• Publisher: Sega
  • Release Date: Feb 23, 2010
User Score
7.9

Generally favorable reviews- based on 588 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 65 out of 588
Buy On

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. roberts
    Mar 21, 2010
    7
    I love the graphics, the batlles and overall play of the game. I think the AI is a little better and a little more agressive which make the real time battles more fun to play. My disappointment comes when I go from the strategy turn based part of the game to the real time battles. there is a glitch where the game runs intermittent while loading the battle. It can take 5-10 minutes to load I love the graphics, the batlles and overall play of the game. I think the AI is a little better and a little more agressive which make the real time battles more fun to play. My disappointment comes when I go from the strategy turn based part of the game to the real time battles. there is a glitch where the game runs intermittent while loading the battle. It can take 5-10 minutes to load up a battle on my computer. My computer is a brand new Alienware aurora with upgraded graphics. It's definitely not a slow or under powered computer. I think it's a game flaw. It will also freeze up every now when going to a real time battle. Other than that the gameplay is great and smooth at full graphics. The other thing I like is the time frame for each turn, two weeks. It's great and much more realistic than previous total war games. That adds so much to the game for me and the reason I rate the game higher than I would with my loading problem. If it weren't for the battle loading problem I would give this game a 9.... Expand
  2. Mikem
    Mar 20, 2010
    7
    The strength of total war games has always been the mods to fill in the flush out the game. It feels like the developers are trying to LIMIT modding instead of encourage it, because they think that will promote more sales from it's base, instead of players replaying Rome or Europe mods. The result is a limited game, with a limited campaign with no room for improvement. I read forums The strength of total war games has always been the mods to fill in the flush out the game. It feels like the developers are trying to LIMIT modding instead of encourage it, because they think that will promote more sales from it's base, instead of players replaying Rome or Europe mods. The result is a limited game, with a limited campaign with no room for improvement. I read forums which said the game is better then empire, but now I'm disillusioned with the whole franchise. I'm going to start looking elsewhere for strategy games in general, and stop buying Total War games because they say total war. Expand
  3. May 10, 2012
    7
    This game has the greatest campaign of all the Total war series but it's actual meat which is the battle's is lacking. The Multiplayer is crap unless you play with trusted friends who play honestly and don't abuse the game. The game's multiplayer is EASY to abuse and camp. The historical battles are epic and the story mode campaign was amazing. From Napoleons campaign in Italy, Egypt andThis game has the greatest campaign of all the Total war series but it's actual meat which is the battle's is lacking. The Multiplayer is crap unless you play with trusted friends who play honestly and don't abuse the game. The game's multiplayer is EASY to abuse and camp. The historical battles are epic and the story mode campaign was amazing. From Napoleons campaign in Italy, Egypt and Conquest of Europe this game gives us a great drive to accomplish what Napoleon did. The campaign map introduces winter/desert attrition and tactical terrain. Campaign, 5/5, Battles 2.5/5 Expand
  4. Sep 4, 2012
    7
    I believe that this game delivers what it intends to. I love the tota-war franchise and the gameplay style. The Napoleon theme also enriches the game a lot. Would give it more if not for the lack of improvements from Empire. Also some buggy features, overall a good game. Buy it if you find it at a decent price. The development team needs your support, not fanboysm. Not a full price.
  5. Oct 14, 2014
    5
    Napoleon: Total War is part of a series of war simulations that never quite gets it right. At best it is a passable game that might be interesting for a fortnight, but it never really captures the essence of warfare of the period it pretends to portray. But what is even more.. it tends to become boring pretty fast.
    The game is a watered down version of civilization in which battles are
    Napoleon: Total War is part of a series of war simulations that never quite gets it right. At best it is a passable game that might be interesting for a fortnight, but it never really captures the essence of warfare of the period it pretends to portray. But what is even more.. it tends to become boring pretty fast.
    The game is a watered down version of civilization in which battles are conducted using a real time strategy (hah!) engine. There are a few Napoleonic features that should give us an impression of warfare from that period. So we have infantry, cavalry, and artillery. Each neatly divided into heavy, medium and light. Heavy to provide the punch, medium to provide the backbone of the army and light to provide easy maneuverability. Infantry was equipped with muskets and bayonets, cavalry with swords, pistols, lances and short ranged muskets, artillery with guns and howitzers.
    All of this is done with nice looking models so there is no complaint from me there.
    What I do complain about is the implementation.
    The game completely misrepresent warfare of that period because it just generates troops as if they are part of a twentieth century production line. An army, and certainly the Grand Army that was commanded by Napoleon, was a carefully husbanded tool of power. The performance of this army, which out performed most other armies of the time, was a combination of revolutionary spirit, corps the esprit, tactical and strategical genius, and careful planning.
    Instead the game defaults to a: generate troops and throw them against your enemy in batches of twenty, as twenty is the maximum amount of units that you can field in a battle. Eventually you will be able to create crack armies out of thin air by having a few cities produce them from scratch.
    Like really?
    The game doesn't really bother with things like supply lines, which at that time had a crucial impact on the deployment of armies. We are speaking about time that armies started to become so big that they could no longer live from the land. Sometimes they could for a short while: the Grand Army of Napoleon deliberately abandoned their supply lines in 1805 to fool their enemies.
    Napoleon was often facing superior numbers which he dealt with by using speed and maneuverability. He utilized the corps as unit, basically a small self contained army, which would march along a separate route from the other corps and was to meet other corps at a certain point to combine into an army and attack the enemy.
    Nothing of this you can find in this game. You could easily march your armies back and forth through Europe without suffering too much for it.
    In essence on this strategic level the game has nothing Napoleonic. It could be Rome: Total War, Shogun: Total War or Alexander: Total War, Word War 1 : Total War or Korea: Total War..Just change the graphics accordingly.

