlike many I have no issues running it, it LOOKS good! But its sooo shallow, like a swan on water it looks graceful and beautiful but under the water is paddling away like mad and far from graceful!! I like strategy games, the campaign is NEVER going to deliver depth, that I know and have come to expect from a Total War game (I play a Paradox game for that great experience!!), I play a Total War game for the battles and here lies the issue, after years you would think they would improve the AI with every release not make it worse??? But this is just a mess! Capture Flags? No use of the battlefield? No Tactics? Blobs? Mechanized infantry (30 mph I reckon!)? Suicidal AI? WHO was testing this? Seriously, WHO? It defies belief!!! I am or was a CA fan! No longer.

    I await mods which I pray salvages my spent pennies, but no longer am I to be fooled again, once a mistake, twice just makes me stupid! I drive past their HQ most days on the way to work, I would love to have a constructive conversation (dreaming! lol!) about just what happened here! Can only think that the original CA team has changed over the years, its a damn, damn shame and gutting! But the sad part is that the money will be made and therefore deemed a success, money is what talks, pure undeniable fact, so all the "noise" will be unfortunately lost in the wind of the money blowing past to SEGA and CA's doors.

    DO NOT BUY NOW! Wait if you eventually must line their pockets till at least December when modders who wont see a penny of your cash help you potentially love this game.
    Expand
  23. Sep 5, 2013
    1
    Total War is my favorite games series. Not just strategy games, but in all of gaming. However, with the release of Rome 2 I realized I paid $60 for a game that isn't finished. This is just unacceptable.
  24. Sep 15, 2013
    1
    Dear customers, you've been brainwashed by the marketing team.At least they're doing their job properly ...but we know its Rome Total MESS !!
    Two steps backwards for the Total War franchise and a well orchestrated PR campaign releasing a broken product that is not fit for purpose like ..robbing people? CA you should be ashamed Not only they have removed features for no other reason than
    to attempt a horrid console cashgrab, but the features that DO remain have been completely dumbed down, broken and ruined.How can you mark a game so highly when its literally a broken game that's unfinished as well as missing all of the series features?How? Expand
  25. Sep 7, 2013
    1
    Developers need to remember that gameplay is the most important thing in a game. The graphics are only cool if they improve an already fun game. They don't make a game fun by themselves. No one will care about the graphics if they are too bored to ever star the game. Get it?
  26. Sep 7, 2013
    1
    Having had this game since release I have only been able to clock up around 5 hours of play time according to Steam (and I suspect much of this has been time spent fiddling in options menus in an attempt to make the game playable). In this time I have established several things:

    Firstly, the graphics are absolutely jaw-droppingly awful. If you haven't seen the regiments of low-res
    potatoes in the game's community hub on steam then I suggest that you do so before you even considering purchasing this game. I don't know how it managed it, but I'm convinced that Medieval 2 looked better than this, let alone Empire or Shogun. The game is horribly optimised and only seems to recognise one of the cores in my processor, leading to extremely high temperatures and an unbearable amount of fan noise, and though my machine is a good deal more powerful than it needs to be to run Rome 2 at a high level the game lags horribly even in the campaign map. Bizarrely, the actual battles tend to run more smoothly though it tends to descend to a conflict between a few hundred sprites on glitchy black patches of terrain before long. In the graphics and presentation stakes, then, Rome 2 gets an absolute panning.

    Secondly, the actual meat of the game is simplistic and fails to engage the interest of the player. Campaign decisions are far inferior to previous iterations of the franchise and the sense of developing one's own cities has been removed with the strange decision to massively simplify the whole process. The fact that there are so many tiny factions plays havoc with diplomacy (the faction lists are just too long to sift through and relationships with neighbouring states will tend to be short) especially given that they persist even when they don't own any cities (armies belonging to a faction without any territory still count as a faction) which leaves the campaign map cluttered and frustrating, especially since the number of armies that the player controls is capped; you will spend a great deal of time simply chasing these around your territory.

    Another major problem with the campaign is the lack of focus on naval warfare (it simply isn't worth it) and the fact that you will find yourself autoresolving battles a good 90% of the time. In one campaign as Athens I conquered the entirety of Greece and Turkey without once having any kind of evenly matched pitched battle before becoming bored and giving up. There is nothing about the campaign that is compelling.

    Lastly, the AI is appalling in both the tactical and strategic portions of the game. Battles are easily won against overwhelming odds in the tactical sphere (all custom battles since the campaign gives very few opportunities for this) due to poor decision making and incredible gullibility on the part of AI generals (ok, its a Total War game; I didn't expect any less) and this cheapens any kind of strategic planning that you might employ in the campaign. Worse, from the strategic standpoint the AI does crazy things like retreating its army stacks away from its last city as my army approached (allowing me to easily capture the city with no resistance and to then confront the remnants one by one), or simply walking away from the contested area completely and not even attempting to put up a fight. This completely kills any kind of immersion you might have in the game when combined with the graphics and framerate issues that so many people are experiencing.

    For its broad ambition being its only redeeming feature, I give this game a 1.
    Expand
  27. Sep 7, 2013
    1
    The worse battles in any tw series. They added magic special buffs to this game, you click a button and magi adds morale or takes away fatigue, makes unit better at x and o etc. The game is just a click fest and even the largest battles are over in 2-3 minutes. units run around like gazelle,no strategy,no fun.
  28. Sep 7, 2013
    1
    I can't believe a company with Creative Assembly's history and pedigree and resources could sell me a $60 game so technically sloppy, so unfocused, so uninspired. Rome I was a brilliant game. Way to celebrate that feat by publishing this junk.
  29. Sep 7, 2013
    1
    If you are expecting this to be like the previous CA games MTW2 or even RTW1, then do not purchase this game as it is totally different using none of the great features that were used in these games.
    The number of factions they have is good, but that's about it for me on this game.

    Very poor, I for one will never ever pre-order a CA game again.
  30. Sep 10, 2013
    1
    eheheh reviews average score: 8.1
    user average score: 4.0
    I hope this is the final word on the "are official reviewers biased or are they not" issue.
    Rome total war 2 on release is unplayable, simple as that. I am using a 2.7ghz dual core, 4gb ram and 1gb video card (specified RECOMENDED requirements on the box, not minimum) at medium graphics (options are from low to ultra high,
    medium is 2/5). Loading times are unbearable. Whole thing is glitchy as hell, on this same rig I could play Shogun 2 at decent graphics and reasonable loading times.
    Really, do they test this stuff before release, or do they think we all have a 2000$ last gen pc?
    So, not able to judge game (the few things I saw are nothing special compared to previous iterations) since it is literally unplayable.
    Needless to say I play total war series since shogun 1..oh well I guess I'll have to find a better job so I can afford a rig that can run RTW2.
    I'll give it a 1 because of the latin quote at the end of the cool (but nothing special) intro
    Expand
  31. Sep 12, 2013
    1
    I am glad i dodged this POS. If only people could think for themselves, millions of other players would have avoided being burned by Rome 2. Months before launch i was the only one saying on youtube videos "hey, are you seriously going to leave the UI like that? Its horrific, look at all the grey space and the unit cards, how could this get out of beta?" "the graphics look muddy"
    "are you sure you aren't spending too much time building big cities and too little on the actual game?"

    I was flamed by the fanboys, who seem to be incapable of engaging their brain to critically assess what they see in promo vids.

    I got my first clue Rome would be a POS when i logged into Shogun 2 about 6 months after purchase to find i only owned about 1/3rd of the total number of units, and i would have to pay almost the price of a completely new game to acquire the rest. This tickled my spider sense that CA were on the scam and i have been critically assessing their movements since. Inviting "Heir of Carthage" into the offices to do a pseudo review of the game sure to be positive as Heir is flattered by being exclusively invited was another tell that CA have lost their heart and soul and have turned full on to corporate snide tactics for taking as much money from the pockets of their subscribers as possible.

    Rome 2 is worse than even i expected though. I didn't expect for a minute that they would completely remove all of the multiplayer depth that made Shogun 2 a progressive step forward, i thought it would be a given that avatars and veterans would be part and parcel of the Rome 2 multiplayer. I was wrong.

    In all, Rome 2 is a worrying release because it has risen questions of CA's competency. This is a company known for making great RTS games, but in this latest iteration, there is no sign of that wealth of experience. Little things like the UI having huge & incoherent unit cards, the map being placed at the bottom of the screen where it blocks units instead of the top where it only blocks the sky, the failure to recognise what a good think they had with Shogun 2's multiplayer.. These things all lead me to believe that the current CA dev team are a bunch of johnny-come-latelys who have no idea about even the most fundamental aspects of RTS games.

