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

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 3281 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 7, 2013
    3
    I expected a lot from the famous "Total War: Rome" title, but unfortunately my expectations were not met (by a good roman mile...)! The AI is average at best. This has a negative effect on everything. They way they move, fight, form alliances, negotiate with your fraction (For example if you have a lot of money, they will demand some from you for everything. Do you want to trade? PAY! Do you want an alliance? SHARE YOUR MONEY!). The strategy part of the game is rather simple too. There are a few types of building, and research. The most "difficult" things is to keep in mind the balance of 'public order', 'food' etc. Other than that you need to build armies and conquer land. "Paradox Game" titles, which are made by 1/100 of the budget used on "Rome 2" can do much better strategy game. I was expecting more. Not recommended! Expand
  2. Nov 5, 2013
    8
    I bought Rome 2 on release and it was pretty buggy and underwhelming. The patches released since then however have done a lot to redeem it, and currently it's a pretty good game though there is still some work to do. The graphics are fine, though I apparently am one of the few who has no problem running it on ultra (even at launch). If you're coming from Shogun 2 you'll find a lot of welcome unit and play style diversity among the factions. The campaign AI feels fairly robust, and I was able to forge some pretty solid game-long alliances with them. Once, some enemy troops slipped past my army and headed toward an undefended city, but an allied AI planted an army to deny them movement pretty cool. Battle AI is a liiiittle less stellar, as is common in all TW games.

    My biggest unresolved gripe has to do with the politics system. The gist of it is, every once in a while, you make a decision about some political event and something good or bad happens. In practice, it's extremely anemic, feels tacked on and you can totally ignore it because it's basically a coin toss. The in-game encyclopedia is buggy and lacking a lot info and flavor about units (all celtic swordsmen have the same unit descriptions, for example). The tech trees at first glance feel very weak, but every culture has different research items so maybe it can be forgiven. UI doesn't bug me, but the lack of seasons (something I LOVED in Shogun 2 and earlier titles) does.

    Anyway, I'm enjoying it quite a bit at this point and I don't regret getting it. I feel like Rome 2 is a pretty solid entry though maybe not the best in the series.
    Expand
  3. Sep 10, 2013
    1
    I know its not a real review. But just warning to people wanting to buy this game, Im pretty sure 90% of the critics on the left side there have been paid off. 100/100, really?
  4. Oct 21, 2013
    0
    Day 1 DLC, Broken game play, Broken AI, constant glitches, UI, missing guard button. These are the top problems of Rome 2. This is game is the worst total war so far.
  5. Sep 6, 2013
    10
    Clearly a game that was released before it was ready, though wait a few weeks/months and the patches/mods will clear up all the problems. Not worth a 10, but certainly not worth all these zeroes either, hence my score.
  6. Nov 3, 2013
    5
    They up this game so bad. Quite possibly the most disappointing game this year. Let us talk about how this game was disappointing, hm? Horrible in game character face models compared to the screen shots, laughable face animations, atrocious AI, painfully stressful loading times for both the single player campaign and multiplayer campaign with the more than 100 factions in the game, and unbalanced units. I could take ONE group of twenty-four elephants and wipe out an opposing army of 2000 TROOPS!!! Yet I LOVE this game! Why? Because... it's Total War. Expand
  7. Sep 5, 2013
    6
    I figured the no graphics drivers from nvidia/amd/ati would give this game a low score.

    Everything about the actual game play is fine guys. in one or two patches...and with minimal effort from graphics card company's it'll be fine.

    This exact situation is why metacritic is considered a giant joke.
  8. Sep 3, 2013
    0
    In short, AVOID at all cost.

    Extremely poor optimization, even you have i7 and GTX Titan, you may still have only around 20 fps.

    Still the same graphic quality as Medieval (wow, it is now 2013), the same buggy AI, and the non user friendly UI and manual control.

    Just play a high quality mod in Total War: Rome I, you may even have more fun than that.
  9. Sep 17, 2013
    6
    For what it's worth, it's a decent game. It does however, have a fantastic foundation and one I hope gets expanded upon in the future.

    Full of dull moments and gameplay mechanics really brings this otherwise good game down. Some of the pop-ins and lags also drag things out and the execution for the game is EXTREMELY lazy! Hope things get better in Rome 3.....
  10. Sep 13, 2013
    0
    Rome II is proof that the current system of "professional" reviewers is utterly broken or corrupt. As commercial magazines and websites (who rely on advertising money from game makers) pass out 8's and 9's to this newest entry of the Total War Series, long-time players and fans weep tears of sadness. Gone is the tactical depth the series was famous for. Gone is the strategic depth that the series was famous for. This game is a step backward in almost every way, and fans know it. Dumbed down, and made into an arcade-like casual game, Rome II may sadly mark the end of the Total War Series. If consumers keep buying dumbed down versions of previously awesome games, and reviewers keep showering them with fake praise, then the industry as a whole is spiraling down the toilet. If you haven't played a Total War Game, and want to know why they are beloved by fans around the world, try Rome I, Medieval 2, or Shogun 2. Farewell Total War Series. I will miss you. Expand
  11. Sep 17, 2013
    10
    I haven't seen any of the launch problems, and since I can play it, I have been able to enjoy the rare wonder that is this game. The game looks great, plays great, manages great... it just does everything right.
  12. Feb 17, 2014
    3
    Well I, like many, formerly gave this one a good review at first. But after 90+ hours of gameplay, I cannot stand this game anymore. Initially, even before patches, I enjoyed the game. Any quarrels I had could be easily remedied with the Radious mod. But after putting one and half campaigns' worth of time into it, its lack of depth has truly killed it for me. I'm not going to rip on unit cards or the UI. I actually think those are fine. What I will say is that this Total War requires far less brain function than previous installments, as if it was streamlined and dumbed down to appeal to a wider audience. Gone is the family tree, which sadly rid the game of both its personal touch and its risk. My general fell in battle? That's okay, there are three more just as good waiting to be instated. It's not like we have to worry about faction leaders or heirs anyways. Control over resources is now an afterthought. There are no trade posts to acquire monopolies as in Empire and they don't aid in construction as in Shogun 2. They're just trade goods, on the off chance that the AI will actually accept trade with you. There was a great chance for trade posts in the form of the Silk Road, but I guess CA had other interests in mind. Instant transports mean that you no longer have to wait years, amassing forces and planning an over seas invasion. You just swim over now, which really takes away one of Total War's rewarding and accomplishing feelings (or brutal and dismal defeat). This also makes no sense, but I suppose we had to suspend disbelief when we accepted "Imperium" as a model for how many troops we could raise, instead of just simply being able to afford them population and money-wise like in previous installments. Not only is "Imperium" probably the dumbest thing that has happened in the series' history, but it also makes the game the most annoying thing to manage in the late game. This isn't strategic depth, this is CA saying "we're gonna dumb down the game and then give you the finger while we're at it." Because of this I can no longer maintain public order as I please and can hardly protect my border settlements. In addition, "Imperium" has allowed the AI, down to its last city, to simply spam stacks around a poor village, preventing my one or two stacks, that should have been sufficient, from actually wiping them off the map.

    3/10 for better graphics and not completely tearing down the franchise's gameplay.
    Expand
  13. Sep 4, 2013
    5
    Initially i gave this game a 9/10 based on my experience in the prologue which i really enjoyed and i would like to apologise for that beacuse that was far from true, since starting the campaign there are a number of glaring issues which has left me dissapointed and annoyed at how broken gameplay is.

    Politics
    Politics is a new feature in a total war game which makes it all the more
    surprising how its completely ignored in the tutorial. Characters have traits which are supposed to effect internal politics and their ability on the battlefield (Gravitas, ambition,cunning etc) However after 12 hours of game play i still have no idea what any of them do.

    Diplomacy
    During my campaign as the Iceni tribes have rejected trade agreements for no apparent reason and anything below high likeness has been rejected. Its almost impossible to get any other tribe to become an ally despite having extremely good relations with them.

    Sieges
    The Ai doesnt defend the walls instead massing all its units at the victory point. On the campaign map a town or city may seem poorly defended only for it to have a massive garrison of hidden units, its especially annoying when you have won an important battle to be confronted by such a large garrison and being forced to retreat from the region.

    Battles.
    When trying to attack the enemy with a phalanx the men all break from formation and charge. All units seem to have throwing weapons which they only use before charging you cant set them to fire at will. Theres pretty much no point in chasing enemy's down after a battle because even horsemen seem to walk along with them instead of attacking them.

    When defending against a larger force theres victory points in stupidly undefendable areas which can lead to you having to give up the high ground or wooded areas. The pace of combat has been massively increased so you have very little time to maneuver taking away a lot of the strategy from larger battles.

    Armies can now randomly walk across water with no cost which is stupid and if their larger than your navy they can properly beat your navy in battle.

