Another turn-based Civil War game. Worst of the bunch by far!

User Rating: 3.8 | North vs. South: The Great American Civil War PC
By herodotus2006 | Review Date:
Based on the same engine that drives the "Great Battles of..." trilogy, "North Vs South" should have been,could have been, a very immersive game. The Classical titles previously (Alexander, Hannibal, and Julius Caesar) had been very good initially, but had not progressed at all as they came along in any definitive way. The "Battleground" series came out with beautifully hand-painted battlefield maps (Gettysburg, Shilo, Antietam, Shiloh, including South Mounatain, and Bull Run) and gave the history buff hours and hours of gameplay with unit structures, Orders of Battle, and varying historical elements thrown in to contend with. Could you repeat Sickles' erroneous attack into the Peach Orchard on the 2nd day at Gettysburg ( which almost cost the North its' left flank and the battle), only this time succeed? Could you beat back the Union line at Bloody Pond at Shiloh to reach Pittsburg Landing? So when "NvS" came out, it was dumbfounding to find a game that had not stepped into the shoes of the "Battleground" series, but had followed on from "Great Battles..." and actually worsened since then.
The graphics are awful. The game physics are very confusing, as the units still behave as if they are with Alexander the Great. The Campaign is simply the seperate battles strung together. It does give a choice of lesser known conflicts (Cedar Mountain, Cedar Creek, Gaines' Mill, Brandy Station) but misses the chance of presenting pivotal battles that have all been neglected in gaming. The cavalry battle at Gettysburg between J.E.B.Stuart (CSA) and Custer (USA) on the far right flank from days 2-3, or Cold Harbour where 7,000 Union men fell in 20 minutes. When Grant ordered a thrid assault, his officers ignored him or refused outright to carry out the order. GAMESPOT is correct in pointing out glaring historical errors such as not being able to fight "The Battle of Gettysburg" until you have fought "The Wilderness battle". Trouble is, the former took place from July 1-3, 1863 and the latter May 5-7, 1864. There has been no effort in researching the period it seems, and for the life of me, I can't quite figure why this game was ever released at all. In the unpatched retail version the icon for firing muskets is still a spear as it was in the older games.
The Civil War era is what brings gamers to this product, and generally speaking the gamer who is attracted to this usually has a pretty good grasp on the history of the period. This game flips the bird at you, and re-writes history and Civil War tactics the way IT wants to. The Confederate Army is always far stronger than the Union's which is historically incorrect in 95% of situations. You cannot turn the tables at Shiloh, Gettysburg is a mess, and Antietam (where Lee could have been annhialated) unrecognizable (even the abstract game/sim "The War College" presents this battle better). Overall, this one's a "bin" job. It's 'bin' done better, and it belongs in the bin.
Load Comments (0)