    Avoid.
    Expand
  32. Sep 14, 2013
    1
    Dear oh dear oh dear. What a complete shambles. It's not that there are bugs in this game; sadly that's par for the course these days. It's not that the turn ends take far too long; in fact, everything takes far too long, for too little benefit. It's not even that it's lost a lot of the attractive features of previous games in the series in the name of streamlining; change has to happen and that's fair enough. It's that the end result is a complete, unplayable, mess.

    Bad AI? Check. Poor performance? Check. Dire documentation? Check. Poorly designed new features? Check. Lack of balance? Check. Lack of usability? Check. This game is a textbook example of how NOT to design a game. That they took such a good series and somehow turned it into this deserves some sort of award. Preferably the sort that involved unemployment.

    Don't bother buying it now; wait a couple of months and you'll find it in the bargain basement at $5, which frankly would still be overpriced.
    Expand
  33. Sep 7, 2013
    1
    I wanted to enjoy this game, but i couldn't. This game has so many problems, i'm thinking they didn't even test this game before release. First problem is the AI, horribly programmed, doesn't attack and it can't defend worth sh*t Second problem: The units you're controlling cant stay in a f*ckin formation. Overall this game feels like a beta, not worth full price..if they want a 10/10 they would have to wake up and come out with a HUGE patch..but they probably wont, they robbed us. Expand
  34. Sep 5, 2013
    1
    Pre-ordered this game for a pretty penny hoping to get an improved Shogun but lo and behold we got a watered down piece of and soon to be console RTS. At least that would explain why they took all of the depth from the campaign map/city management and left battles a simple matter of auto resolving every battle like a preschool version of Europa Universalis. On the rare occasion that you have to join the battle you'll have the pleasure of routing the enemy without so much as moving an inch if you have any artillery because they won't move either! No artillery to be found? I'm sure right clicking the enemy once for victory with your infantry or calvary is going to keep you busy forever!

    Sad that they throw away the goodwill of their hardcore fans who have bought title after title with this dribble. Save your money pc, and inevitably, Xbox and PS owners.
    Expand
  35. Sep 5, 2013
    1
    for ITALIAN users, and even the SPANISH ones: SEGA or CREATIVE ASSEMBLY have cheated us by writing on the packaging and on STEAM (except the change made on September 3 after its release) that the game would be "COMPLETELY IN ITALIAN" or "FULLY iN SPANISH "in breach of Article 20 of Legislative Decree 206/2005 which speaks of false advertising that is" any advertising which in any way, including its presentation, is likely to mislead the natural or legal persons to whom it is addressed or whom it reaches and which, because of its deceptive nature, is likely to affect their economic behavior or which, for this reason, it is likely to injure a competitor so if CA will not solve the issue, it will be resolved by a judge. Expand
  36. Sep 5, 2013
    1
    Horrible AI

    Sluggish graphics

    Poorly optimized

    Lacks any of the soul of other Total War games.

    An abysmal launch that is characteristic of Creative Assembly.

    Paid reviewers got paid to give this game high marks. The average joe who had to spend $60.00 on this got taken advantage of. Avoid at all costs!
  37. Sep 8, 2013
    1
    Truly dreadful game, it's as if no-one ever play-tested it. It plays like game written by some third rate company, trying to make a Total War clone, but running out of money half way through and just dumping it on the market unfinished.
  38. Sep 8, 2013
    1
    Tested on i7 2600, GTX 770, 16gb RAM on HIGH and EXTREME graphics quality:

    - Graphics are horrible, the Anti alaising is completely messed up (Empire TW looks better... seriously)
    - AI is not reliable, often attacks an army of 16 units with only 1 unit on campaign map and just stands around until you get closer in real time mode
    - FPS drops are common, triggered i.e. by pressing
    spacebar during combat
    - Multiplayer Campaign unplayable, processing the moves of the AI factions takes around 3min EACH turn
    - UI is confusing, the art style is appealing but gets in the way of things

    I'm sick of beta testing games that I paid 50€ for. No for Sega until patched properly!
    Expand
  39. Sep 9, 2013
    1
    Has so much potential,
    But AI is everything in the end.
    Got bored on my first campaign try, AI just sits pretty and takes it up the A.
    I still play Rome 1, guess I should do campaign number 500 on that one.
    Vote this down to stop them from destroying this great series with similar future releases.
  40. Sep 9, 2013
    1
    I don't know why people give good reviews. There is no depth in gaming experience. After a couple hours of playing its bored. My views are: Good: - nice campaign map, many factions - province system is better - good music Negatives: - Terrible campaign and battle AI, but that is fixable - no family tree and seasons; characters are quiekly dead (after 30 turns) and you have no feeling with a person, there are not enough marriages. When I play with pontus Mithridates is soon dead and there is no heir, strange in the Mithridates dynasty Is the same with other dynasties. The gravitas is not a additional value but a step backwards.
    - the army system, when a army is demolised you can recruit the same army again included the positive traits and good troops. It's more spamming of armys then a good gaming experience
    - the flags in open battles, but that it's fixable
    - the fast battles, avergae 5 minutes 1 minute active battles and 4 minutes when the troops met each other

    I hope that Sega or CA listen to this views, its also on the forums. Roma total war 2 has potentialin the future but in this form its boring to play.
    Expand
  41. Sep 9, 2013
    1
    The worst gaming purchase I've ever made. Besides terrible beta state, fails to reach the bar raised by its predecessors in the art direction, music, and mechanics. It's lame AI, coupled with a purposedly dumbed down UI and city management (for console testing), linear gameplay and poor multiplayer makes this an incredible disappointing experience.
  42. Sep 9, 2013
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A complete and utter disappointment after 35 hours play (i.e. the equivalent of a working week)

    The good: Interesting province idea, big map, many factions, the new stance system works ok.

    The not so good: Awful AI, boring graphics (not like the trailers), unit types play the same, family tree removed and marriage options not properly implemented, over-powered free transport ships, flawed and limited tech and build trees, implementation of the province vs city idea is abysmal (you can build a maximum of five buildings in Rome), battles resemble the WWE Royal Rumbles but with more garish costumes, different agent action types pointless, generals die after 20 turns, no seasons or winter weather, random attrition travelling on the map, no roads, no buildable walls or defenses in towns, HORRIBLE UI, units have magic powers that can be spammed indefinitely (but can't they stay in formation), formation movement buttons removed from battle map, Varus give me back my guard button, legionary fire at will button and defensive pilum removed, testudo doesn't work, phalanx formation for the Greeks doesn't work, units run at 40mph, battles over in 4 minutes (big ones), few videos in game those that appear are random, random politics and events outside of the player's influence, co-op campaign doesn't work, diplomacy doesn't work, single player campaign doesn't work no one will attack you even on hard very hard, over simplified and boring economic system, slow-opening encyclopedia (web pages load faster), poorly implemented mouse over information, poorly implemented general system reduces you to few big armies but the AI pointlessly throws a multitude of tiny armies at your cities, horrible massive unit cards, unattractive icons and unit card images, lacks the historic polish and informational depth of the previous games .

    Apparently many people are also experiencing technical issues. Doesn't support SLI (or Crossfire so I've read) either.

    I could go on. I really wish I hadn't pre-ordered this game. I know people who took time off work to play this this week. Creative Labs, EA, Sega Shame on you.
    Expand
  43. Sep 9, 2013
    1
    Rome 2 is actually not a bad game for casual young player. But for me as dedicated player of the Total War series this is the greatest disappointment in gaming history. Graphics are nice, but gameplay lacks heart and soul. I would never thought I will write negative review for Rome 2. If this game was named differently and was not released by CA, I would rate it probably 5/10. But I consider it also the biggest scam. 60$ for this is simply too much. Replayability is at zero Expand
  44. Sep 10, 2013
    1
    Low fps, texture issues( black spots, and texture popping on the campaign map and battle map), bad AI way to passive one the campaign map, and just poorly coded, poor optimazation (shogun 2 was way better optimized), battles last like 2 or 3 minutes, they turn in huge blobs with no strategy needed, bad path finding, now for some reason routing enemys canot be runed down and be killed, there is no family tree, the different houses for Rome and Chartage make no inpackt on gameplay, the internal politicks system makes absolutely no inpackt on gameply i completely ignored it in my campagne, and nothing happened, in terms of some penalties or riots, i thought it will come to a civil war or something. Turns now last a year, making genearls die like flys, coop does not work, and crashes..............and much more what has been said here, and on the forums.