    Sadly this is just a list of sum of the issues that i personally have seen and that have really hindered the experience so far for me, there's clearly a great game in there somewhere but it needs a lot of patching and probably a few mods to get it anywhere near the standard that we all hoped for.
    Expand
  14. Mar 13, 2014
    6
    How can I possibly write a positive review for a game that periodically becomes TOTALLY unplayable, and requires a complete reinstallation of my entire hard drive and Steam library? This is such a game. On three separate occasions since first installing it, Rome II has become seriously dysfunctional, beyond the help of the help desks. Files get seriously corrupted and the software freezes on launch. it cannot be reinstalled via Steam, nothing but a total rebuilding of the Steam library in a fresh installation fixes it. hence this game has MAJOR PROBLEMS STILL. If the damned launch wasn't bad enough.

    Beyond these serious technical shortcomings the game now is much better than it was at launch. 9 patches repaired most of the totally dysfunctional stuff. If you have a good rig the game looks and plays well. A lot of the design choices remain poor, but the game has FANTASTIC moddability, and there are mods to fix almost everything about the game that is sub-par.

    Creative Assembly deserves credit for getting the game into decent shape. But the modders also deserve credos, since they usually seem to have more design flair and passion about this title than the studio that made it. Guys like Radius seem to have a much better sense of what makes the game good that the guys who were paid to make it.

    This game still has a way to go yet. While the present content and mechanics are fine, much fine tuning is needed in the political economy of the game.

    Also the periodic death of the program requiring a major re-setting of the entire operating system is mighty irritating. Hopefully all of these issues will be resolved in the next six months and we can praise the game we should have seen at launch. In future CA is advised to finish their games before publishing them

    Orctowngrot
    Expand
  15. Sep 3, 2013
    10
    I'm a huge fan of the Total War series, and so far I'm NOT disappointed! The game is clearly a member of the Total War series, anyone who has played their previous titles will be familiar with the general gameplay. However there are new features in just about every aspect of the game that have been added, everything from province management, to agents to battle, that makes this feel different from other Total War games. As a long-time fan of the series, I love the changes, I'm looking forward to a couple hundred hours of gameplay (I had 300+ on Shogun 2). Thumbs up! Expand
  16. Jan 13, 2014
    0
    Terrible, terrible game. Miscarriage in TW games. Almost everything in this game is either badly designed or not working at all (sometimes both). Garbage.
  17. Sep 13, 2013
    3
    This review score isn't based on the bugs (of which there are a lot, but they'll be patched out of existence soon enough). It's not based on day one issues of crashing, not being able to play etc. It's not even based on the ridiculous balancing issues (this is a world where an elephant could destroy the entire Roman legion on its own if it were so inclined) or the terrible AI and ridiculous overall simplicity of the game (currently, you have to actually try to lose a game, it's the easiest strategy game I've ever played in my life!). I recognise all of those things as issues, but they're not deal breakers for me. They can and will be fixed.

    No, the score is so low because of one completely unforgivable and unfixable problem in particular; the capture the flag mechanic is mind-numbingly stupid and a central facet of this game.

    It's beyond bad. OK, so armies charging through impossible odds to take the shortest route to the flag etc. "may" be fixed, but the mechanic will remain and thus the game will forever suck. It had no place in this game and it's difficult to comprehend exactly why the devs thought this was a good idea. It would have taken one proper strategy game enthusiast an hours testing at best before telling them it sucked, so the question has to be asked: did they test this game on any scale at all before releasing?!

    And it's such a shame, because there's a classic game waiting to burst out from under the surface here, but there's just too many stupid and/or lazy decisions by the devs which weigh it down to the point where there's little to no hope for it.
    Expand
  18. Nov 28, 2013
    2
    If you liked the previous total war games, then welcome to the children friendly version. My suggestion is to get the first Rome Total War and download one of the best mods for it, it will provide you with plenty more fun. I was hoping for a new Rome Total War since 2004, almost 10 years later never have I been so disappointed at a game. What were they thinking? The bugs, the AI, omg the AI... is just so so bad, did they evolve it since 2004? I doubt it. The gameplay in general, the absolutely ridiculous battle changing general super abilities, seriously?

    The only reason someone might enjoy this game is if they never played any other total war game.
    Expand
  19. Sep 8, 2013
    8
    I write this review in a hope that the creators will fix the massive bugs, try to optimize the game and improve the AI of enemy player. Gameplay is great, graphics arent too great but they had to be toned down because of many units and big maps. If they fix it, it will be one of the best games in its genre but for now, i have to put lower score.
  20. Oct 8, 2013
    1
    What is this? The Trailer was terrible. I decided to give it the benefit of the doubt and wasted my money to witness it being more terrible. How did it get a high critic rating? Rubbish storyline. Been-there-done-that gameplay....it's sad to play on so many levels
  21. Nov 17, 2013
    5
    Rome II... A good game but first one is the better of the two. In this TW you can only choose I think it is 12 factions from what I remember. In the old one it was 24. However the graphics are stunning but the gameplay is lousy. It's just basically troops go there. They attack for 2 minuets. In the old one it's more Troops go there. Wait fall back! Because there are like 400 odd troops on the other side. I don't know. This one just seems a bit meh to me.

    Overall
    -Amazing Graphics
    -Not enough Factions
    -Easy gameplay
    Score 57/100
    Expand
  22. Oct 4, 2013
    1
    Hey look another CA Total War game, with all the same caveats poor computational optimization, lack of unit diversity, only masochists play naval combat manually, AI turn times which progress about as fast as a legless donkey, useless combat AI which stands around while you slaughter them (it's been such a long-running problem, I'm starting to think CA believes AI you massacre effortlessly is a selling-point because the player's supposed to feel like a bad*ss, instead of cheated), a boring and unengaging "metagame" (campaign map play), and sadistic camera settings which don't let you really grasp everything going on without breaking flow to move the camera and see all the different engagements while the game's paused (seriously there's no excuse for this. If I wanted "realism," or whatever it is they're going for, I'd just keep the camera zoomed in). Modders rush in to fix the many deficiencies of the game, and do a fair job with it but I'm not going to take mods into account when vanilla gameplay is so awful, I uninstalled the game after less than 5 hours of play. In defense of CA itself, however check out Extra Credits Extra History, which CA's marketing division funded. I imagine it's the most fantastic history lesson on the Punic Wars ever given. Expand
  23. Oct 18, 2013
    9
    First of all. Just bought a "new" rig, not so powerfull, but rome2 works perfect on 80% of top graphics settings. No glitches, no freeses, works perfect with 4 patches, and looks aweseome (in a rainy conditions).

    Absolutely awesome new features:
    + No army without a general (who can be changed), so no small packs of troops just roaming everywhere.
    + XP for everyine! Troops, armies,
    generals, provinces, all are getting experience. Much slower, cause characters XP divided in 3 parts.
    + Legendary Difficulty, which is: only auto-saves and no active pause, plus some other difficulties.
    + Slow tech development. Only slingers at first and no archers, no superlegions and stuff. Reform your army! Unic tech trees for main civs although.
    + Absolutely brilliant changes into strategy mode like province system with it's building and few cities.
    + Understandable diplomacy with hints like "recent war with our allies 10", "gifts to us 10". Tnx Civ5.
    + More complex senate system. With bunch af random events and memorable random characters.

    - Faster battles. Soldiers are running faster 8) so epicness is a bit lost, but it's ok.
    - No family tree. But family is still here.

    About AI. Ofcourse it's not a human player, but there are cavalry through flanks, enemy units can break through your line, leave skirmish, regroup and flank you. Just lost a HUGE sea battle, lost 2 generals and 2 armies, recently took a city with huge losses, so AI looks MUCH better then anywhere in Total War (excerpt Shogun2 maybe, didn't played it).

    PS. Played about 12 hours, half for a prologue campaign. So may change my mind. 8)
    Expand
  24. Sep 15, 2013
    8
    In under two weeks patches have made enough difference for me to rate this game a 7. While there are still bugs and same questionable design decisions this is still a solid improvement in the Total War franchise. AI is now quite solid and its a heck of an improvement over the constant siege battles of Shogun2 (which I still loved but ...urgh so many sieges).
    If you have brains enough to
    get your settings right it is absolutely gorgeous.
    While this game partially deserves all those zeros for being rushed out the door too early I do wonder if these people will come back and rescore in a month.
    Expand
  25. Sep 11, 2013
    9
    I'm giving it 9 only to offset the angry kids that give zero, my real score however is 7, the game is good, definitively pushed the limits, no comparison between the first Rome and the second, the scale is just huge, the units detailed, the strategy feeling is there, you build a strong economy and you manage your armies, but, yes there is a but, the game feel unfinished and some features were left hanging in the air like the dynasty ones, overall i think they are going to address all these issues because CA showed that they listen to their fan base. Expand
  26. Sep 10, 2013
    2
    Total War Shogun 2 was such a massive improvement... and now this? This is a disgrace to the Total War series... it's got strip away features, it's buggy to hell and back, AI are the most retarded they have ever been before, the map AI will almost never attack you.. and even when they do they only throw tiny groups of enemies at you. Never a big group. Enemies in game will stand there and stare at you... without making any movements. Those god damn flags.. the god damn flags in a open field.. Oh man The UI in game is a terrible (except for the map screen). The graphics are glitchy and very average.
    Looks like a 2005 game. The videos showing how good the game look? Fake. Nobody has been able to get the game to look as good as some of the trailer showcased video footage of this game. Somebody up big time. This looks like a Alpha! They are selling a bloody alpha version for lots of money? Who the hell was in charge of this? It's a travesty. Long time fans are royally pissed off with good reason.