    So is there anything Napoleonic on the tactical level?
    What there is, is not much and it is half implemented. For instance.. your infantry can assume a square formation. This was a tactic used against cavalry. In this game you have to order them.. the AI never assumes square formation, not even when directly threatened by cavalry. In fact... ai led infantry just assumes a line formation and fires at your cavalry even when attacked from the rear.
    Column to line and vice verse tactics do not exist. For those who are not in the know: column was used to move faster and to deliver close assault. Line tactics were used to maximize fire power. Oh you could click on the button to change decrease and increase your ranks.. but really.. that is not how it should be.
    Skirmish infantry doesn't work properly. Skirmish infantry was used to screen units from attack and to harass the enemy or provoke him into an unwise attack. The essential element is that the skirmish unit would fall back when attacked.. which in this game can only be achieved by having them turn their backs towards their attackers and march them away.. Skirmish units were trained in backing up.
    Line units lack skirmish units. In reality french units had an integral skirmish unit. Nothing like that exists in this game.
    Artillery units when attacked, usually took shelter inside squares.. nothing like that happens in the game.
    And I could add more.

    Napoleon: Total War has nothing to do with Napoleonic warfare, it is the same old game Total War game fitted in a new outfit. If you liked Rome :Total War.. you might like this.. it is just the same game. If you want something that represents the time better.. look elsewhere.. or read a book.
    Expand
  6. Feb 5, 2019
    7
    The smallest map and total war of them all. Its all round Napoleon and his campaigns which is not much. What this game offers and its unique in is naval combat and combat improvement adter Empire overall. Best naval combat in the series. Worth playing.
  7. Aug 24, 2013
    7
    Creative Assembly are a wierd mob. Their games definitely LOOK great. The loading screens are PERFECT, the music is great, the campaign maps are BEAUTIFUL. In battles the units look and sound terrific. All the eye-candy is there. But the gameplay? It's INCREDIBLY BLAND. And as many, users note time and time again. the unit AI in battles and the campaign AI in general looks and plays likeCreative Assembly are a wierd mob. Their games definitely LOOK great. The loading screens are PERFECT, the music is great, the campaign maps are BEAUTIFUL. In battles the units look and sound terrific. All the eye-candy is there. But the gameplay? It's INCREDIBLY BLAND. And as many, users note time and time again. the unit AI in battles and the campaign AI in general looks and plays like bad computer coding. The games never feel as good as you imagine they should feel from looking at them. I think the naval battles in this game, as a separate component, are the only truly sound part of the design. Everything else looks great but plays MEH! It was also very rude of CA to spurn the Darth MOD dude, because his hard work was actually pointing the way to make a better game. IF CA don't change their designers and find a team capable of improving their campaigns, or at least start borrowing liberally from the ideas of Paradox Interactive we are doomed to see ever new ever prettier but ever hollow shells of good games. For the long of God CA, please get over the graphics and get the gameplay right for a change!