    The pre pre pre-alpha of the Cartage siege looks supperior to this!
    Expand
  45. Sep 10, 2013
    1
    First of all, cannot really run the game, downloaded patches but still terrible animations and FPS quality.
    Also the features in the game are poor, like squalor levels that really ruin your game play experience. also flaming torches that make rams and ladders pointless. Not a fun game, until future patches sort things out.
  46. Sep 10, 2013
    1
    I am fan of the TW series at heart. For my credentials as a critic, I currently have over 100 hours in game, have beaten a campaign, and am one of the top of the leaderboards in multiplayers (Xtreme Chaos).

    Rome 2 feels entirely dumbed down when compared to the previous title, Shogun 2. The terrible campaign&battle AI, the lack of unit customization, the lack of general customization,
    banners, etc.

    Shogun 2 took the series two steps forward. Then Rome 2 came and took three steps back. While the graphics may have improved visually, there are still many many bugs and graphics related issues like water floating a battlefield etc. that it makes the game feel unfinished and untested.

    I would have been more than happy to volunteer my time and test this game for free so that the game could be passable on release, but CA and SEGA didn't feel like quality took a priority to advertising.

    Lastly, the moderating on their online forums are terrible. They cherrypick what threads do or do not stay, they keep horrendous and troll praisers yet they delete and ban valid criticisms. I'm looking at you, Sasu.
    Expand
  47. Sep 10, 2013
    1
    Huge step back =( Played this game 10 hours looking for the promised experience, but it lacks strategy, depth and is bugged as hell. Here the things that bothers me the most: - family trees removed no connection to my nation - passive campaign AI - too easy, too fast and too acardish battles with lack of strategy - UI is horrible (why didn´t they just copy the perfect Shogun II ???)
    - the sound is boring compared to the other TW Games
    - bugs everywhere

    This game really feels like a beta!!!

    I do like the campaign graphic and it´s maybe the best TW game to start with, if you are new to the series, but TW veterans will be disappointed.
    Expand
  48. Sep 10, 2013
    1
    Look, It's time for gamers to realize that some companys are trying to fu## us. I'm tired of it, 40% bigger budget my A##. Crappy AI, and a total downgrade to the past entrys in the franchise. I really am wondering if the critics actually tested the game or watched a trailer. This game has so much potential, but this is completely unacceptable. I actually gave this game a 1/10 because I remember the good days that made this my favorite strategy franchise. Please. stand up for gamers. Don't buy this game it is stripped down and not worth it. Expand
  49. Sep 10, 2013
    1
    I waited 9 years for this game. I pre-ordered the CE. I wanted to love this game. But after several hours of single player game play and several failures at Co-op; I just stopped playing. Maybe it will be playable in a month or two.
  50. Sep 11, 2013
    1
    Hey Shprax this is not about gaming Rigs. I do have an I7 core gaming rig with dual video cards on SLI, 32 megs of ram and a 64 bit OS. Which does nothing to enhance a mediocre game. Only 36 critics and 494 reviewers gave somewhat positive reviews. That's 530 people out of 1716 reviews. That's is 70% of true gamers that voiced their opinions for a faulty game that they truly care about. Maybe you got the game version that the critics got along with some perks. out of curiosity.Do you work for CA?? Expand
  51. Sep 12, 2013
    1
    Just terrible. To purchase a full price game, pre-ordered I may add, and it's clearly a beta test that other's will benefit from our testing by buying it at half price 6 months away.

    The AI is bad. The FPS issues and graphics incompatibility issues (With a high end pc and gpu) are just ridiculous. The worst game release of the decade. Still not fixed!
  52. Sep 12, 2013
    1
    My God, where do you begin with this game? Awful performance, dreadful AI, poorly balanced units and broken features.

    I feel like a complete fool for pre-ordering this.
  53. Nov 22, 2013
    1
    I really would not trust these high reviews that are coming up now praising CA for patching the game and "fixing it" in their eyes. Most of these people are just advertising blood and gore ("oh my blood and gore dlc is so amazing it makes the game so fun") really? like do you have family at CA or what? Give me a break. And no they did not give us "a bunch of free dlc" like some of these phoney reviews are pointing out to. What... some uninteresting factions that were cut from the original game is somehow supposed to win me over now? Of course they couldn't sell it as DLC they would just look like a bunch of morons like they are for marketing the blood and gore pack and then having the audacity to call that Patch 6. lol, oh and the state of the game you might ask? Again don't believe these fraudulent reviewers that have been attempting to raise the score. The game is still poorly optimized for high end machines and patch 7 has gone live. (I have AMD FX 8350 8 core, GeForce GTX 670 and 8 GB ram and the campaign map is still stuttering very noticeably, aka low frame rates). The UI is as ugly as it was at release (the pre-alpha looking ui), the trivial design decisions are still in the game armies cannot be merged as effectively (general has to be in an army), armies can instantly turn into ships, no seasons and 1 turn per year, broken politics system that has no use replacing the family tree, ai is still horrible and lackluster (still much worse than previous entries) after CA has attempted to patch it, battles are still very non-strategic (capture the flag, broken siege battles, broken formations and on and on), truthfully the game is so painfully broken compared to shogun 2 that I actually don't even have the urge to engage in battles let alone even play past several turns (I always go back after patches hoping it might be the one to at least fix some problems but I've been disappointed for over 2 months now). The game is not even in a beta state, now going on 3 months after release, CA has completely sold out and basically robbed us of our money, people telling you otherwise are flat out lying or are completely unaware or ignorant of what constitutes quality. I've poured over 500 hours into Shogun 2 and that was the pinnacle of the total war series. Rome 2 still does not even come close. I'm being as honest as I can after having my heart broken (this was my most anticipated game of the year). Expand
  54. Sep 4, 2013
    3
    After my senses came down from the inital hype of this game, I came to write this off as Terrible. This is why:
    -Terrible UI: Both within the campaign map and battle screens, the UI is simply too complex to easily understand and remember. I handled RTW1's UI within seconds of playing it. No such luck in RTW2; buttons are randomly placed, look alike, and are hidden out of the way. I'm
    spending too much time wondering what a button does again, rather than actually you know playing.
    -Stupid Character/abilities:
    a) WTF is cunning? Authority? What does it affect specifically? I cannot seem to find this information anywhere, EVEN IN THE ENCYCLOPYDEA! WTF?
    b) The Rally troops ability used to be a button to keep wavering units from routing... Now it just buffs a single unit instead... And the second wind button? wtf? RTW1 was an attempt at being historical while keeping the game balanced and fun.. RTW2 is the exact opposite. Fail.
    c) The lack of a family tree is a bit of a letdown, but there are other features that have been implemented to continue to make things somewhat interesting.

    Enemy AI: On the campaign map the enemy is simply TOO defensinve (and even incompetent at that, sometimes). I've sent small armies as map scouts before, only to spot an army three times the size within reach of me, BUT because I wasn't yet near the city, that army never attacked my scouting party. It just sat there, waiting. I've also marched towards a city (while suffering from a plague/-20% morale) only to have the army garrisoning it run away, wait until I conquer the city, then return to reclaim their city. Their reconquista fails and they get destroyed but they could've potentially defended their town had they simply stayed put in it.

    Protraits: They are ugly. Confusing. GTFO.

    Lag: I can run Shogun 2 on ultra. I can run Skyrim with 4k texture mods, ultra settings, ENB presets, extended LODS, and a ton of other graphic mods, just fine. Hell... My computer will start to overheat before I really see a hit to my FPS. But this game... It lagged with 500 units total on the battlefield. It lagged again on a lower setting with a less detailed map. And it lagged again on High setting with a similar map. Clearly EA needs to fix this aspect of the game.

    On the plus side the map is more detailed than before. No more barbarian cities; all cities are owned by a faction. I believe the dev team may have also fixed the glitch/ability to make 500,000gpt conquering only mediterranean coastal cities, but I'm as of today unsure, as I've only played the Suebi so far.

    And last but not least, a word to EA: I truly understand the marketing/financing impact of DLCs, but developping a DLC alongside the game itself is just wrong. It's like buying a house and realising you need to spend another $xxx on the garage attached to it. Wtf?
    Expand
  55. Sep 4, 2013
    4
    Huge dissapointment after months of excitment, too much marketing too little work, total war is one of the few strategy games that i still enjoy the most and it's going the wrong way by hyping people and then selling the beta version of the game.
  56. Sep 6, 2013
    3
    I think a bullet point list best summarizes my problems with this dumbed down excrement. In no particular order: -No Guard button. I mean... what? -No ships needed. Your army will summon ships out of thin air to move over water, removing the natural obstacle that is water. -No seasons, everything is done by year. It takes a year to march through that small valley. -Agents block army movement. That invisible Spy you have? Yep, he just blocked a 3000 man army from moving through that pass.