    +Cinematic cam
    +tooltips help you focus on the gameplay rather than being lost clicking stuff.
    +World Map
    +Province have capitals
    -Apart from tooltips, the UI is very limited.
    -AI are totally broken.
    -No challenge.
    -Graphics are bland.
    **** multiplayer, it's barebones 2 player gameplay. Nothing else.
    -Family trees have been stripped away, diplomacy, religion/politics & skill trees are worse than before.
    -Naval battles are plain screwed. The game automatically spawns ships when you send units to the sea, which are more powerful than actual naval ships. No fire at will or guard mode, no formations.
    -Your units refuse to go down walls
    -Most cinematics are gone.
    -No context sensitive battle speeches.
    Expand
  27. Oct 26, 2013
    4
    It's not very often a series declines game after game but the Total War titles seem to be on a downward spiral to nothingness and Rome 2 highlights the sheer drop in quality from the excellence of the original.

    The ambition of the game seems to be overriding the quality of the finished product. It's a half baked game that is woefully presented, cumbersome AI and a very bland interface
    with management options lacking and a dreadfully simplistic challenge which you'll find exceedingly tedious over a session. The shockingly poor technical side adds to disappointment with considerable framerate problems and sloppy realtime battles. As you progress. the end of turn system becomes intolerable with turns taking in excess of minutes as the AI plays catch-up. This boils down to the seemingly dated engine and leaves you waiting without control for an unacceptable amount of time. This kills the flow and adds to the overall dismay.

    CA either need to go back to the games' roots or sell the licence because this series is dwindling to oblivion. If you want a fine strategy game of the Roman era; you'd be better off re-installing the original. It may be over 10 years older but it's streets ahead of today's messy attempt at rejuvenating the Total War collapse.
    Expand
  28. Dec 24, 2013
    0
    This is about the most frustrating, slow, bugged, random, stupid, idiotic, pathetic, moronic piece of garbage game I have even seen in my life. I've had more fun doing _nothing_, just after I threw this disk out of the window and wiped the hard drive of every single bit of this time wasting joke.
  29. Oct 27, 2013
    1
    Rome 2 was supposed to be the best TW game as of yet... this is sadly far from the truth, the game is broken in every way possible, even worse than Empire Total war. I can't stress this enough; DON'T SPEND YOUR HARD EARNED MONEY ON THIS PIECE OF SH*T!
  30. Sep 6, 2013
    10
    Fantastic game, yes the AI could be better but other than that it is fantastic. One of the best in the series imo and will only get better in the future with updates. Alot of the changes I like but they do take some time to get use to, I think once people play the game for more than 5-10 hours they will relize the game is pretty awesome.

    It seems like people forget about the launches of
    Empire and Shogun2, people had said they hated the games on release then after some patches they love it.

    Whats here now is great and can only get better in the future, optimization and AI can ALWAYS be improved, these are things the series could always do better.
    Expand
  31. Nov 4, 2013
    4
    I want to know what game the critics were playing, because it certainly wan't this one. This game is rampant with bugs. It is flat-out broken. The A.I. is horrendous. I don't even know why the game was released. It needed at least six more month's. Absolutely no polish, because the game wasn't even finished to begin with! Why i everything red as well? It looks like you're playing on Mars. An utter disappointment, especially after the beauty that was Total War: Shogun 2 Expand
  32. Sep 10, 2013
    1
    What should have been a massive improvement has turned into a massive disaster All the improvements that were promised and boasted about simply don't exist, in fact they have been streamlined to the point its unplayable. There are some great ideas and nice features but these are overshadowed massively by everything that is wrong. The epic battles of old are gone. Small skirishes that last 3 minutes are now the norm. Graphic issues and screen tears are constant. The game speed and sense of urgency in conflicts has been increased way to fast, the devs seemed to have got lost their direction. In its current state. Not only is the game current price not worth it in its current state, the devs have the nerve to offer day one DLC to content that should clearly have been included. Cashing in yet again. In addition this game has a bigger budget then any other Rome game and I have no idea where its gone. I swear they accidentally released the Pre-Alpha build, its scary how wrong things have gone. The sad truth is that even with numerous patches, the new direction with combat and its style will mean this series will no longer what it will be. The fact the many numerous patches will be needed to make this playable is quite frankly pathetic. Shameful display! Expand
  33. Sep 6, 2013
    10
    easily the largest, most ambitious, and most fun total war game to date. from graphics to game-play to sound audio this is a masterpiece from Creative Assembly.
  34. Mar 26, 2014
    0
    I am at a loss why Creative Assembly wanted to ruin their reputation with this pile of trash. It's also inexplicable how Total War: Rome II is made by the same studio that made Shogun II, an excellent successor to the original Shogun. The game betrays every single Total War fan. It is so casualized I felt like I was playing a tablet game. Some lamentable design decisions include no family tree, no attrition, no AI aggression, and my personal favorite: fire torches for gates. Then of course you get the expected technical issues of a CA game. But wait. This isn't your typical CA technical mess. It's much, much worse. On a nice computer you would be lucky to get more than 30 FPS on the campaign map. Do you like to wait 5 minutes at end turn? This game offers that. The biggest joke of this joke is unit AI, where units clump up together like a mosh pit and run randomly in all directions.

    Heh, I actually told people how great this game was going to be. Good job using misleading footage, CA.

    P.S. When your game is absolute trash, you might not want to anger your fans by releasing DLC.
    Expand
  35. Nov 17, 2013
    4
    Great franchise which i liked since the first Rome. But this game is terrible. they just made out a raw game, which is practically unplayable with its poor optimization and crashes. Obviously they would fix everything but the first impression is ruined. Hope next time they won't treat their fans like that.
  36. Sep 16, 2013
    0
    I was very excited for this game, and expected the very best from CA, however what I got was a bad, unfinished and dumbed down game. The main issue I found during the first couple of days was how horrible the AI is, and being a primarily single player game I had expected a more appropriate AI skill, besides the fact that my fairly new upgraded pc had some performance issues.There are just far too many issues and I highly recommend you wait or simply not buy this. Expand
  37. Dec 8, 2013
    1
    It's an incomplete game, buggy, with design flaws, and worst, a broken hard-coded core. This is something that not even modders will be able to change or improve, because it's the mechanics of Total War in the end.
    They should decide if they want to make a tactical real time battles game or if they want to make a strategical turn based map-based war game. As it is now, they try both and
    fail utterly.
    If you paid for this game I feel sorry for you, I sure grew out to Paradox games many years ago so I wasn't expecting any different from CA. Whoever played Medieval know what pain is.
    One wonders the appraisal this game has from "professional" reviewers. Were they paid?
    Expand
  38. Sep 10, 2013
    0
    Absolutely horrendous. AI is utterly stupid and the addition of "capture the flag" greatly decreases the challenge of battles. Naval battles are disgustingly impossible due to glitches, they are a required auto-resolve. Pay an additional $8 in order to play This game is just completely broken. As an avid Total War since the first Shogun Total War, I am disgusted. I really hope I can get my money back for this. I'm pissed at the positive reviews this is receiving from critics. Quite the travesty. Expand
  39. Sep 3, 2013
    9
    Although the AI is still pretty bad, I can't complain since I've been waiting years for this game to finally release. If you're a Total War fan, I'd highly recommend this game to you.
  40. Sep 24, 2013
    4
    Well, what can i say what others haven't.
    I had high hopes for this game, expected it to be the pinnacle of the franchise and then it all fell down.
    Maybe after 2 expansion pack this game will be in line with Shougun 2.
  41. Mar 7, 2014
    8
    I had no bugs but on a relatively high-end PC. I started off playing as the Seleucids on Normal difficulty and it held my interest for about 200 turns spread over several weeks. There are loads of design flaws, but on the occasions when the whole package comes together and you have a really tense, satisfying battle it's awesome. I haven't played any of the other Total War games but came to them after being disappointed with the King Arthur one, and I found the basic mechanics pretty similar to Graftgold Games' Realms (1991) or Myth: The fallen lords.