    THE GROT REVIEW CRITERIA: After a long time writing reviews like an anus, think its time to set a few bad habits straight: Stop insulting designers. Show some respect for the design process and getting games in circulation. Hence (1) No Red scores. (2) Game scores as follows: Bad Game 5/10. Poor Game 6/10. Mediocre Game: 7/10. Good Game 8/10. Great game 9/10. Stella Game 10/10. To get 10/10 it must be a game that can be (theoretically) play-able for 1000+ hours. Not only great but near endless fun. Games may be bad or poor but making them should earn respect. Thus even the worst POS will still be a 5/10. 0/10 no longer exists in my vocabulary. Yellow is the new red. For the sake of accountability: you can reply if needed: Orctowngrot: Tim Rawlins: timtimjp@yahoo.com
    Expand
  8. JoepL
    Mar 21, 2010
    7
    It's a cool game, quite realistic battles and especially the final Waterloo-battle is quite challenging. Unfortunately the campaign-part is too predictable when you're familiar with other TW-games. There's not much happening between AI-controlled nations: usually one nation will become big and once you've subdued that nation, all the fun is over. Very few rebellions, It's a cool game, quite realistic battles and especially the final Waterloo-battle is quite challenging. Unfortunately the campaign-part is too predictable when you're familiar with other TW-games. There's not much happening between AI-controlled nations: usually one nation will become big and once you've subdued that nation, all the fun is over. Very few rebellions, emergences of new nations and the diplomacy is flawing and illogical at times. Also it's a pity that real military doctrines do not seem be in use anymore (such as the benefits of flanking fire and enfilade artillery). However the advantages of being on high ground are quite realistic. It would be interesting to see an Total War: American Civil War (including Indian tribes, diplomacy with European nations, new warfare technology, siege battles, entrenchment and such) and with the playability of Rome Total War (which is in my opinion the TW-game with the most "depth" in gameplay). Expand
  9. Mar 7, 2011
    5
    (As an important note: If you don't think you can run this game on ultra settings, do NOT purchase it. This isn't some graphical elitism, this is because the game is TERRIBLE if you're not running it maxed out. For some reason, TCA have removed the dead bodies unless you play on ultra settings; after about 10 seconds, the dead bodies will disappear. Why?! Oh God why would you do this?(As an important note: If you don't think you can run this game on ultra settings, do NOT purchase it. This isn't some graphical elitism, this is because the game is TERRIBLE if you're not running it maxed out. For some reason, TCA have removed the dead bodies unless you play on ultra settings; after about 10 seconds, the dead bodies will disappear. Why?! Oh God why would you do this? Also, i'm playing on medium settings and GUH it's ugly. Empire looked pretty great to me on medium, but this...this is horrible. The characters are all washed out and completely lack bump mapping. You'll understand what i mean if you check the Steam store screen shots; the textures look rushed, and i'd expect better from a modder.)

    Anyway. Nappy Total War isn't a bad game. It's just not a very good game either. It's just a rehash of Empire with improvements that could easily have been patched into Empire. The improvements over Empire are very tasty though, such as round shot on cannon actually being useful now, somewhat improved AI and all the other crap promised in the blurbs. The problems are that the bugs are still present, including some new ones, the AI still can't manoeuvre over the battlefield without getting confused, and the campaign is crazily short. The new "technology" is just a rehash of other tech in Empire, much like the promised "Warpath" technology.

    "Game Revolution
    If you own Empire, there's not a good reason to own Napoleon."
    There you have it.
    Expand
  10. Oct 20, 2013
    7
    Creative Assembly are a wierd mob. Their games definitely LOOK great. The loading screens are PERFECT, the music is great, the campaign maps are BEAUTIFUL. In battles the units look and sound terrific. All the eye-candy is there. But the gameplay? It's INCREDIBLY BLAND. And as many, users note time and time again. the unit AI in battles and the campaign AI in general looks and plays likeCreative Assembly are a wierd mob. Their games definitely LOOK great. The loading screens are PERFECT, the music is great, the campaign maps are BEAUTIFUL. In battles the units look and sound terrific. All the eye-candy is there. But the gameplay? It's INCREDIBLY BLAND. And as many, users note time and time again. the unit AI in battles and the campaign AI in general looks and plays like bad computer coding. The games never feel as good as you imagine they should feel from looking at them. I think the naval battles in this game, as a separate component, are the only truly sound part of the design. Everything else looks great but plays MEH! It was also very rude of CA to spurn the Darth MOD dude, because his hard work was actually pointing the way to make a better game. IF CA don't change their designers and find a team capable of improving their campaigns, or at least start borrowing liberally from the ideas of Paradox Interactive we are doomed to see ever new ever prettier but ever hollow shells of good games. For the long of God CA, please get over the graphics and get the gameplay right for a change!