    -About 150+ factions that lead to pointless mini wars dragging out the turns way worse than any preceding Total War instalment. You can turn off Show AI Turns, and it will still take up a good portion of your time and make you miss important movement, to boot!

    -Capture points, on open field battles. Apparently made to balance ship landings. Well you just killed the whole terrain factor of the open field battles, I think that far outweighs what little you actually, truthfully gained by creating the ship landings feature to begin with. This is so aggravating that it validates removing ships altogether from the game, including the sea battles.

    -The AI cannot handle ship landings to begin with. Whenever it receives reinforcements in form of ships it will fail miserably to utilize them, giving you a free victory.

    -Playing on Very Hard, this game has a difficulty comparable to Shogun 2 Normal, possibly less. The AI is incredibly timid and will simply not exploit your weakness. It will leave your undefended villages without walls be. It will ignore your open flanks and go for the capture flag like a retard and lose because of it. For what it's worth I've completed Shogun 2 on Legendary several times, I expected SOMETHING from the AI in this one. At least an attack? Try damnit?

    -Diplomacy is worthless: It may be because I'm playing on Very Hard and am getting demodifiers, but who knows, not like the AI ever agreed to anything even if it clearly was in it's best interest to do so. Pile up gold and riches, have long standing relations, it will not help. They will still pester you and demand payment tribute even though you have vast armies compared to their little village. Did I mention there's 150+ of the tards?

    -No family tree. No leader. I mean this literally, you have no family tree and you recruit generals willy nilly out of thin air.

    -Complex politics promised. I've yet to see any kind of politics. I mean there's not even a family tree as mentioned above, how am I supposed to have complex politics?

    -Unbalanced army traits. You can customize and grab the obvious good trait line, or go with the options for flair I guess.

    -Army MUST HAVE general. You cannot hunt down that 160man band of rebels without a general. Your general recruits out of thin air. You cannot recruit units and have them walk from your town to the general, they themselves must have a general to move. You can't train extra garrison. No logistics. You cannot intercept enemy reinforcements from a city.

    -Problems in your little village? Well it affects your whole province. Want to exempt from tax? Done for the whole province, let alone finding the button to do so is a quest in itself. Only Province capital can have walls, so only one in 3 villages will have walls and you can't pick which. Since you need Population to build improvements, you therefore have the choice to improve behind safe walls, or let all your important stuff be in the better located but worse defended village, since population is by province.

    -Can't garrison vs. Public Order problems, the effect is extremely small, not to mention doing that garrison requires a general of which you have a limited amount able to be had.

    -Worst UI in the Total War series, everything requires several button clicks instead of say right clicking once on that village.

    -Tech tree UI is 100% worthless. What was one perfectly perspicuous tree on one popup page, you now have 4 buttons that switch between 4 branches of a tree that is smaller than the predecessors.

    -Everything, and I do mean everything, needs to be inspected in the encyclopaedia. What you can build in a city depends on faction and actual city, meaning you visit the encyclopaedia each time to look at your options. Don't forget that it is browser based and seems to be requiring an internet connection, I have load times on the pages.

    -Want that advanced popup that will actually tell you what the damned thing does? Better wait for that fade-in and delay-to-show in the first place.

    -I cannot stress enough how useless the UI is. General gained a trait? How neat! Now which one is it? Is it this army? No wait it's not showing me when having the army selected. How about hovering the general unit? Ah no it simply shows the general unit type. If I press this detail button? Oh no that was the army detail page, which does not show general name either, how weird! Oh it was the third button!

    -Coop MP broken. Constant desynchs and longer AI turn time
    Expand
  57. Sep 11, 2013
    4
    This game is just broken. The AI is so stupid. This game is not challenging at all. It is very buggy. RIP Total War franchise. The only reason I'm giving this a 4 is because there seriously are worse games out there. I can not believe they spent as much production dollars on this as they did. unbelievable. Time for people to get fired.
  58. Sep 17, 2013
    1
    A slap in the face of all Total War and strategy game fans. This game is a disgrace. Creative Assembly just lost all its core audience by dumbing down gameplay for console release.
  59. Sep 4, 2013
    3
    I've played Total War for over 10 years now and I can honestly say that this release is just as bad as Empire, if not worse. They have slowly taken the winning formula for Total War and dumbed it down for the masses. 'Casual gamers', the console and phone game generation have been the downfall of many a great PC game series. From top to bottom this game is purely sacrilegious to any Total War fan who values depth and tactical battles. They have taken away all of our control and implemented gimmicks to please the casual gamer. I will provide some insight into the fundamental flaws at the core of the games design rather than elaborate on the myriad of optimization problems and bugs the game suffers from at this time.

    GAMEPLAY:
    A huge number of features that were available even in Total War: Rome are missing both conceptually and mechanically. I will try and break down the problems point by point as they relate to gameplay.

    -No family tree.

    -No 'Loose' or 'Tight' generic formation commands. Can't spread to avoid enemy fire?!

    -No 'Guard' command, your units cannot be instructed to maintain their position and formation at all costs.Even the most disciplined melee troops devolve into a blob during melee combat.

    -You cannot toggle fire at will on infantry with javelins, they only fire when they charge. Some unfortunate tactical consequences are that they cannot throw javelins to break an enemy charge and then receive the broken charge, they cannot fire on skirmishers and cavalry harassing them, and if you move reserves to reinforce a battle line they will AUTOMATICALLY throw their javelins into the backs of your own men who are already engaged. WTF CA?

    -Troops have inappropriate context based behavior or a complete lack thereof. IE. They will stand in position and take arrows to the face from archers ten feet away (as if instructed to guard, but still lose unit cohesion in melee) and will not chase routing enemies. During a melee blob if a unit of men destroy their immediate foe (target) they will not engage nearby enemies. They will stand there watching their comrades get hacked apart five feet away.

    -Auto run breaks unit cohesion.

    -BATTLES ARE WAY TOO FAST! The battles last a few minutes generally. You spend three minutes walking to the enemy force. Your lines meet and devolve into a chaotic blob and the melee is typically over in about 30-50 seconds as one side routes. If you were inclined to flank the blob you typically don't even have time to move a single flanking unit around into position before the melee is decided. You're far better served simply committing the unit into the blob of doom right away and spamming the 'magic' combat buffs/abilities your men have. Speaking of..

    -MAGIC COMBAT ABILITIES! You can hit a button and suddenly your men charge with more force than usual or you can magically remove all fatigue? Get your voodoo out of my Total War. Abilities should have a justifiable function that makes sense.

    -Units run entirely too fast, especially with tactical map speed buffs on roads for certain units and while charging. I would seriously estimate that your men can charge at nearly 30mph.. Again, wtf?

    -Diplomacy has improved so far as the campaign AI actually interacting with you in ways beyond declaring war but it is almost always on their terms. If you prefer passive diplomacy you wont notice the problem but if you want to proactively cultivate an environment of success with your neighbors you will fail. The AI refuses to accept logical treaties of any kind without bribes, very unfortunate.

    -Magic boats appear when you move an army into the ocean... Magic.... Boats.... These transport ships are free and can be used to great effect in naval battles. Building and maintaining an incredibly expensive navy is rendered void of strategic value and ineffective. You can recruit a bunch of militia and march them into the sea and ram your enemies navy to death without much difficulty. Horrid.

    -The campaign AI is atrocious even on the highest difficulty setting. The AI nations will maintain small armies and play passively. If they do field large armies the majority of the time they will consist of almost all slingers or other skirmishers. This causes most battles to involve a 10 second melee blob of doom then 10 minutes of you chasing down skirmishers at random. Epic disciplined and mechanized meat grinding battles? I bought the wrong game.

    -Unit size is locked. Why do I have smaller unit sizes than the original decade old game?

    -One turn per year. Good luck utilizing the fresh general development ideas cause all your generals will die of old age very quickly assuming they survive even one blob of death thanks to the extremely high kill rates.

    -The UI is beyond inconvenient. It is a mess of sub menus and obscure iconography. You play the game through a figurative maze, not a streamlined UI for 2013.

    -The awesome in game encyclopedia of the legacy Total War games? Still gone.
    Expand
  60. Sep 4, 2013
    4
    I honestly can't find one thing that Rome 2 does better than Shogun 2. What the hell happened?

    I was so looking forward to a new total war game set in this era, but as it is this game is just entirely unsatisfying and broken in so many ways.
  61. Nov 25, 2013
    0
    It's a bad game, over hyped crap. The AI is retarded, UI looks like agents do the same thing so no point in having 3 different types, no point in besieging a city you can attack right away and have your soldiers burn down the huge metal gates with magical torches that they keep up their ass during battles, naval combat is broken, load of bugs and so on... Do not buy
  62. Sep 4, 2013
    4
    The attempt at simplifying the game not only took away from what made the series great but in some ways made it more complicated/less intuitive for people familiar with the Genre. Over all the game is alright but doesn't really live up to the standard set by the previous Rome title.

