Rrichard

Really great fun game, runs and works great on PC, definitely recommended. Interesting story and good gameplay.

One of the greatest DLCs ever made, with a huge amount of content and enjoyment. Worth buying the base game to enjoy. Play at Normal difficulty or higher and watch Night Phoenix on youtube to learn mechanics.

Basically replicates The Last Stand with 3D graphics and much longer game length, as well as coop. A bit rough around the edges but still pretty fun.

Not enough focus trees for $20. TFV: $15 with 5 focus trees DoD: $10 with 4 focus trees LR: $20 for 3 focus trees! This is just bad value. After one year, the HOI4 development team is just putting out far too little content. Its a shame that Paradox have a monopoly on grand strategy games now, and are in an unassailable position thanks to the Steam 20/25% commission tier that most of their games are into (whereas all other Indie competitors have to pay out 30%) because they are milking the category dry.

Sure the controls are a bit wonky and the performance isn't the best, but I'm having a very fun time and happy with my purchase.

Alpha Centauri dumbed down, and made utterly unoffensive, for console children. There is no philosophy, interesting story, or science behind the game. Like a McDonalds meal of a strategy game.

Absolutely outstanding. If you're a fan of Civilization, you'll love this. Gets the level of detail and challenge just right. Very intuitive, minimal micromanagement, no bugs. Best new strategy game since Frostpunk. Well done to the creator.

Extra micromanagement and huge mundane complexity for no benefit. Navies are now *less* fun to play with than before. Unabalanced new features and focus trees. HOI4 dev team are going full Kaissereich in order to chase DLC dollars. The core WW2 experience and balance has been utterly forgotten.

SJW revisioning of history where women in Ancient Greek were equal to men and fought in armies. Everyone is given dark skin - real Greeks do not look like this!

Developers have upended core concepts (eg. ironman challenges rewarding meaningful stars) to push pay-to-win heroes and towers. Core game is very dull as a result, since there are no new towers being introduced for each new level. Apple's charges a 30% commission on anything sold on the app store, so I feel sorry for devs who have to resort to desperate tactics to overcome this huge tax, and still earn enough to pay the bills. This poor showing confirms that mobile gaming is basically just a huge exploitative mess, and that the only good games are on PC and console. At least the game is not as bad as the awful Iron Marines. Edit: Apple will not endorse a refund, so I have lowered this to zero stars. 4 stars.

SJW ruined Battlefield. I don't want to play a game with women screeching in WW2 combat.

Campaign makes it finally worth buying. Epic combat, great teamplay, great for fans of RO2. Only downside is outdated UE3 engine.

One of the dullest stories in any FPS I've played. Too many characters. The best cutscenes were the ones I could skip. Written to be unoffensive and banal. Only played through due to the cool setting - America - and the good gunplay and vehicles.

Definitely worth it. An upgrade to the original in every way. Great graphics, good UI, good sound, no bugs, funny. Best simulation game in a long time. Buy it!

A good RTS ruined by poor balance and game design. For example, even on Easy difficulty, the enemy can replace unit losses faster than you can kill them, even when you are fighting in their base and they have no apparent resource pool, and buildings 'heal' faster than you can destroy! And like plagues so many RTS, you have to micromanage **** all over the map, sending units to defend some far off settlement that the AI has decided to target. I think the game would have been better with a slower, more linear pace, like Total War battles on a smaller scale. Great tech and art, poor game design.

Best musket/rifle combat and management game since Empire Total War. About 30 hours worth of gameplay. Highly recommended.

Hearts of Iron IV: Micro the Tiger 800 hour player, 7 hours with the DLC. Time split between competitive multiplayer, and single player. Overall, I'm disappointed with the patch and expansion. The new features added make the game worse, and the the overall direction of the game feels lazy. Its makes you realise how good TFV and DoD were. The biggest culprit is the new 'Chain of Command' system. Previously you could assign an unlimited number of divisions against a single Field Marshall. Now, you must manually assign each division against an individual general, with 24 divisions maximum. When you're fighting with hundreds of divisions, your time is spent manually allocating your divisions among your generals and fixing all the broken frontlines. Its needless busywork that never should have been introduced. The traits system for Generals feels unnecessarily complex, and just added on for the sake of it, rather than an actual improvement over the old system. Tonally it is too much 'RPG', out of place in a grand strategy. If I have 10x generals controlling my 240 divisions as Russia, I don't even have time or interest in managing the traits of my Generals. It was better when traits were gained automatically based on fighting conditions. In terms of features, the new Decisions system is hamstrung by the fact that none of the choices are any good. For example, spending 100 political power to create... one building slot? It feels like whoever designed the selections has barely played any strategy games and certainly never played HOI4 competitively in mulitplayer - where min/maxing is essential. The new focus trees are clearly created with the viewpoint that 'bigger is better'. The problem is that nations like China are given huge elaborate new Focus Trees, but six months less before Japan declares war on them! The player should really just focus everything on their economic and military picks, and the whole border wars thing becomes irrelevant. When I think **** game, I think of one where the developers know the game better than the community itself. They're better at playing it, and have a strong vision for its future. I've been getting the opposite feeling watching from the developers over the past many months. The strengths of the game used to be its clean presentation, and focus on research, production, equipment, and grand strategy. However, the game has become overwhelming with the new systems, and has introduced far too much micromanagement. Its clear the developers have too much hanging over them from the early Hearts of Iron games (HOI2/HOI3), and have not realised what made Hearts if Iron IV such a great modern new one. 4/10. A step backwards, and perhaps enough to kill my interest in the franchise.