    Too many battles in Rome II have an immediately obvious outcome because they have already been determined at the strategic/economic level. Too many of them are repeated sieges of the same cities, and can be won by putting a couple of pikeman/spearman units on the wall to hold off the ladders and then sticking them in front of the gate while the bulk of the enemy forces blunder into the gatehouse's rapid-fire, instantly-lethal, completely non-historical boiling oil, and infinite-ammunition, heat-seeking arrow towers. If they had had some of that stuff in 55BC, Julius Caesar would never have gotten out of Cisalpine Gaul.

    Ambushes play out exactly as you'd expect if the enemy's ambush was carried out in the middle of a desert with 20-mile visibility in all directions, by a 2,000-strong force with brightly-coloured tribal shields. "Centurion, I think I can see 2,000 warriors massing on the horizon to ambush us tomorrow!", "hmm. they must be planning to put all their archers on one side of the road, and all their spears on the other, and they don't have any cavalry at all. It must be Saturnalia - let's kill them all!"

    But just occasionally the ordinary battles in a big field, or defending an unwalled settlement, more than make up for all the rubbish battles in between. Stragglers from depleted units having to overwhelm an elite pike unit quickly enough that they can get in swords-reach of the archers behind them who are whittling them down, or cavalry having to cross the entire battlefield unsupported to take out the enemy's giant ballistas on the flanks before they pulverize the infantry.

    On the strategic scale, it's similar. Most of the time consists of settlements rebelling because they didn't have a big enough temple. "Centurion, the slaves in Brundisium have yet again revolted and formed 18 precisely-organized military units many of whom have extremely expensive equipment and training, especially the cavalry." "Ha! Fools. We will push four of those units off the walls using some cheap spearmen, and then proceed to cover the rest in boiling oil at the front gate like we did in twenty previous years". But then there are times when Carthage are holding out impressively on one side of the map, and then the Roxolani and the Scythians form a "Horde of the Steppes" and start sweeping in from the other side of the map.

    Every part of the game mechanics is flawed - but in a way that every couple of hours throws up brilliant, unexpected jewels that wouldn't be found anywhere else. It's worth lumbering through this game for that.
    Expand
  42. Sep 5, 2013
    0
    This 0/10 is for the price of Rome II and for exploiting the DLC-concept far beyond the point of shame. At this point it doesn't even matter what the game has to offer.
  43. Sep 3, 2013
    10
    have some bugs, but wich new game doesn't? what matters is the overall experience and rome 2 delivers what promised. fair ammount of factions and cultures and expands upon shogun 2 in every single way!
  44. 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
  45. Oct 24, 2013
    7
    I rate it a 7 out of 10, as it is a decent game, but does not live up to the Total War standard and doesn't even come close to the original Rome 1.

    I'm writing this after patch 5 has been applied and sadly the performance is still... not atrocious but not good either. The battles are still somewhat too short and AI does some really weird things.

    But actually these are not the issues
    that I found saddening, I much rather regretted seeing that still all factions somewhat play the same and there has not been done enough to make them distinct from each other.

    All in all I recommend buying it for 25€ or less.
    Expand
  46. Sep 6, 2013
    8
    So far, my experience with Rome 2 is of disappointment, but not at the AI (Which for me is working quite fine), instead it is at the horrendous optimization which Creative Assembly promised would be widely scaleable. I can't even pump out decent FPS at Very High (Which is essentially the "Normal" of the graphics options), and any changes I do make to the graphics settings seems to have absolutely no effect on the outcome of how it looks. Just awful. I could go on and on about the optimization, but I think I made that clear. My other disappointment was how slow-paced it's become, with turns taking well over a minute long to resolve once you get to your 25-30th turn, which means that around 10-15% of your gameplay experience (depending on how long you take to end each turn), will end up being just the resolve action of clicking the "End Turn" button.

    Those problems aside, I have encountered next to no AI or gameplay glitches, and when it works, it works perfectly fine. The campaign AI is unreasonably aggressive and hard to diplomatically communicate with though, rarely if ever coming to a "moderate" or "high" chance of success, and even then if it's only a moderate chance, you'll still more than likely fail in your diplomacy.

    But, there is a silver lining here; CONTENT. Rome 2 has literally HUNDREDS of unique units, and the units that are shared between factions, are designed to fit around the factions themselves, so no simple color-swaps here like in Rome 1, Empire, or Shogun 2. There's also numerous types of agents at your disposal this time, each with unique abilities, such as poisoning garrisoned enemy units with your spy, quelling public dissent with your hero, or causing political intrigue with a diplomatic agent.

    On top of all this, they've given increased options in easy-to-access, pre-made battle formations to put your troops into, organized by type and rank. There have also been some improvements to the economic aspect, as it's been streamlined, but the depth of how it can be affected, or how you can affect it, has been increased.

    Combat based gameplay has reached its pinnacle, as you can now have a truly combined Naval/Land assault on armies or cities, leading to some very grand-scale battles. Great strides have also been made to make simply attacking a factions city as quickly as possible something NOT to focus on at first, instead, drawing out their forces and fighting them in pitched battle, which removes the very arcadey feel of the previous installments where you simply went from base to base, fighting siege to siege. They've also added depth to the auto-resolve function, where you can focus on different styles of combat to insure a higher chance of victory, or a higher percentage of troops left.

    With a few patches, I'm sure this game could reach the 9 or 10 out of 10 it deserves.
    Expand
  47. 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.
  48. Sep 4, 2013
    10
    I think this game is great overall. Even though it has some bugs and doesn't run well, but it has beautiful graphics and great gameplay. The animation, graphics, sound, and gameplay dynamics were completely redone from the previous total war games. Bugs and performance issues should be fixed in a couple of weeks and patches, so therefore I don't think people should judge this game upon those issues. Expand
  49. Oct 24, 2013
    5
    I really like the art. It's pretty. Sadly that is just about it for this game. The battlefield AI was recently made slightly more intelligent which is always nice. However the world map AI is garbage. I really wish we the players were given as good a copy as the "professional" critics. They seem to have gotten a good working version.
  50. Sep 13, 2013
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Paid reviews the game. Expand
  51. 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
  52. Sep 4, 2013
    0
    As a player of the TW series since Shogun1, here is my opinion. The good: - beautiful campaign map - nice soundtrack - lots of factions (though only a few playable) - smarter AI (still not smart enough) The bad: - no balance at all - battles are over in 3-5 minutes - no bit of realism whatsoever - very poor optimization - Multiplayer minimalized compared to Shogun2 - Interface
    - Drop hacking in MP still an issue
    - bugs/glitches
    - very hard to mod
    - turn timers

    Overall the worst TW release so far, this tops even the Empire TW disaster.
    Expand
  53. Sep 27, 2013
    0
    ai is mentally handicapped and turn rotations take forever those damn "critics" have clearly never played more then a few hours of a game or don't realize that you need enemies in a total war game not brainless ai that don't bother to attack.
  54. Sep 3, 2013
    1
    to counter the silly 10's being thrown around out the wrongfully I had to give this game a 1. It's not worthy of a 10 and everyone knows itl It's not worthy of a 1 but we have to even things out. Right now it has some intuitive issues and crash issues and diplomacy issues and I saw them. Figuring out how to build took about 3 turns and having to have a plat form before one builds is just more micromangement the game doesn't need. Diplomacy is silly in that no one wants a simple trade agreememt or non aggression pact. Crashing is a big issue with me because I rarely have them but this game crashed on the very first battle. a bad one too reset my whole computer and did a hard reboot. I'm sure there will be more issues like the AI is pretty easy too but hopefully that is because of these early factions I've encountered if it gets better without mods I'll up my score until then it gets a 1 Expand
  55. Sep 13, 2013
    4
    A good game soured by a rushed release and unfinished content. The alpha screens and videos showed something much better than was delivered, a real shame really. I did enjoy the game until I started to crash in battles with more than two armies present, co-op is shamefully incomplete, and worst of all the fixes will be paid DLC.

    Really that is what you can sum up Rome 2 as, a shame. A
    real shame.

    Who do we blame? Publisher or Developer. My bet is both.
    Expand
  56. Sep 10, 2013
    3
    It's fun but right now it's easily the worst total war game in the series. Absolutely horrendous optimisation, horrendous ai problems, horrendous ship combat. Conquering people and running an empire is always fun, and I have played 20 hours so far conquering people. Very rarely does a challenge actually occur and the bugs are ridiculous. It crashed because I merged armies. It crashed because I tried to assassinate a general and attack with my stack at the same time.
    It crashed because blah blah blah.. the list goes on.

    The textures are pig ugly, on all settings with all tweeking. The frames per second is terribly optimised too.

    The game lacks atmosphere and doesn't really suck you in like shogun 2. all the cut scenes are pretty much cut, the music is just generic windy washy sounds with a few shouts thrown in. I already miss the victory song from Fall of the samurai and when you win in this you just get a shout.. oh great yeah.. give me some war drums or anything? Just lacks atmosphere.