    The simplification of the cities takes away a lot from the crowds who like to experiment and specialize
    different cities in different parts of their empire. Also, armies relying on a general to field and actually being recruited by the general in place takes away from having to manage the logisitics of your empire. This makes the game overall less of a simulation and more of an arcade title of the RTS fights. Research is also taken down to two very basic easily obtainable paths.

    For some these may be welcome changes but as someone who likes the empire building and civilization style large branching tech trees these are significant problems. The title is clearly made for a broader audience who don't want to have to get bogged down with the logistics and economy management of previous games.

    On top of changing the general game play these changes have made some things more difficult; the removal of some of the more detailed city/settlement management tools has made it in some cases extremely hard to understand why your city/province is unhappy.

    The combat remains more or less the same though it seems some what easier to route/destroy your enemies. It's possibly less tactical but I'm not sure if I'm confident in saying that yet only having played about 15 hours.

    There are significant wait times between turns but that is somewhat expected.

    The game has beautiful graphics.

    I would say if you liked the world map part of Rome, research, and auto completed most of your battles you could probably give this game a pass. If all you did was play for battles and were irritated by having to manage your empire then you may like the changes that were made.

    For people like myself and my group of friends I cannot recommend you play this game. Personally I'm more concerned with empire building than doing the little RTS battles, for me they were just the cherry on top that made Total War special.
    Expand
  63. Sep 9, 2013
    1
    Where do i begin ?! Visuals looks way worse than shogun 2 in almost every way !! Performance is Horrible ! With a Rig that runs shogun 2 at maximum i cant even get a descent frame rate lag free game at medium-low setting !! Absolute Technically broken all the way ! The most stupid AI ever ... Thousands and Thousands of different bugs and glitches everywhere !

    Unplayable

    BROKEN PRODUCT
    Expand
  64. Sep 6, 2013
    3
    Don't waste your money on this trash. It's boring as hell, full of bugs, graphics suck, UI is terrible, AI is terrible and it feels like it's unfinished, like there is a lot of stuff missing.
  65. Sep 11, 2013
    3
    The game is basically unplayable. I have a Nvidia GTX 760 and 8 GB of RAM, and can run A.R.M.A. III and Metro: LL on MAX settings and get 50 FPS, yet this game on the LOWEST SETTINGS pushes 20 FPS at the most.

    I have no idea what systems the professional reviewers have, the game runs horribly and almost everybody else has this issue. It's just unoptimized.
  66. Sep 5, 2013
    0
    What a piece of garbage. There are no words to express how much I regret buying this game. It's probably the most unstable piece of software I've ever owned, and regularly crashes in between turns. If that wasn't bad enough, it absolutely slogs on a GTX 680 x2 SLI, 4.5ghz i7 machine. We're talking framerates in the high 20's on the world map. Yes, you read that correctly; even the world map has a crappy framerate. I would have returned this game for a refund already, but I foolishly purchased it through Steam, who like Creative Assembly, has no respect for their customers and has instituted an unconscionable rule against ever giving refunds. Lesson well learned on my end. Expand
  67. Sep 8, 2013
    0
    Well, as a loyal Total War series player, I have to say this game is kind of an embarrassment. There are so many great things about it yet one very serious flaw destroyed my enjoyment. Basically, the developers someone managed to eliminate any element of strategy in the open-field battles. In the heat of a huge open battle, I learned the hard way that there is a "Victory Point" placed on the map in my defensive territory. The point is out in the middle of nowhere and of no strategic importance. However, I found that if I don't commit my soldiers to defending this seemingly unimportant, arbitrary spot, the computer AI will send one unit directly to the point and claim victory. Having not noticed the victory point, I strategically positioned my defending army atop a hill so I would have an advantage. Unfortunately, the battle was over before it even got going. I lost with a decisive defeat. I started with 2200 soldiers. When the battle finished, I had only lost about 300 of them in the actual battle. Does that sound like a decisive defeat? No, it's utterly absurd. Only more so because I still lost the entire army after the battle was over. I was going to lose the battle anyway, but I missed out on the chance to take down the enemy's numbers a bit. I lost all 2200 of my soldiers, but the enemy only lost the 300 or so men that I took down in battle. This Victory Point nonsense is game breaking for me. I really enjoy the economic strategy, but real-time battles are the core of this game. This game could be close to a 10 for me if they would fix this one little victory point problem. Being that I'm not going to play the game anymore, it does deserve a zero. What a disappointing waste of money. Expand
  68. Sep 4, 2013
    0
    Terrible game. Two steps backwards for the Total War franchise. In Shogun 2, the clans/matchmaking/map persistence/veteran units actually provided a modern framework that brought Total War into the competitive multiplayer gaming scene. They have since completely removed it and brought it back to 1998 lobby-only style. The reasoning behind this is that CA is currently working on a F2P game that's almost nothing like actual TW battles. Does this make any sense to anyone? I want to play TW battles in a meaningful and dynamic way which was teased with the Shogun 2 system, not some TW/MOBA hybrid. Also, the graphics are really, really bad even with everything set to "extreme." Anti-Aliasing doesn't even work at all which is extremely apparent in battles. Expand
  69. Sep 6, 2013
    0
    This is the biggest game launch failure i have ever seen. The game is not even in beta stage at the moment and should have not been launched at least until 6 more months of development. Paying 60 euros for this garbage has convinced me to never again buy one of Creative Assembly games again. Ever.
  70. Sep 5, 2013
    4
    The AI is completely broken, the battles in a city have no strategy at all, there are f0ck1ng special powers in the mid of the battle, i feel like i'm playing a MOBA, and I HATE MOBAs!!! I really miss the General Speech, it was one the favorite features in Rome TW. I'm really disappointed with this game, specially because they probably won't add the speeches back so soon, or maybe not at all. The reason i like Total War games is because they're games about history and realistic battles, not some goddamn MOBAs that have no strategy at all! This Game needs a ENORMOUS patch... Expand
  71. Sep 5, 2013
    3
    Yea they obviously spent more money on marketing than on improving their series.

    1. AI is pathetically bad, both the way the game reacts to player orders as well the computer opponents. Example In the "siege of caligua", you'll start off with the Samnites to the left on this plateau, take your melee troops and have them try to flank the enemy on the plateau on the right of it.
    Instead of pathing correctly, and not engaging while the line is thin, the troops will get stuck on the corner, basically creating a bottleneck to be killed in 1s and 2s. The funny part is that this tactical blunder then causes the AI to retreat!

    2. UI is terrible why they decided to use these unintuitive cards is beyond me... Another thing, is that there's about 60 factions, and when you hit end turn, you'll have to go through that entire lineup before next turn.

    3. Meta game is basically about surviving with your taxes on the lowest so that your people don't revolt, until you can build up cities to support a positive public order (i've yet to accomplish this).

    While you can field great armies, the game is just a copy-paste from Shogun 2, with no new additions, no reworks, and the same hype about naval combat which has never lived up to expectation.

    Do yourself a favor, if you even decide to pay for this game, do so when the price is 29.99, which will be in about 3 months. I will warn you the load times are so slow that if you're not putting it on an SSD it'll just create frustration.
    Expand
  72. Sep 5, 2013
    0
    Total War: Rome 2 deserves nothing more than 0/10 because of a simple fact: it is broken. Unplayable. You have two options of play; a lag-fest of high settings, or a lag-fest of a map looking like a glazed doughnut. My computer well meets the specs, playing Shogun 2 at highest flawlessly, but this game ruins all the progress CA has made beyond Empire. With a bigger development time and budget this is the best they can do?