    Orctowngrot
    Expand
  11. Mar 25, 2014
    7
    Napoleon comes as basically an apology for the disaster of a launch that Empire experienced. They are both extremely similar games, but your preference will come down to what part of the game you covet more. Multiplayer fans will prefer Napoleon since it has better combat and unit diversity. Singleplayer fans will want to stick with Empire since it has a vastly superior campaign map and aNapoleon comes as basically an apology for the disaster of a launch that Empire experienced. They are both extremely similar games, but your preference will come down to what part of the game you covet more. Multiplayer fans will prefer Napoleon since it has better combat and unit diversity. Singleplayer fans will want to stick with Empire since it has a vastly superior campaign map and a large diversity of factions. I still encounter several annoying bugs throughout the game, and sometimes I'll crash for unknown reasons, But it's nothing that completely detracts from the experience. Napoleon is a worth addition to the Total War franchise and is definitely worth the money if you liked Empire or even just the period it was set in. Expand
  12. Sep 13, 2014
    7
    A good game for strategy. This game requires a good computer like Empire. The graphics are good if your computer can handle ultra. The gameplay is somewhat dull only having 5 nations to play as and less fractions than before. Although the map of Europe has more provinces than in Empire. The campaigns are good as usual and are backed with historical deadlines. The end turn system hasA good game for strategy. This game requires a good computer like Empire. The graphics are good if your computer can handle ultra. The gameplay is somewhat dull only having 5 nations to play as and less fractions than before. Although the map of Europe has more provinces than in Empire. The campaigns are good as usual and are backed with historical deadlines. The end turn system has changed for something a little more realistic from 2 weeks instead of 6 months. Overall this game has not changed a lot from the previous in terms of graphics and gameplay in fact I don't think it has really changed at all except research of some new technologies for your nation. Expand
  13. May 19, 2017
    7
    What I love the most is that Sega keeps on making the same climatic games (with obvious changes) every time. Really great battles, especially sound, it feels powerful and immersive. What I would like better: graphics and plot that is unfortunately over simplified.
  14. Apr 15, 2017
    5
    Un jeu très intéressant sur le papier, ne fût-ce que pour sa véracité historique ; c'est fort bien documenté, du beau travail en vérité. Ses batailles sont un vrai point fort, plus "wargame" que stratégie temps réel classique d'autant qu'on peut faire pause durant le combat. Assez spectaculaire et correct graphiquement, il n'en est pas moins très exigeant côté matériel.

    Le gros problème
    Un jeu très intéressant sur le papier, ne fût-ce que pour sa véracité historique ; c'est fort bien documenté, du beau travail en vérité. Ses batailles sont un vrai point fort, plus "wargame" que stratégie temps réel classique d'autant qu'on peut faire pause durant le combat. Assez spectaculaire et correct graphiquement, il n'en est pas moins très exigeant côté matériel.

    Le gros problème se situe dans la partie gestion : on s'enlise rapidement dans la lourdeur de l'ensemble, très loin de l'efficacité et de la convivialité d'un Civilization ! A force de se (dé)battre avec une interface et des menus mal foutus, l'ennui s'installe inéluctablement. Dommage !
    Expand
Metascore
81

Generally favorable reviews - based on 56 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 49 out of 56
  2. Negative: 1 out of 56
  1. Napoleon Total War is a great RTS game, an incredible homage to the real french emperor. With great gameplay, and several game modes for single player and multiplayer, it's a great addition to the series. But it relies heavily on the basics of Empire Total War, so it feels a bit held back due to the lack of real improvements.
  2. Not brave or bright enough to wow Total War veterans, but the battles and improved multiplayer save the day. [Mar 2010, p.80]
  3. 89
    Napoleon is an enjoyable addition to the Total War franchise but it's not as a big a game changer as previous sequels. While Napoleon and his armies were probably every bit as terrifying as Mongols, Vikings or Barbarians, the scope of this sequel is a bit more limited.