The boss fight at the end of FTL was always too difficult for me to beat. At least the game had multiple cool ships, interesting mini quest choices, and cool upgrades. Into the Breach doesn't really have any of that. It's like a strategy game where you are stuck with the same 3 units and replay the same tiny maps over and over again. This game would have been better off with a far grander scope, sacrificing a bit of replayability if necessary. Definitely overhyped.

If you like the tactical combat of PUBG but were yearning for something with more soul and better graphics - this is your game. The environments and graphics are phenomenal. The level is the best looking and most immersive I have played in any multiplayer video game. Progression system is interesting, rewarding skilled players. The weapons are all useful and interesting, with nothing trashy. It would be nice if you could pickup items from dead players though. There have been some small technical issues, one 'freeze' of the game requiring sign out of windows, and FPS is about 45 with my 1070. Given the slower pace of combat, this is not really a problem, and a fair tradeoff given how beautiful the environments are. Given the bargain price of $30 during Early Access, I'm willing to accept some roughness. Highly recommended.

If you were hoping this expansion was gonna save Civ 6, prepare for disappointment. The fundamental problem of 1UPT remains, so the AI still cannot properly fight. Additionally all the calculations means that late game turns really lag. There are still a whole lot of QoL issues with the UI, like Wonder videos still not showing what the effects of the wonder are, Policy Edicts which are outdated and need to be replaced showing you what was being lost, or how any changes will actually impact your output. I quit and uninstalled about 8 hours into my first game, when I realised I was just playing the same old Civ 6 again, monotonous late-game micromanagement, long turn times, and a set of AI enemies that were outpaced 1000 years ago (normal difficulty). Still we have the childish, long unit combat animations, and now silly Governor heads, like something out of a mobile game. I wish we would just be given a Civ 4 with Hexes and modern UI, graphics and improved performance.

Good: Graphics World Combat Bad: Performance Story Quests Its like a wannabe version of the Witcher 3, with a SJW story for children. The world and graphics are enough to keep going, but its wholly unmemorable.

I would rather play Railroad Tycoon 3, as outdated as it is, than this. That game had sensible controls and user interface, and huge scenario maps allowing you to build across the USA, UK, EU etc. from the earliest ages to the modern age. The Railroad Empire UI looks like something out of a mobile game, completely misplaced for a train simulator. The art director should be disciplined. The controls are confusing. Multiple buttons do the same thing, and multiple clicks are required to sift through to the information you need. UI seems optimised for a console TV screen, not a PC monitor. Its a shame because the 3D graphics are great, the game runs well, the track construction capability is great, but the layers on top of that are really sub-par. The voice actors playing 19th American businessman at the start of the game also clearly does not speak English natively. Seems a weird thing to cheap out on, given its your first introduction to the game.

Game is too difficult on 'easy'. Played for 3 hours, and could only draw once against the AI. I'm an accomplished strategy player. Game needs to be rebalanced. Right now I would not recommend.

An interesting niche experience. For $20, I was hoping for something a bit more though. There was a moment when the lights when out, and I thought, 'hell yeh, time for some thrills!', but... that was it. Really its the kind of game we should be seeing on iPad, if the iOS market was not completely broken and allowing only F2P games an audience. The puzzles are very limited. Pick it up on sale when its 50% off or below.

Adds some great new features to the game. Hearts of Iron IV easily has 500+ hours of potential when you play multiplayer. What other WW2 grand strategy game is out there? Reality is folks that by buying this DLC, you support the free patches that provide a lot of new mechanics and bug fixes to the main game. Or would you rather buy loot crates? Making these games is expensive, get over it, buy the DLC if you like the game and support the developer.