    Until the game leaves early beta, which I expect will take a good few months for people with graphics card that are incompatible which is most of them DO NOT BUY. Rome 2 is a broken mess. Repeat: a broken, unplayable mess that squanders its potential and says 'FU' to all fans like myself
    Expand
  73. Sep 5, 2013
    3
    Well, the game was very promising, until...
    The very moment you start a battle and experience heavy lag, pathfinding glitches, missing core features (guard mode, fire at will on "Hastati" and units which don't follow routing enemies...), random crashes...
    The game is really poorly optimized and it will lag in medium size battles regardless of your system because it happens to use only
    about half the power of powerful GPUs like GTX Titan, it has poor multi-core support and worse graphics than it's predecessor.
    The campaign turns are just unbearable, they last 4 minutes full of nothing to do, you can't move units between settlements unless you have a general to drive them, garrisons are composed of random units depending on which military buildings you have in the city and armies can travel on seas generating their own ships in no time (the transport ships they have are almost as good as real navies and cost nothing...).
    The game feels greatly dumbed down in features, most concerning is the really bad AI in campaign which is not able to stand up to players unless with cheats and often attacks with poor units your huge armies, getting defeated in 5 minutes.
    Also, battle speed is absurd, most fights last less than 10 minutes including the initial march.
    UI is TERRIBLE an covers half the screen!
    I would say this game is not worth 50 bucks, not even 20 in it's current state.
    But i see much potential in here when it will be fixed, so for now it's only 3, but it could possibly raise up if the issues are resolved in decent times.
    Expand
  74. Sep 6, 2013
    3
    This is without a doubt the worst Total war game to date It allows you to have only 3 armies and 2 navies while the enemies have unlimited troops You troops desert while you enemy does not For the first time you cannot merge depleted units Graphics are not as advertised it is a major step backwards from it's predecessors Playability on maps is weak You armies cannot move while "mustering" new troops and only generals or admirals can recruit
    It was a waste of 60 bucks
    You want a Total war game stick with Shogun 2, Empire, Medievil 2 or other earlier games in the series
    Even the original Rome was vastly better
    Expand
  75. Sep 6, 2013
    4
    Total war is long term game so you are expected to do a campaign for about a week or two if you play casual. 50 turns into Rome II -> 1. End turn 2. Alt Tab 3. Have babies, get them married. 4. Get grandchildrens 5. have your new grand kids to come and see the historic moment. 6. clean pc from dust. 7. Alt tab 8. wait few more minutes 9. turn 51! yay! grand pa 'his c'wap is cool!

    in more serious note,
    1. graphics the game gave me automatic Extreme settings which runs kinda well but game looks bad.

    2. gameplay this is NOT total war. total war is about using agents on the strategic map with wise and smart province management combined with small specialize inferior forces to outmaneuver and outmatch your opponents and conquer the world. here we got world map which is basicly LAME version of civilization with no sense what so ever. a battle mode in which there is no strategy only blob wars over victory points in which slingers will annihilate everything (try it... full slinger army will destroy anything in the game lol). In fact game so bad they added "Economic" and "cultural" victory so you don't need to conquer anything! just use diplomacy and ofc enhanced auto-resolve which tells you now not only if you win but how many troops you get left with!

    3. Navies are so crap now they deserve their own section, you take and unit and drive them into the see they turn into a fleet. the get a ramming ship! and they can board. no need to build navies just get 20 mobs send them into the sea and you got doomstack navy. Also because land units can now easily turn free into NAVAL units some weird stuff happens like minor barbaric tribe from north Europe invade into Arabia!!!! wtf is that crap.

    4. Politics, no more senate floor... no more family tree.... now you get weird list of generals which shows who got most power... once in few turns you get some weird event which cause little problem until you resolve it.. how? pick a button.. that's it. no politics what so ever!

    5. diplomacy... hmmp... well... faction so stupid they will stay with 1 province, no armies, under siege and refuse peace treaty 5000 gold that stupid. in previous games you could set trade agreements and do stuff here it's dumbed down diplomacy as most options like switch cities, stop wars, exchange map information, BRIBE are removed from the game.
    then when you finnaly manage to get trade agreement some weird stuff happens like your new buddy wants to help you in your war so he sends 1 ship to navy blockade a port of the enemy last city for OVER 20 turns and so you can't kill them... bah.

    6. limited number of armies, navies and agents.
    on previous games you could recruit some units then have a captain with them which if he was successful could be adopted and become a general but here you need to "Raise" force as general or admiral then recruit straight to him the forces and most of the game start you can have no more then 4-6 armies! it's pathetic. as militant player I did lots of conquest and combat on this series with smart small forces and wise tactics but here I'm limited to 3 armies! on game start so basicly if you got bad luck and enemy got allies or 2 factions declares war o you suddenly 4-5 doomstacks vs your 1 little stack as you can't divide it to ambush them or use one small force to lure them while your main force gank their cities sun-tzu style... nope.

    7. city development is utter stupid. no point at all you reach to a point where you got income like 10k per turn while city is mostly level 2-3 buildings. no need to build anything! the population remains the same when it's growing you actually get more building slots to get more money from buildings. actually building more advanced stuff in cities gets you ton of squalor and shortage in food which do not benefits enough income wise (extra 1000 per turn for empire wise upgrade) to actually do it so build 2-3 military building rest is farmings and agricalture boosting buildings tehn get ton of money and spam slinger armies of doom :X fail.

    this is fail game from design to execution. shogun 2 is superior and more pretty, Rome 1 is a better game and much better game with mods. Medieval 2 was one of the best game in the series.. add medieval 2 with a mod which exteneds the map so you can do grand campaign on HUGE map which contain the vanilla all the Kingdoms campaigns at same time for utter victory.
    Empire was decent as casual total war and had good points as it did gunpowder decently but overall Rome 2 is step backward.

    "IT WILL GET A PATCH YOU FOOL!" fact: i finished campaign on all of the total war games WITHOUT patches. on Rome II I cannot finish a campaign cause the end turn takes 2 years to finish cycle 30000000000000000000 factions.
    rig: 8 Gb ram i5 2500K GTX 550Ti OC edition Win 7
    Expand
  76. Sep 6, 2013
    3
    Total War is the only series I buy every game at (or near) full price. I am disappointed that this game randomly crashes within 30 minutes of play. This is on a newer laptop with a fresh install the OS. The game is slow and clunky. I hope a big patch comes soon. It's also noteworthy the difference between the user score and the critic score. What game are they playing? It's not the same one I'm playing. Expand
  77. Sep 6, 2013
    3
    First, I have to explain the difference between an alpha game and a beta game.
    -Alpha: The game is not finished at all and full, bugs, poorly optimized, messed IA and also not balanced.
    -Beta: The game works pretty well, there are some bugs, the IA is at last playable, optimization is ok and the same for the balancing.
    Rome 2: Total War, is in a pre-alpha stage.
    -There is no fu***ng
    AI, I can defeat 10 armies with few men. -In a battle, 1200 vs 5000 I won losing 300 guys. Also they don't know how to siege and how to defend settlements. The campaign AI is a little better but still crap.
    -The bugs are thousands, watch lastest Angry Joe videos and you will notice dat.
    -Who designed campaign UI? Rly, why didn't they fired this guy and the AI one?
    -They paid critics to make good reviews.
    -Balance? What is balance? R2TW does not know what that thing is.
    In the end, R2TW is in worst stage than R1TW when it came out, and R1TW was in a rly, rly bad state.
    Expand
  78. Sep 6, 2013
    3
    I have owned and played every TW game since the original Shogun. I have played each game for hundreds of hours. However I am VERY disappointed with Rome 2. I have no bugs and the game runs very well on My new PC (i5-3570K, GTX 770, SSD ungraded to play Rome 2). BUT the game is DUMBED DOWN. The IA is worse than Empire, cities can only build 4-6 buildings, the faction/ internal politics is senseless, the documentation is useless. I don't even know what I can build in the future. The aux barracks show every unit in the game as available when that is not the case.....just dumb;( Expand
  79. Sep 7, 2013
    0
    As much as I dislike giving this game a review score of Zero, it must be done. CA use Warscape engine in their games for years and developers still manage to make a game with tons of bugs and dreadful optimization. I was hugely disappointed with changes such removal of walls from settlements and removal of family tree. AI is retarded. User interface is unimpressive. It fails as a game, and it fails as part of TW series. Expand
  80. Sep 9, 2013
    0
    A poor excuse for a game which I'm frankly shocked by. after playing 30 hours of this broken, incomplete game I'm surprised that they where able to charge money for this mess.

    -The AI in total war games has always been lacking but never to the point where factions will not engage you on the campaign map and will walk right up to your formations on the battle map and then run away
    without any reason.

    -WARNING- do not even attempt a naval battle they are completely bugged (My Gran could code better AI) the ships will randomly chose to ram or to board depending on how the game is feeling.

    -WTF decision to add capture point on land battles which removes all tactics making you rush for the flag making it feel like a game of domination from COD

    -The game will rape your PC even on the lower settings. The lowest graphical setting look worse than the original total war which is shocking.

    -The game does not run smoothly at all, just panning the camera will look like a power point presentation

    -THE MAIN POINT why on Earth was there no public demo or beta to iron out these bugs in the first place, personally I feel as though CA and SEGA (SEGA (SCUM)) should have paid the 'per-orderors' of this game instead of us paying them.