    I wish I hadn't bothered, the sad thing is I expected this from the developers but I anticipated it would actually be an improvement over shogun 2 which is excellent..
    Expand
  57. Sep 9, 2013
    10
    Despite the bugs, this is a very entertaining game. I've put 30+ hours into it already and I am enjoying it thoroughly. Optimization, AI, and hardware problems will probably be addressed by the weekly patches CA plans to release. I am disappointed with the state of the game CA release, but it is still very fun, even with my low FPS on the campaign map.
  58. Dec 12, 2013
    0
    Worst TW game to date. I've never had any complaints about previous titles, and I've loved many of them, but this game is truly hideous in every aspect. Previous titles always had that sort of feeling as though they have been crafted by the same hand, there were elements which you recognized. Rome 2 looks like it was made by an entirely different developer. Everything is wrong with this game, there's not one feature worthy of merit, not to mention that even with all the high end graphics options, the game still looks awful as far as I'm concerned. Expand
  59. Sep 17, 2013
    0
    [comment no longer applicable, removed by the author] [comment no longer applicable, removed by the author] [comment no longer applicable, removed by the author]
  60. Sep 15, 2013
    1
    A step backward for TW arcadey and simplistic combat, ugly graphics and a really weak campaign mode. I dislike the 3D portraits and found the unit cards to be be too hard to distinguish between at a glance. So glad I was able to try it before I wasted money on it, I'll go back to playing MTW2, RTW or even ETW.
  61. Sep 5, 2013
    8
    For the first time I find my self going against the majority of other voters here and giving this an 8. Though I find it wise to ignore all 0 and 10 scores when reading these user/commercial reviews. You get a better idea of what the games about without the hate or ass kissing reviews. Truth is though I do agree with them this time. The faults they list are right. I pre ordered and had Athens appear underwater in a battle, one of several bugs I have seen. The min specs do appear to be way to optimistic too, so lots of people will have wasted £45 for Rome 2 and will not be able to play it. So they are expressing their anger here. All too understandable. Fact is though, the campaign game may be slow because there are lots of factions to process, the map may be huge for the same reason. But the campaign map is a big improvement both feature wise and graphically over all over Total War games and deserves that 8 score I am giving it because the rest is likely to be fixed in patches to come. It does away with the old upgrade and forget system and replaced with it a province system where you build stuff to balance out your influence, food production and happiness. It works rather well. Because provinces have minor towns and a major town, the major towns tend to be epic battles where as the minor towns tend to be small scale affairs. The province system shares influence and happiness between all towns in the province, so you have to consider the balance you achieve and avoid upgrading all minor towns but use them as a means to support the larger province capital instead. The time it takes for a turn to end seems to have gotten better after the first day so perhaps the pre order code was old beta code or something. Also I have not seen the interface lock up bug since the first day so it looks like it was older code. Unit and Army limit sounds bad at first to be honest should not exist in a game like this because money should limit those things, but the game works rather well. Especially when timing attacks so more than 1 army attacks a town at the same time. Producing some of the best campaign game battles I have ever seen in any Total War game so far. The game does have problems, but the campaign game is very well thought out. Too bad the UI sucks so badly. Under the hood this is the same old Total War game you know and love though, but the new additions improve it beyond what your used too. Expand
  62. Sep 8, 2013
    0
    CA needs to stop releasing buggy games on release. "Total War games are always buggy at release", that is obviously not a good thing, its a nasty habit. Don't be an enabler and mindlessly preorder games. If the developers can't be bothered to polish a game before release, they aren't worth anyone's time.
  63. Sep 9, 2013
    3
    The critics must be watching trailers on this one!! The biggest problem for me right now is the ever present lag, even on my very capable gaming rig. It detracts from a game which I long to delve into, and frustrates me after short amounts of play. This along with the graphical bugs, such as popping and texture streaming make this game look very shoddy for the AAA title it so keenly clings to. Mopping these issues up is ESSENTIAL for me to ever boost my score.

    Smaller irritations that I have noticed, albeit not game breaking for me personally are:
    The complete lack of managing to retain a formation during battle; troops just kind of smush together in a big conglomeration which sends the whole "tactics" bit out of the window.
    All units seem to route extremely easily and rapidly, meaning that battles are very very short.
    The bizarre interface which is counter-intuitive and makes me spend ages figuring out what a certain button actually builds, and what the construct actually does.
    Troops seem to run extremely quickly...as though they are all wearing roller blades.
    Diplomacy seems utterly pointless, (at least at my stage of play.) The same can be said of politics.
    I don't understand the household pool thing at all.

    These are the problems which spring to mind right now, although they keep on flooding in as I rethink.

    I give this game, perhaps confusingly to those who have read this, a 3. I believe (hope) that were the lag issues to be sorted, I could perhaps try and live with the other problems and irritations. And also, I honestly believe, that somewhere amongst this mess is a very good game with huge potential. Unfortunately however, in its present form, it is nowhere near the quality I would expect for my £30.

    Roll on the miracle patches.
    Expand
  64. Sep 16, 2013
    9
    Great game, some changes on how the campaign map works (cities, regions etc.), which works nicely. Same awesome battles, now with astonishing graphics.
    There are some problems though, where some people (as always) cannot play the game from release. They seem keen on fixing this though.
    AI is a bit ambivalent some times really 'smart', some times amazingly dumb..
    Really heavy game to
    run, as it feels like it was not optimised at all. I have only small problems, but I read that a lot of ppl have great difficulty even running the game. I expect this to be handled in patches.
    I believe they will fix a lot of the problems, though it does not seem likely they change the ai too much, as it is such an advanced part of the game.
    As with all Total War-games, I still love this title and must give it 9/10 so far.
    I understand ppls frustration and why the rating is so negative right now, but releases has been rough on all aaa-titles the last 5 years, so this should, unfortunately, be expected by now.
    Expand
  65. 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
  66. Feb 18, 2014
    3
    After playing this game and trying desperately to like it, I find myself with only one thought --- what the hell happened? How did a company that's put out a whole string of games that upped the bar for the Strategy genre time and time again, with each incarnation finding a way to improve over the last, put out something this appallingly bad. Appalling. I have never used that before to describe the shape of a video game because I have never encountered a game that was so profoundly inept and utterly disappointing. Let alone a game named as a sequel to one of the most well received strategy games of all time.

    Don't get me wrong, there are games that are worse than this, much , much worse, but none so utterly in-congruent with its name sake. If I didn't no better I would think that this game was an outsourced abomination and not a product of the same developer who crafted all other games bearing the Total War banner.

    The AI is awful, the difficulty erratic and unfair, the graphics somehow don't seem as good as the last couple iterations. Why this is, I do not know, it may be that they are technically better, but optimized so poorly that even the most advanced of systems will inexplicably encounter performance issues. The loading times are....well let's just say I hope you have a nice chair to doze off in. I'm just at a loss to explain why so many things just don't work, are bug ridden, and/or only work sometimes.

    The worst of it all is how they have decided to make the game more difficult. You may remember the concept of spies/assassin's/saboteurs/etc from previous incarnations, where there seemed like there was some kind of formula allowing a result based on factors that felt at least some way fair. Well that is no more. Your "agents", as they are called in Rome II, are a collection of the dumbest individuals of all time who have about as good of chance of succeeding on a mission as a bull has to going through a china shop without causing damage. The CPU however, has the opposite problem. They can send ONE, ONE agent who can singlehandedly cripple your city in such a way that it is utterly decimated for 20-30 years...yes I said years. And this one agent can roll up to your largest, most experienced army, lead by your best general and kill him literally 19 out of 25 times. Your chances with identical circumstance --- 4 our of 25.. Those are the numbers I got. I know its not an scientific result and I don't have any proof to post it, but when I had an experienced general with a full army assaulted by a singular agent, then reloaded it to see how it would play out again. I did the same thing when I faced a fully stacked enemy army with a leader of comparable level and an agent with the same novice level abilities that the CPU agent had. I give it a 3 because sometimes it is genuinely fun, but honestly its not fun enough to elevate it above the level of "fun" that comes along when you are super drunk and you throw up after which you feel a little better.

    Thats' all I've got to say. Caveat Emptor my friends, caveat emptor.
    Expand
  67. Sep 6, 2013
    0
    Wow, i'm a big fan of the total war series, i have played hundreds hours on every game since Rome 1, on every DLC, and i wanted so much to love this one! here were so much announcements, but it appears it was mostly false advertising...
    The AI was never very good in any total war, but at least, if you played "fair" and don't used and abused of some tricks, you could have great challenges,
    especially in napoleon and shogun 2 You could enjoy from time to time some epic battles if you played in very hard or legendary, be it a victory or not, that was something quite unique in my video game experience.
    Rome 2 was advertised as putting that at another scale.

