Metascore
53

Mixed or average reviews - based on 19 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 19
  2. Negative: 3 out of 19
Buy On
  1. A breath of fresh air when every other historical first person shooter is focusing on World War II, but unfortunately the game isn’t interesting enough to warrant a $50 purchase when you pick up the substantially better "Call of Duty 3" for a few dollars more.
  2. While the game could certainly have used some refinement in a number of key areas, at the end of the day I still enjoyed my time with it.
  3. The History Channel Civil War is a nice alternative to other World War II shooters, but you might want to rent it on a rainy weekend. It's a shame because The History Channel footage is really well integrated into the game.
  4. 60
    While Civil War isn’t going to win over most FPS fans the game does show a huge amount of potential.
  5. Smartly though, the game is very easy on the lowest setting, so even the most aim-challenged of casual gamers should be able to get far into it.
  6. Official Xbox Magazine
    60
    We honestly wanted to like this game a lot, but really, it's worth liking only a little. [Feb. 2007, p.76]
  7. It’s a must play for any Civil War-loving gamers out there, and a decent rental for anyone curious to experience a war game from a war other than World War II for a change.
  8. After playing through the game, we couldn't help but wonder why Civil War: A Nation Divided wasn't released at a lower price point. The game features subpar graphics, no multiplayer mode, poor AI, and a fairly short single-player campaign.
  9. While the historical battles can feel appropriately fierce at times, A Nation Divided is too short and flawed and with no multiplayer mode there’s not much here shooter fans will enjoy.
  10. History Channel: Civil War is good for a few mindless hours of shooting action, but not much else. History buffs need not apply.
  11. 52
    Ultimately, History Channel: Civil War is a game that should be played by most war FPS fans just to experience something different. It may not be the most innovative or exhilarating war FPS, but it is a breath of fresh air from WWII FPS #205.
  12. War has rarely been this uninspiring and run-of-the-mill.
  13. At best, Civil War is a weekend rental for shooter fans, history buffs, or Achievement miners who aren't knee deep in this fall's blockbuster military games. Be prepared to learn a little and reload a lot - while the buckshot flies all around you.
  14. 50
    Sure, you've got some historic weapons and rally cries you won't likely hear in another game. Yet, the shooting isn't fun and the gameplay doesn't do anything to bring the feel of the Civil War to life.
  15. The only person I can recommend this to is a sado-masochist. They will enjoy the torture and unbearing pain that is this game. Please, avoid at all costs.
  16. A game based on the American Civil War could get fans excited, and you'd expect more when it carries the History Channel name. A thoroughly disappointing outing.
  17. 40
    Enemies are downright dumb and it's pretty hard to tell what's solid and what isn't. Bullets breeze through some things but won't pass through the gap between the spokes of a wagon wheel.
  18. With a lack of multiplayer and a very short game – it’s doubtful you’ll be playing this long. The only replay value is the attempt to try to beat your friends score online and that’s not much of an incentive.
  19. The price tag of $50 seems almost insulting to anyone who buys this game, as it has too many problems to even consider warranting a run-through.
User Score
6.9

Mixed or average reviews- based on 31 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 16 out of 31
  2. Negative: 5 out of 31
  1. Sep 11, 2015
    6
    The History Channel: Civil War - A Nation Divided is an average game for the most part, I liked being given the backgrounds on the battlesThe History Channel: Civil War - A Nation Divided is an average game for the most part, I liked being given the backgrounds on the battles before playing them. Both campaigns are alright (some missions are very tedious). The graphics though are PS2 or Xbox -ish "not very good". Full Review »
  2. Yomoweyhhfgmkcnkxj
    Jul 18, 2007
    1
    I thought this game was shit. why the hell does the union wear freakin gray hats, everyone looks the same, your just a lonely soldier with noI thought this game was shit. why the hell does the union wear freakin gray hats, everyone looks the same, your just a lonely soldier with no squad or division, this gamedoesn't knowhow people like good graphics. in most games The ps2 graphics are good on this game it looks like your playing a ds. The 360 looks like ps2 graphics should in ost games Full Review »
  3. LakotaB.
    May 19, 2007
    7
    Its pretty fun but is short and has no multipalyer on it. Pretty good graphics but you die to much from the cannons.