    Also the lack of pre-launch content e.g. videos, previews and next to no details on the multiplayer which is by the way completely F*****.

    To concluded I have lost all faith in the total franchise which in my opinion was day light robbery of the fans money, shame on you for this shambles of a game.

    A FINAL MESSAGE TO THE DEVS-

    What where you thinking you fools!

    One does not simply release a game in this state!
    Expand
  81. Sep 10, 2013
    0
    I played this game for over 40 hours and i can say with complete honesty that this is the most disappointing game of my life. Worse in every single way, except scale, than shogun 2 hell it is worse than rome 1 except in graphics, but at least rome 1 will run. Limiting the number of armies was an awful decision as dealing with revolts and invasions by small meaningless countries becomes a micromanagement chore. The basics of multiplier are left intact but everything spicing it up was stripped away for no reason. Even if Rome 2 wasn't a buggy mess i would still rate it a 4/10 because the last 4 main Total war games are simply better. I gave up on this game after 40 hours, but logged more than 200 each into Rome 1, Medieval 2, empire, and shogun 2. A disgrace. Expand
  82. Sep 10, 2013
    0
    Please ignore any good reviews about this game! This game is the worst Total War Game I have ever played. Since release day I have experienced plenty of game crashes for seemingly no in game reason. The AI is absolutely awful, you see opposing units randomly walking instead of defending or whatever else they should be doing. The units that you are controlling constantly break formation. The frame-rate drops all the time for no reason, and it definitely shouldn't be on my PC. This game needs patching majorly and immediately simply to make this game even worth the money that was spent on this game! Do not buy it until an update/patch is released! Expand
  83. Sep 6, 2013
    4
    Really liked Rome 1. After a few hours of Rome 2 I'm about ready to quit. Almost every single mechanic is either a downgrade or a side-step from the original. It's just not much fun at all, and it's riddled with performance issues. Shame.
  84. Sep 5, 2013
    0
    This game has a massive cpu bottleneck. No cpu at stock speed is fast enough to run this game, espeically siege battles involving capitol cities.

    From what i hear this game only uses 4 threads. Hyperthreaded 4 core cpu's run faster with hyperthreading turned off. If the game is bottlenecking on fast 4 core cpu's, dont even think about trying to run this game with 2 core cpu. Also, since
    game can only use 4 threads, AMD 8000 series FX cpu's dont stand a chance unless overclocked to the moon.

    To put it into perspective, my intel 2500k processor at 4.8 had a bottleneck on the main cpu thread. It was running at 100 percent, with other 3 cores running at about 60 percent. So a intel 2500k at 4.8 isnt fast enough to run siege battle properly in this game.

    What I think happened is the game was compiled with SSE 2.0 instuction set in order to ensure max compatibility. Problem is SSE 4 has been out since 2008 and no cpu that isnt a quad has any business trying to run this game. I think if game was recompilied using the most modern instruction set like AVX, people with high end cpu's should be fine. Of course I could be wrong and game is already using latest cpu instructions, but I doubt it.

    Also Creative Assembly has already come out and blamed AMD and Nvidia for poor graphics drivers, which I believe is completly untrue. Yes, you need new drivers for crossfire and SLI, but single cards wont be seeing massive performance increase from new driver alone. CA has done this many times in the past. Medieval 2 had a problem with blob shadows on Nvidia dx10 hardware. CA came out and blamed nvidia for over a year until finally THEY FIXED the problem with the medieval 2 expansion kingdoms. (and never patched fix into main game)

    It wouldnt be the first game to include a AVX exec, as GRID 2 already has one, and it runs fine.
    Expand
  85. Sep 7, 2013
    0
    Let me start by saying I am a fan of the previous TW games for about 5 years. This however, barely qualifies. They tried to streamline the game and failed miserably. Since getting the game a couple days ago they have patched more than a couple times. I would like to be clear here: if your game is not ready to be played, don't release it. This game is full of bugs. Most notably the game has a nice little feature where out of nowhere it "alt tabs" out of the game. This is not something only I am experiencing either. It wouldn't be a problem if you could simply alt tab back, but often you cannot.

    As for the game itself, wow I don't know what to say. In my heart I think that they realized they should try to hurry this game out prior to the new consoles systems due out in a couple months. I am not sure why because traditional TW fans would not be affected by consoles. I feel when Im playing it that the various nation "campaigns" are a lot more scripted than previous games and I hate it. It ruins replayablity. I kept Medieval Tw on my Comp for years and loves Shogun 2. I would play either 1 of those with my butt cheeks before I would play this money grab garbage. Releases this bad ruin great titles and make customers like me not want to trust those developers again.
    Expand
  86. Sep 5, 2013
    4
    Disappointment. No family tree Graphics worse than Shogun 2 Capture points in open fields on non-siege battles Every faction has a British accent (Slavic if you have the German version) Battles end quicker than a virgin's first time with a lady Horrible AI, it does not react at all to being flanked Minor factions are destroying all major factions Every faction and their mom has ships everywhere
    Sieges are boring
    Unit cards are huge and take up a lot of screen
    Upon hitting end turn you have enough time to have a fap until you're able to play your next turn
    Obviously set up to charge lots of microtransactions like the previous two or three titles ($2 for blood)

    The list goes on but I'm tired and need to go have a fap. Avoid this game for now. I only gave it a 4 because it's a Total War game.
    Expand
  87. Sep 6, 2013
    3
    What a disappointment! From the initial laggy play and jerky graphics, through to just out and out bugs and missing features this game feels like a cut-down unfinished update to previous total war titles.
    The problem with trying to review a game that plays/feels like this is that it's very difficult to give it a fair rating. Sure.. there is potential here, when everything is ironed out I
    may be giving this game a 7 or even an 8. Somehow I don't think the city management will change for the better nor will the annoying absence of the family tree.
    At the moment its difficult to see past the performance issues. The bugs include help windows that don't render.. units getting stuck or refusing to move, an accelerated time mode that just seems to turn the sound off and didn't actually accelerate anything.. the list goes on..

    Okay, so CA have reacted by announcing patches/updates to follow. Not good enough I'm afraid. The growing tendency to release unfinished games has finally hit the Total War franchise.

    Buggy, Laggy, Unfinished.

    Worth buying maybe in 4 months time. I wish I'd waited.
    Expand
  88. Sep 10, 2013
    0
    What a crummy AI. How can you have a grand strategy game single player game and have such horrible AI?They have made no progress on this front. All they did was churn out another game with the same exact problems. Rome: Total War was one of the best total war series. This is probably the worst.
  89. Sep 6, 2013
    0
    Major disappointment. The graphical problems and extremely bad AI are the biggest problems, the trailers released before the games launch show a completely different game, one with fast frame rates, colorful and vibrant graphics as well as a fairly competent AI. CA seem more than happy taking time out to create paid content and DLC instead of actually ensuring the game is finished and playable
  90. Sep 11, 2013
    0
    I've been playing Total War games for about 8 years. I've spent over 1,000 hours playing Medieval 2, Empire, and Shogun 2. Rome 2 is a massive disappointment in comparison to the incredible previous games. Now I know that Empire was extremely buggy when it was released, but it was a completely revamped and expanded game. CA didn't bother to add anything new to Rome 2. They actually simplified and dumbed everything down. You know what this reminds me of? SimCity. EA promised all sorts of amazing new features and gameplay. Then they released an unplayable, broken game without delivering on anything they'd promised. CA has done the exact same thing with Rome 2. Horrible AI, graphical glitches galore, and unplayable multiplayer are just a few things I'll take the time to mention. And the sad thing is that the professional reviewers don't even punish CA for all these gamebreaking problems. The same exact thing happened when SimCity came out. I've lost all faith in the mainstream game review companies. They're clearly working with the corporations and not the consumers in mind. CA should be publicly shamed and protested for releasing such a painfully disappointing product. Expand
  91. Sep 4, 2013
    4
    ehhhh.... poor graphics (ugly sometimes water, trees, commanders`s faces), poor performance, too fast foot mobile units, sometimes stupid AI. rest is good
  92. Sep 4, 2013
    0
    Last time I ever made a pre-purchase... every game i did this was a mess... and i have to say Rome 2 is the worst of all.
    I really loved the TW series from the beginning and loved it up to shogun 2 (even though I missed the variety of the previous titles) but Rome 2 is just a big disappointment.
    I won't complain about the bugs and the performance issues as I'm pretty sure this will get
    fixed in time. I even can live with the crappy AI since I'm used to it. But the casualization is horrible:
    - no immersion (family tree?)
    - battles are absolutely mindless and superfast paced. As soon as the units are engaged there is no tactics anymore
    - who's idea has been the army limit? what a crap...
    - campaign map management is simplified very much
    - pretty sure cash-cow DLCs for things that should've been in a full price title will follow (not that 65eur wasn't a hell load of cash for a game already)