    But the problem is... the AI is dumber than in any previous total wars i played, even Rome 1.
    On the campaign map the AI can't build balanced armies, balanced settlements, and on the field, it's worse...
    Either they storm you and try to outnumber you by throwing everything in a big melee (clash of 12000 men's, i dreamed of that... i had 2200 mens against 10000... and i won with less than 500 losses because the AI just throw everything in a big mass, you flank that mass, and they almost instantly routed... not fun at all... no strategy involved, it's absolutely not "epic"...) or if there is a wall between you and them, you can just take a break of one hour or fast forward the battle, because either they will not even try to approach the walls, they will not use their siege weapons, and if you kill the unit trying to ignite the door (yes, you can take Rome or Carthage just by putting a damn door on fire with some torches your soldier throw at it, like in shogun 2.. )
    Well, i'm very disappointed, there is many little things i don't like very much in the game, but they are often design choices, and well, i have to do with that until someone mod them, and there is also some things that are well thoughts, like the province system, the nice campaign map... but the AI!! It's the meat of the game! How could it be possible they never realised there was such a big problem before releasing that game (and advertising that it was the best AI ever...)???
    Until the AI is not fixed, i can't rate this game over 0, because it's supposed to be a strategy game, and there is obviously no strategy nor fun at all in the solo campaign (i don't play multi, so i can't rate that)

    And sorry for my bad bad english...
    Expand
  68. Sep 25, 2013
    1
    This game is broken beyond belief. So much lag with the lowest settings so its obviously not the computer its the game. ITS BROKEN. To legally be able to release a game and charge $60 for something broken just makes me wonder what this world is coming to. Stay far away from this game, you will be less frustrated doing so. Wish I did
  69. Sep 6, 2013
    3
    As the old saying goes; Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. I'm not sure what might e said about the fourth or fifth time.

    Total War: Rome 2 was probably the biggest "Not again" moment I've had in recent years. While the series was hit and miss in general depending on what time period was offered and how that changed overall gameplay Total War: Rome was generally
    considered one of the best in the series.

    Total War: Rome 2 had a lot to live up to and unfortunately it didn't. The fact that Creative Assembly hasn't exactly reinvented the wheel as far as combat mechanics and tactics over the last what, ten years(?), should make for a very rich and refined experience now. The problem is the same UI issues, A.I. issues, overall poor performance that plagued previous installments are back. This time around there are so many bugs and issues that the game is almost laughably broken.

    The whole "wait for the patch" mentality has worn thin for me, especially on a big budget game that clearly was shoved out to meet a release window. This was an utter disappointment to a series I was once a big fan of. 3/10
    Expand
  70. Sep 5, 2013
    0
    his game failed its Total War predecessors. It is too fast paced, it´s hard to actually "feel" the game and immerse in to it, because of the new campaign, in which you just don´t give a what happens next. Diplomacy is ok but could stil use improvement (especially the trade agreements).
    But the battles! Oh my god, they suck balls. Even with high tier units, the battles tend to last at ma…
    Expand
    Helpful? 18 of 23 users said Yes. All this user's reviews
    Necromonger Sep 4, 2013 0 Extremely disapointed and i see revieuws of this game scoring 9 and 9.5 Do game revieuwers get payed these days This game isnt even in Beta stage, seriously what an abomination... I got a beast of a system and it runs crap, crashes, textures bugs, politics what politics insane wait times per turn... I wait a few months to the modders can fix this game as the originel is jus… Expand
    Expand
  71. Nov 8, 2013
    0
    A perfect example on how NOT to treat your customers... Releasing unfinished game that looks worse than previous instalment but boasts the opposite? Ridiculous approach. Very poor optimization...the campaign map...waiting for other factions movement takes up 90% of your time...we did not pay to sit around waiting to play... Multiplayer desync problems. Avoid...unless you are very patient and loaded... Expand
  72. Sep 19, 2013
    0
    Total War: Rome II is total the my high end rig can not even run it a 30 fps at max settings I got a FX 8350 and 7970 and I don't even get a 30 fps stable if you want to play a RTS play Shogan 2 this game is freaking
  73. Sep 15, 2013
    9
    This game is a solid 8 at least, no matter how low it's rated here.
    The only thing these haters are right about is the pathetic AI, which, well, it is indeed pathetic.
    You don't want to pay for a flawed TW game? Wait some months until a solid body of patches and mods fix AI and major bugs, and then buy the game. You should already know by now that CA likes to release games that need
    patching/modding in order to achieve the quality we all like.

    But, anyway, what about Rome II's virtues? Only half of the people here are talking about those.
    I've played all TW titles since the original "Rome: Total War" and Rome II has absolutely the best graphics by light years (anyone who says this is a "repixelated" version of Rome:TW whatever that means...LOL, is either a fool or a liar (or has a rig that can't handle Rome II and the game is lowering texture and model quality according to the system capabilities).
    Rome II isn't a pain in the arse to micro/macro manage and has, AT LAST, a clear diplomacy system that makes sense, unlike the original Rome:TW.
    A pretty lame AI is the only real flaw of Rome II, the rest rocks big time. Give them time to improve AI/develop mods and this stuff will be a milestone in ancient era strategy games.

    I don't understand why people is saying Shogun II had a better UI when Rome II has pretty much the same. But anyway, some of them are rating this game a 0 only because they don't like the UI.
    Don't worry guys, someone will patch it or make a mod soon enough that will end your misgivings.
    You think Rome:TW had an intuitive UI? LOL. I hated spending 10 entire minutes endlessly clicking different windows and icons only to manage my construction reports, and after that I had to manage my unit recruitment reports which meant 5 additional minutes of clicking, and after that I had to spend 5 more minutes managing diplomacy and agent actions. So we are talking about AT LEAST 20 minutes of clicking all sorts of things just to manage the basic elements of my faction EVERY TURN.
    The rest of the time I spent moving troops, warring and checking my settlements INDIVIDUALLY (when I had a few of them it was fun, but when I had 30+ it started being really annoying). What many people here is complaining about is that they no longer get to spend nearly half an hour in managing their settlements and getting sick of it in the process.
    Rome II's provincial managing makes it so much faster/easier to handle settlements and troops I can't believe you guys don't like it. And what about the building tree? How many buildings do you need?
    I hated it when I had 10 different types of shrines and temples, when I didn't need a third of them.
    In Rome:TW you didn't need half the buildings available for construction, so what was the point? Immersion? Don't worry, I'm sure someone will make a mod adding hundreds of buildings.
    I like the number of buildings Rome II offers, but if someone makes a mod including more buildings I'll sure give it a try. The same goes for the tech tree, you are complaining about things that are easily solved and don't have a major impact on the game. I'm glad of the simple fact that Rome II has a tech tree, unlike Rome:TW, and If someone makes a script to add even more technologies I'll be even happier, but I won't start complaining about something I regard as an improvement .

    What about naval battles and landings? They are great features, something Rome:TW lacked and has been included in Rome II, so what's wrong? The problem is the AI which is a totally different matter and will disappear when it gets fixed, the rest is absolutely amazing and I'm glad CA included it in the game.

    It's true Rome II doesn't let you split your forces the same way Rome:TW allowed ok this is a setback but, again, I'm sure it can be changed. And what about unit recruitment? It's pretty much the same as always, you can only train troops at the settlements were you have developed the technology to train them so what's wrong about it?
    Someone complained about units becoming a blob after entering combat (losing their formation)...
    first, this also happened in the rest of TW games, second, it's realistic, when you are hitting and getting hit your concentration shifts from keeping your formation to not dying...
    And what about chariot/horse impacts? Of course units fly away and get crushed into the ground, it's kind of what happens...

    And yes, there are no family trees in Rome II, at least not like in Rome:TW, big deal... Rome II deserves a 0 for this?

    Battles are too short and easy... well, that's because the AI is lame. Again, once it gets fixed you won't stand a chance. This is the same problem all the previous TW games had and were eventually solved.
    Rome II runs at decent fps on my rig but, like the rest of TW games, it lags over time. Well, I'm amazed Rome II can run 4000+ hugely detailed units, terrain,sky, water, effects at 50fps, so that's that...

    Great game with a nasty AI and lots of potential.
    Expand
  74. Nov 5, 2013
    3
    Very sad, but Total War: Rome II failed. I expected a lot of from this game, but a see only one thing- failure. The game has very good graphics, but very bad optimisation. Bad AI, that make game quite boring. In my opinion- pure waste of money
  75. Sep 11, 2013
    7
    Totally horrible stupid A.I and graphics buy even with my high end PC and flag points on the battlefield totally ruined it .Horrible campaign matches that serge battle depend on a stupid flag point
  76. Sep 5, 2013
    1
    The game is laggy and ugly even on my relatively good computer. I'm not going to play it until it is patched and hopefully optimized and I can't recommend it to anyone. I feel sorry I preordered this unfinished game.

