A step forward for the strategy gaming
User Rating: 9.2 | Rome: Total War PC
Rome: Total War is like Civilization on steroids with huge RTS battles. By the time of the release, it can be considered as a new reference for combining the best of both RTS and turn-based elements: a superb integration. If only one word shall be used to describe this gem, it can be elegance. This wargame is sometimes brutal, yet always in an overall spirit of elegance. It's the same historical elegance from the Civ series when dealing in the strategic map ( but now with 3D scrolling ). The attention to detail is impressive; and the transition mechanics from the map to a specific battlefield are just simply marvelously done. The player who only have a 15-20 minutes of free time can choose to play a historical battle - there are 10 of them at retail, most are impressive as well. For the accomplished strategist, playing a long campaign can take an eternity...it can be a micromanagement paradise. Not everything is perfect though; Rome could have easily been THE best strategy game ever ( in the 9.5+ ) if not because of the AI. The strategic AI is above the competition, that's not the point. The AI on the battlefield needs work - that's all. Let's make it right: considering the ambitious features and scale of the battles ( mainly those involving huge cities/ walls ), the coding is already impressive. A couple of patches ( like the process Firaxis did for Civ III ) and we can expect a nice polish for a tactical AI. The graphics are as good looking for the deatails shown on the main strategic map than the battlefields themselves. It's even preferable to see all the units involved NOT too close ( and at long range like armies of ants converging, though it's laggier ), since the developers had to cut the number of polygons for obvious purposes: at a closer range, each unit looks like ''1998'' but you won't have the opportunity to zoom specifically that often since you'll be quite busy managing the overall battlefield. The sound coding and musical score are top-notch. The quality is ultra-professional. However, in time it can become tedious to hear the same grunting like ''Aye,aye, cpt'n'' or the diplomat saying '' I shall speak with them at once '' gazillion times per turn. Moreover, this redundance is stressing the player to disable voiceovers and/or music in some instances and Rome seems to be plagued with the same side effects on that matter that many of TBS classics. Earlier we mentioned this game can be brutal, and some attacks very sneaky & unexpected. Yes, mostly at higher difficulty levels - overall at medium the game is just right setted, '' quietly polished'' . The moves of rivals are more predictable than Medieval: Total War. Some Medieval addicts may whine about this. On the other hand, with a more objective analysis, the moves & combat system are just simply adapted upon Ancient Times when historically, things were moving more slowly. Everything was planned and deployed upon a much larger period of time: Rome's mechanics are even more realistic ( not ultra, just right for a game to deliver a great fun factor ) and present a real feeling of what should be a good city management and troop preps for waging a successful war. There is only one additional minor gripe ( along with moving diplomats which becomes tedious ) : confusing orders given to your troops while invading a city: personallised CTRL-groups can be quite messy when they're entering a walled city. It's better to click on each unit and monitor individually. Despite some minor flaws, Rome: Total War remains an outstanding masterpiece, a complete wargame to be cherished by warmongers. For a much greater challenge, the advanced player can play a barbarian nation ( like Gauls ) or an eastern faction ( like Seleucids, Parthia ): the difficulty gap is huge between them and the powerful/easier to pick Romans. This game is truly an evolutive step for the Total War franchise. 