    I'm back to Medieval 2: Stainless Steel and Rome: Europa Barbarorum. The good old days when gameplay was more important than hollywood (and they even messed this one up)
    Expand
  93. Sep 4, 2013
    0
    I have played this series since 2004 and i am shocked this game is so bad.It is essentially a reskinned Shogun II that manages to run worse,look worse and feel worse even when they had a massive amount of money which seems to have went on PR and false reviews

    Firstly the promise of slower grittier battles never happened and battles are so fast they are over in no time at all giving the
    user a huge load time wait and feeling underwhelmed.Units are also quite small and unmoddable at around 160 per unit.And the unit movement speeds are just insane with horses running with wild cheetas.There is a huge ugly and intrusive UI blocking most of the up close action when you control 40 units which is supposed to be a huge new feature. Expand
  94. Sep 5, 2013
    0
    waited years and paid lot of bucks for what a F**kin BETA ????

    the other sad thing is that the worst total war ever made is also the one in my favorite era ....

    thanks CA and SEGA

    you really deserve my ZERO
  95. Sep 5, 2013
    0
    This game is simply a disaster. Words don't describe what an utter and complete disappointment and failure Rome 2 is. Throughout the process CA has obfuscated, dissembled, and outright lied in order to conceal this trainwreck.

    Total war has been turned from a compelling, fun, historical sandbox into a crappy starcraft wanna-be console port. At least a dozen major features that have been
    in EVERY SINGLE TOTAL WAR for the past decade have been removed without even a peep of warning during the year+ long marketing phase.

    Not only have they removed features for no other reason than to attempt a horrid console cashgrab, but the features that DO remain have been dumbed down, broken, or ruined.

    Shogun2 was a highly polished, tight, competent game. This is a disheveled debacle.

    The UI is absolutely dreadful. From the menu in a menu in a menu design to the god awful transparent black border to the horrid, 1998 3d portraits. Every single thing that they removed or attempted to "improve" on from shogun2 has been an unmitigated failure.

    There are at least 15 major features that have simply disappeared. Just gone. If they had spend a quarter of the time they spent on their incompetent, ugly facial animations and "the face of war" hype and instead put it toward maintaining the features that its fans have grown accustomed to, perhaps this wouldn't be the worst total war in the history of the franchise. Perhaps those people about to be fired for this disaster in the coming months would still have jobs.

    This game has certainly earned its spot among the Diablo 3s, Simcitys, CoH2s, and Dragon Age2s of franchise killing debacles.

    Oh by the way, the game shipped with no anti-aliasing and no SLI/CF support. That's right. In 2013 an AAA released with no true AA and no multiple GPU support. That's the level of care and concern that went into the development of this farce.
    Expand
  96. Sep 5, 2013
    0
    What a fail....
    The battle are too fast, the graphism are like cartoons, my generals die always after three or two turn.
    The troops are all Usain bolt, they run very very fast.
    This game is not finish.
  97. Sep 6, 2013
    3
    To begin, no game should receive anything over 4/10 if after two days of release, the creators have to say that a patch is being put together. If its buggy and not working correctly, do not release it! Simple! For this reason alone you should steer clear of the critical reviews of this game, I am truly amazed that it has scored as well as it has.
    Why?
    Because a game is intended to
    entertain you, this just bores you, terribly.
    But lets begin on a positive note.
    The map looks superb, while the cities no longer assume the square box on a map look, but expand as the city grows.
    The armies look great and respond much better than previous offerings, especially the cavalry, who actually attack the enemy this time. It is refreshing to be able to hire mercenaries within the city too, and the range on offer is greater than before.
    The diplomacy, initially at least, gives a greater depth to the campaign as you interact with your neighbours without having to create and send a diplomat to do the job, especially if they are within earshot anyway.
    And, errr, that's about it.
    It becomes evident rather quickly that Sega have finally trodden the well beaten path of other gaming companies by pouring their resources into impressive eye candy and gimmicks, rather than stick to their niche of well rounded offerings, where graphics are sacrificed to the god of war in the quest for gameplay.
    To begin looking at the negative (and the list is larger than the empire Rome built), the UI for city management is truly horrendous. I tell a lie, its not even that good.
    It looks like it has been created for our PS and XBox friends to quickly flick through, so that they can hurry on to something else without taxing their thumbs too much. It is a series of poorly detailed and visualised boxes, with a dumbed down 'technology' link that again, looks like it was made for either small children to access or the console clan to enjoy.
    The two do not link well at all either; with the result being turn after frustrating turn of not building anything within your city, whilst you look on with envy as your allies and enemies create the second Rome.
    Apparantly people did not like the Medieval-esq approach to city management, though I have as yet to meet these 'people'. It worked well, was tidy, and more importantly, was easy to understand.
    Given that you may not even move your army and/or spy at all during a turn, and given that you are not building anywhere near often enough either, leads to abject frustrating and repeated 'end turn' clicking.
    Which leads to the 80's return of the king. The waiting for the 'end turn' fiasco.
    I have this installed on an SSD with an i7 kicking it along, and it still takes around a minute for the AI to take their turn. Add to this the fact that for large swathes of the time you are doing precisely nothing, and you can see how quickly boredom creeps in on a grand Total War scale.
    It is not that you can not build an army to create havoc, you can, but you are extremely limited in maintaining and upgrading it because your cities do not produce enough cash, whilst your neighbours garrisoned armies are far more numerous than yours.
    Added is the fact that nine battles out of ten are sieges. I did not in encounter an enemy with a decent army in the field at all in the three days I played it, leading to bus stop tours of city sieges, nothing more, which again, becomes boring faster than Usain Bolt on steroids.
    The dreadful AI during battles too verges on the insane; one instance amongst many I came across had the enemy simply scarper from their city whilst my two divisions of slingers (no dragons, tanks or F15 strike eagles in tow before you ask) walked straight into central city complex and held it, without an ounce of blood being spilled. The main bulk of my army was sitting around outside, enjoying the sea views and sipping tea.
    It is also in the small detail where this game fails to deliver on an epic scale too.
    You can now talk to your neighbours via the diplomacy button without having to physically move an object their, but you can not start trade in the same way for instance. Why not? So I can talk to my immediate neighbours night and day, but can not trade? Makes perfect sense that.
    Also, the idea of using family members and 'ordinary' folk to lead your forces is a nice touch; apparently the idea is that the more gravitas a general receives, the better his chances of taking over.
    But this just does not deliver excitement on any level, and ends up being just another useless side note in the long list of failures that Sega have collected up and dished out under the 'Rome II' tag.
    I could continue, but the word count is dangerously close to the 5000 max.
    To summarise, go back to earlier offerings folks, and wait until either the community either mod this shambles, or Sega bring out the much anticipated patches.
    Expand
  98. Sep 6, 2013
    0
    Launching Second Shortcoming of the Year. Retarded UI, poor optimization, no SLI. Yes, I was talking about CoH2. Applies to this title also. Support better game developers, there are a few.
  99. Sep 6, 2013
    3
    Ok, where to start... bought the game and well, disappointing is the first word that comes to mind. It feels unfinished, almost rushed. The ingredients of a great game are there, but it just doesn't deliver on any level as previous TW titles did.
  100. Sep 6, 2013
    0
    This game is a disaster. A lof of technical issues (no AA, no SLI support, very bad framerate considering how ugly it is, etc), very confusing and awful menus (tech tree menu and unit cards are just super nasty, etc), strange design decisions (NO FAMILY TREE, idotic skills for armie casual simplified province thing, etc and VERY imbalanced. Currently this game plays like unplayable beta. AVOID AT ALL COST! Expand
  101. Sep 4, 2013
    0
    I wanted to like it but in this state I cant. I cant beiieve the differnce in scores of the pro reviewers and the fans such broad spread you know something is up when all the pro reviewers think so much of a game. wonder how much they got paid on prop up one of those streamlined games as such. I had two crashes and I've never had crash problems before with any game. I actually after a short session wanted to play something else like The Sims 3 how terrible. I even thought of playing the origional RTW but remembered how bad the ai was in that one and all the rest up to Shogun 2. I'd play Shogun 2 but I don't like asian games that much, but I do like challenge so I'd play SPARTAN or SACRIFICE. This one didn't make my interested list though I wanted it to so bad. Needs lots of work. Collapse
Metascore
76

Generally favorable reviews - based on 71 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 49 out of 71
  2. Negative: 7 out of 71
  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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]