    At the moment it is the ugliest Total war game ever. The graphics look like they are 10 years old.
  77. Sep 7, 2013
    3
    Poorly optimized GFX and AI
    UI reminiscent of a console game feels really dumbed down.
    Too many factions takes too long to process AI's turn.

    It's against my princples, but really wished I'd pirated this rather than pre-ordered....
  78. Sep 4, 2013
    0
    Well for me and all my numerous friends who were hyped for Rome 2 this game is huge disapointment. It looks and works worse than shogun 2. Looks like half trough development phase. Shaders not working, AA not working properly, performance is horrible at i5,i7 and to date GPUs while shogun 2 looked much sweeter and FPS high and smooth. The look of this game doesnt look at all, not even 20% of how its shown on "screenshots" from producer. On top of that numerous game braking bugs, broken AI, horrible placeholder interface, bugs, battle speed silly fast, awkward camera, awkward units behavior, fights looking far worse than shogun 2... well i dont know where to stop, but this game is just cr... compared to predecesor. No fun at all to play... Ah, and btw. shaders seems to be broken aswell no difference which one i choose at system that can handle them all it all looks like if there would be some cr.. shader on. Expand
  79. Sep 8, 2013
    5
    I pre-purchased this game the day it was pre-released. I installed it the day it came out. It ran ok the first night...but I noticed a LOT of bugs. I tried some custom battles. I used 4 squads of Spartan Hoplites against some Rome Cohorts...I got pwned. I even out-flanked them and out-maneuvered them...nope, dead. It is on "normal" difficulty.

    Since day 2, I have spent 30+ hours
    trying to get the game to launch..it won't...freezes on the load-up screen. Right now there are 434 positive reviews of RTW2, and 767 negative...make that 767. CA and Sega have my money....I don't have anything in return except anger and frustration. I'm going to make sure that they lose lots of money by helping scare away potential buyers...until the game is FIXED. DO NOT BUY THIS GAME yet. Wait until they get their together. Expand
  80. Sep 11, 2013
    6
    I've put in about 30 hours so far, so I think that's enough for an initial review.

    Given the complexity of the game mechanics, I'm more than willing to forgive the bugs it must be one hell of a mission to debug this game! But I have played all the TW games except the first Shogun so I'm definitely a veteran.

    Firstly, the campaign map is unforgivable in it's playability. I have an
    Alienware laptop that is only 2 years old, and it was happy handling the Shogun 2 Campaign map. Rome II is not happy at all, even with the fog of war covering most of the map. I'm talking low frame rates, which I find inexplicable. There is nothing going on in the campaign map which is significantly more complex than Medieval II, and yet it takes up many times the processing power simply to run the graphics. The graphics aren't as important as the game. Go all the way back to Medieval and you'll find a quality game still, even though it looks a lot less graphically resplendent.
    Tied in with this is the number of factions available. It wouldn't be so much of a problem if they each didn't take at least 2 seconds to process their moves. With about 50 factions available that's at least 2 minutes to wait for the end of a turn. Couple that with the horrible campaign map frame rate and the campaign side of the game is woefully slow, with the key word here being 'unnecessarily.' Now I understand better systems will cost me less time but as I meet the minimum spec to play the game, I would expect the game to run properly on minimum spec. If you bought Battlefield 3 with a minimum spec machine, then you'd expect 30fps. If the game only ran at 15fps, you'd soon be questioning where the hell they pulled their 'minimum spec' requirements from!
    Next, the management of towns has changed. It looks as though they've tried to dumb down the complexity of the management but have managed instead to make your understanding of how to manage your province impenetrable. They did explain on their forum that they were trying to avoid the amass and conquer style tactics usually employed in the other games, but I personally find this new management style to be horrible. Very little flexibility in managing your towns, very little idea of how to split your building types effectively.
    Then you have the army units themselves. You now need a general in order to have an army and the number of generals is limited by the number of towns you own. This means if you raced in to conquer a town and won, and wanted to move all your archers west to another battle you would have to take that entire army west, drop the archers off and then bring your army back. This is HORRIBLE! And totally unrealistic, which isn't necessarily a hard hitting criticism of a computer game but as they've prided themselves on their realism so far I think it holds strong.
    You no longer need to build fleets to move your army, just walk your army through a port and onto the sea and suddenly they're all in boats. Why? It's a horrible idea.
    The battles themselves are pretty similar to previous titles and so can be a lot of fun. But there is some proper dodgy AI going on in them.
    So all in all, rather disappointing. I really, really enjoyed Shogun II, and the follow up Fall of the Samurai. I can't recommend Rome II to anyone. The changes they've made are for the worse, and it does feel like another dumbing down exercise like with Diablo 3 or Company of Heroes 2. I'm quite sure that pretty soon every game will involve just 1 button to mash repeatedly. After all, that'll be the entire market covered. It strikes me weird that anyone would even attempt to dumb down Total War. The specs to get it running mean only geeks will be playing it anyway.

    I'm not going to shout at CA, I'm not going to get angry. I'm just disappointed. And anyone who's messed up their school year know that is by far the most devastating comment you can get.
    Expand
  81. Sep 3, 2013
    0
    Biggest over hyped game of 2013 no doubt. Poorly optimized and buggy. Loading times are ridiculously slow.

    UI is clunky and not very streamline. I am a big fan of the Total war series so it saddens me to admit this is nothing but a disappointment. Before the zealous fanboys scream ''your pc is I have an ultra end gaming computer and can run arma 3, and metro 2033 at over 50fps on ultra.
  82. 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
  83. Nov 29, 2013
    8
    Straight out of the gate I have to admit I have a positive predisposition regarding anything Roman. A strategy game on this subject is therefore one of the top even before I start the game for the first time.
    Total War: Rome I has been played for hours on end and it looks like number II won't be a different.
    Well, in fact it is. As I was slaughtering barbarians alone in I, I'm now doing
    it in co-op with a good friend in II.

    As you probably have read so far the game was beyond buggy upon release and to say that it is stable now is a grand understatement of the core issues that still haunt it. The developers however have put their best effort into fixing each and every one of the major issues, so that at least single player is well playable.
    Multiplayer does however quite often freeze up without reason; leaving some save games utterly unplayable.

    But the shear size of the game, the options, the battles and the strategic choices make you come back time after time, especially when you are sharing the enjoyment with a good friend.
    In short, if you can get past the irritating glitches that can in some aspects overshadow the good, you find yourself in a massive, diverse and challenging game filled with the best war scenes one can think of: Ancient Rome.
    Expand
  84. Sep 10, 2013
    3
    Im not sure what they are thinking! They released the game way to soon when fans would have understood. It is dumb down and streamlined way too hard. So many bad design decisions make it depressing to play this "Total War" game
  85. Oct 25, 2013
    2
    Nothing good came from this game. Good things : - Better graphics (of course!) - Naval combat. The naval combat itself is fun enough. But the AI is useless. - Naval and ground combat in one map. Great concept, lackluster execution. Bad things : - Bad campaign, takes hours just to go to next turn. - Troops has really stupid AI. Enemy troops will charge at you, and break off at the last moment, and keep repeating it, while taking a lot of fire from your archers. Even though the enemy unit is superior, they don't want to charge you.
    - Stupid flags. Nobody wants to capture flags in the middle of the war.
    - Campaign map LOOKS great, but too bad, the campaign AI sucks.

    This game is an example of a game that put graphics above game play experience. The game has a lot of interesting new concepts, but the AI of the game (which should be a focus of a strategy game) is really really lacking. Nobody wants to look at fancy graphics and fancy ships, we want enemy AI that (at least) give a convincing fight.
    Expand
  86. Jan 27, 2014
    6
    First off I am a big fan of the Total War series so it hurts me to say this. Sega stop putting Betas out on steam for at full price. you did it with Empire Total War and now you did it with this game. I am going to give this a 6 just because going back to that time time period is so much fun by it self.
  87. Oct 23, 2013
    3
    In short, I call this game a failure in the series, simply because the changes over the previous titles, and the new additions are poorly implemented, and they are not fleshed out enough to make a difference. What I don't understand is, even though they had a bigger budget, and "experience" from the previous titles, accomplishments and mistakes, how have they come up with such a disaster.

    Longer version, the battles play way more faster than any previous title in the series, and mostly it becomes a blob-fest where your orders doesn't matter. This is where you'll notice that nearly all units have an ability, maybe more than one, and this is another example to the bad implementation. You win battles by using to these abilities, rather than a careful planning and execution of the strategy. Which is a shame, as I think many people play this game for its epic battles. Not to mention that the AI is still troubled, and most of the time do stupid stuff.

    Among the new features, now you pick a stance for an army. Why? It felt natural before; if you have slow moving units, your army movement was bound to those units. To move fast, you had to use cavalry-only forces to hit and run, or catch an enemy. To ambush, you had to set up "camp" in forests, and alike. It felt natural, you didn't have to click on anything to "toggle" those stuff. Also, the way the recruitment is done in this game is just retarded. Why change the old ways? Recruit from any city/town, group them up, send them to the general. While it seems logical in Rome; that your general has to stand still, it is not. Game tries to "emulate" the process for you, but it makes so in a stupid way. Shogun II's system was better, recruit at general, and recruits move to general, also can get intercepted. Recruit in towns, group them up and send them to general yourself. Etc...

    Naval combat... I don't like it. The best naval combat was naturally in Empire Napoleon. There, you can execute some strategy. Any other game, where cannons are not involved, it generally ends up in an orgy on some ship, and all other ships around it. Still, combining naval combat with land combat, that's a very good step. However, that thing is bugged aswell, I am unaware if it is fixed but, there are just a few landing points, and when all of them are occupied, all your ships can just watch the rest of the battle.

    City management also suffers. You cannot get a clear picture of what is what that easily, and this IS a big problem. UI has always been one of the weakest points in Total War games in my opinion. Instead of expanding on and improving what they had, they just skimmed the UI heavily, and buried the essentials even deeper. Introduction of bread, and changes to growth, while sounds sensible, takes away a part of the game; town/city development. In Shogun II, if you captured a well developed city that belonged to your enemy, you'd be keeping it intact, because any sacking/razing done would affect the accumulated growth aswell. Now, there is no point, a city is always the same, razing or sacking doesn't change a thing.

    Among other new things, the political system is rudimentary, non-essential at best. It involves a few buttons that are totally unnecessary, and takes up hard-disk space in short. Also, (for Rome and Carthage at least), political system sort-of gets disabled after the major rebellions. As I've said, poorly implemented and not fleshed out fully.

    The performance of the game is on the floor. While I can play Shogun II on extreme, and even Rome II offered me Extreme, it turns out, I can only play it at low-medium. Just unbelievable.

    I can go on. But among this many negative reviews, I think you get the point already.
    Expand
  88. Sep 6, 2013
    0
    Horrible UI.
    Horrendously confusing unit cards.
    Poorly optimized.
    Fix the triremes.
    Where is my guard button.
    Make a unit card that covers half my screen.

    2/10 for releasing.

    Glad I paid 60$ for beta testing.
  89. 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
  90. Sep 10, 2013
    3
    To put it simply. Whatever you do, no matter how you feel about past Total War games. Do. Not. Buy. This. Product. Not only is it totally unfinished. It is not a fun game to play. The AI is ridiculous. The game design is deeply flawed with contradictions and annoyances. I have played for 25 hours. 5 of those hours have been waiting for the CPU to take its move. I run this game on a £4000 system. GTX680, i7 3.33ghtz, 16gb Ram and it is too slow, choppy and laggy (offline) to bare to play any longer. It is torture. I am so, so disappointed to have waited so long for such a terrible excuse for a game. May CA and Sega learn a harsh, harsh lesson. RIP PC gaming. Expand
  91. Sep 4, 2013
    8
    The game is good, does it have it's problems? You bet. The AI is at the current state where Shogun2 was just after release. Which is somewhere between good and mediocre. There are optimization issues, especially with shadows, and water reflections. Baring that, I'm easily able to get an avg 35-36fps.

    What most people who say "but zomg ultra rig" are forgetting is that most games in
    the FPS genre are good at non-animated semi-static flat meshes. Where as in RTS's, such as shogun 2, rome 2, and so on ever individual character is it's own mesh. That's four times as much rendering being done. And in a lot of cases, the "zomg ultra rig" is your Dell special. With a FX-6350 and a 560Ti, I have modest frames with little to no lag issues that others are reporting. With that, one of the biggest suckers on FPS is the "use all available memory" toggle, that most people are flipping on and not understanding. Using that toggle with push everything it can, and it will also attempt to push other programs from active memory to the disk in order to free up even more memory. So, if you're not using a SSD, again you're going to see serious issues.

    Really if I had one complaint, it would be the turn phase and the number of factions. It really reminds me of medieval 2, lots of factions doing lots of things, and people don't like the long turns. Once the factions begin to thin out, not so much of an issue.

    And for anyone who wants to see my forest benchmark, feel free to look up on Steamcommunity.com/id/mashiki
    Expand
  92. Sep 5, 2013
    5
    I have been a big fan of everything CA for years. I really enjoyed empire and shogun, thinking that they basically did everything correctly in those games. I find Rome II to be disappointing. It's hard to put my finger on why, exactly. I think a major part of the problem is the long wait between turns. It breaks immersion and it is not fun to sit there for a minute while the enemy crunches numbers. This is actually my chief complaint. If the game loaded faster and crunched turns faster, then I would probably be enjoying this game a lot more. Expand
  93. Jan 10, 2014
    0
    The AI is still completely broken! DO NOT BUY THIS GAME YET!!! It is practically impossible to loose any battles in this game! The game provides no challenge what so ever. If you want to play total war games stick to Shogun 2 instead!
  94. Sep 8, 2013
    0
    This is one of the few games that I literally could not play. after marathoning Shogun 2, Rome 1 and Medieval 2 for the last two months I have concluded that this game strays way too far from the original formula over complicating simple things and oversimplifying the things that have worked well in previous installments of the franchise
  95. Sep 4, 2013
    9
    I think the main gripe one can have is that game isn't (more or less) a complete remake of the first Rome Total War. Then again, I personally loved Shogun 2 as well as its add-ons. Rome II makes me feel pretty much at home whilst there's plenty of changes in the system to make it feel like a whole other game. Yes it's buggy, there's a lot that goes in combat and those shield bearers really hurt. As for framerate, a lot of games run poorly on launch, just wait for a new driver for your graphics card. Mine runs 40~60 on ultra without SLI (680). A month after release it'll feel totally different and a lot smoother! Expand
  96. Sep 9, 2013
    0
    Most people who rate this highly usually say "it's good but" this game is broken from the graphics to the AI, and what's worse is the optimization meaning it'll be difficult to get a good FPS even on good rigs.
  97. Sep 4, 2013
    8
    This game is fun, not 10 stars, but certainly nothing below 5. My computer handles it perfectly, and it's no beast. I'm guessing most people don't treat their hardware right and haven't optimized their software in ages. It's a common problem with new TW releases.

    Bugs Have noticed maybe 2 in a 24 hour session, fairly reasonable.

    + Graphics, it's all beautiful, streamlined campaign
    map (I have played since Shogun 1, and I love this new map), Diplomacy (it's actually reasonable for once in a TW game, nothing compared to Paradox but then I don't expect that). Battles are nice and fun, (though yes short, but I say again.. Vanilla TW.) Navies now do something!!

    - No Family tree, that really blows. I like the new faction stuff, but family trees RPG character aspects have always greatly appealed to me in TW games, and this one does it poorly. It IS a real shame.

    To comment on other reviews, even though I shouldn't.... I think a lot of 12-17 year olds are buying this not knowing what they will get. TW games are never historically accurate, nor are they particularly in-depth. They are a campaign map battle map action empire builder. They emphasize the pretty things, the fighting, the animation, the sounds. The modders are who have made EVERY SINGLE TW game INCREDIBLE. But love CA for their template they put out, without them and the drive to profit, none of those TATW, or RTR would have existed.

    The navies now really help in city assaults (if you don't want to wait to siege a big city, try a sneak naval attack). The naval battles themselves are the most fun they've ever been. I disagree that armies make navies useless, though I do wish the transports would be less effective.

    People don't realize that a game like this is way more resource intensive than ANY of your FPS, due to graphics, and AI processing. If you don't like wait times inbetween turns, don't play this.

    Tons of factions tons of fun, finally, no useless arbitrary 30 faction limit to a TW game.

    As for the AI being stupid. Hi, my name is Ralph, here is your exit. Duh the AI is dumb. What do you expect? Do you know how difficult it is to build something resembling intelligent artificial behavior? It doesn't happen. Yet. Wait for some of those brilliant AI modders who SPEND THEIR ENTIRE LIVES doing that. Even their best work is mneh. I've never had trouble in any TW battle, but being a history major maybe I had an advantage.

    It's a great game, with it's own real problems, which will be resolved in time.
    Expand
  98. Sep 10, 2013
    0
    This game is expect the series to get better with sequels from Shogun and not worst! The AI is horrible,the script for the characters is abysmal.Much less there are deformed faces on the characters,and whatever you saw in the trailer,is NOT THERE. The graphics is horrendous,its like a 2005 PC game,also there is major desync problems. Whatever you saw on youtube about people saying the game is awesome,is a LIE by the company probably paying reviewers to smack a high rating in turn for cash.DO NOT SPEND 50 BUCKS ON THIS GAME. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED Expand
  99. 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.
  100. Sep 3, 2013
    0
    The worst Total War game since Empire. They took every bit of progress they made with Shogun 2 and threw it out the window. What we have instead is an uglier, worse game on the same engine.
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]