Battlefield 1 is a 30 hour game at most. It lacks depth, compared to much better online team-based shooters like Red Orchestra 2. There is no communication, voice chat either isn't available or is rarely used. Even team chat is unused. You may as well be playing with bots, you have no interaction with your teammates. The new weapons are locked behind silly gamey gates. 'Get 50 headshots' to unlock this weapon etc. Basically for a casual or exploratory player they may as well have not been added. The maps are unremarkable, mainly because the Operations and Conquest modes are so dull. Conquest is just whack-a-mole - ninja behind the enemy, take their flag, spawn the entire team in, repeat ad nauseum. Operations mode has players continually wobble between two points, and because there is no teamwork or coordination, the more stacked team wins whether they are defending or attacking. In short - unless you want a braindead shooter, avoid. Otherwise go and play Red Orchestra 2 or PUBG. Its sad that we have no better modern WW1/WW2 multiplayer team shooters available right now though.

Great story, great mechanics, great graphics. But... what's the point if you don't want to play it? The whole game just takes way too long, combat animations go on and on, so that even a simple battle against an easy enemy goes for 5 minutes. The journal doesn't show you waypoints on where to go, so there is a huge amount of backtracking and guessing. Look on Youtube - there are zero complete walkthroughs from known Youtubers because of these problems. 20% of the length of the game could easily be carved off by shortening combat animations and giving waypoints with a proper journal.

Even though microtransactions have temporarily gone, all that's left is a dull grind, without reward for performance. There is nothing to get excited about each round when you know you'll be getting the same amount of credits at match end as everybody else (based merely on match length time).

Unfortunately, this game has been hamstrung in order to force you to buy currency to buy ingame lootboxes. Most specifically, your own performance ingame does not reward you with credits, instead you are given credits merely on the number of minutes that each match took. This leads to incredibly slow progression, and zero incentive to play the objective. As a result, each match devolves into just getting kills, kills, kills, despite the objectives of each map that need to be completed by the team. About 10% of attacker games end in victory because of this. Avoid.

Basically on rails, levels are never wider than 5 metres. Designed for 8 year old playing on a controller. Like a McDonalds meal, it will get you through a few hours but totally forgettable. Much less interesting than World at War. Shooting Arabs, Robots, Russians, Germans? Basically all the same, just different skins. Heck, at the start of the game the Germans are using Russian PPSH and MG42s mounted on German jeeps are labelled as MG34s!

Great gunplay, great performance, great story. What more can you want in a shooter? Really enjoying it so far. The alternate history is cool, and the characters are interesting. Definitely recommend buying.

Better to watch Lets Plays on Youtube and skip all the boring combat. A substantial step down compared to the first game in terms of enjoyment. Even on sale I would not recommend this.

Simply not as much fun as the earlier Kingdom Rush Tower Defense games. They should purely make tower defense games. They have a winning formula, no need to change it. Just add new units, storylines, and maps. Alien setting with Tower Defense would have been OK. Right now this is a very shallow RTS. The beauty of tower defense is that it can work well on an iPad with touch as it can on a PC with mouse. RTS doesn't translate well to iPad with its small screen.

I missed out on ever playing Dungeon Keeper, but have to say this game makes up for it. Campaign, Graphics, Gameplay, all are great. The amount of complexity and depth to the dungeon management is good, and the combat above ground is pleasant. I can happily say this is the best Dungeon sim game available. Narrator and story is funny too. Buy it!

Same weaknesses as the first game: the battles are not fun to play. It is very difficult to track all of the units across the map, particularly with the huge variations in sizes. All of the battles are huge 20v20 brawls without any tactical depth. I just spammed armies of Spearmen and autoresolved everything to get through the campaign. The loyalty mechanic makes the Dark Elves and Skaven a PITA to play, with risk of mini civil war (the mechanic that ruined Rome 2 and Attila) constantly. The campaign itself is quite weak, with less depth than the first game. The 'rituals' just involve defending yourself against multiple 20-stack armies placed into your territory every few turns. A sad downturn in enjoyment as compared to the awesome Empire and Shogun 2 games. The series has been on a downard trajectory since Rome.

Easily the best strategy game available right now. Lacked a bit of depth at release, but the two DLCs have been great. Hundreds of hours of potential, and even more in multiplayer. Absolutely recommended if you like strategy games. Graphics are great too, though the 32-bit single core engine is a bit of a letdown.

Terrible UI. How have we gone backwards since Railroad Tycoon and Transport Tycoon were released so long ago? It should not be so difficult to change the makeup of a train's cargo, to see what kind of passengers/cargo are at a station. Good graphics mask a poorly designed game.

Against the awesome base game this is a highly flawed expansion. The core simulation mechanics don't work - there is no way to understand why your hotel occupancy rate is what it is, and it doesn't seem to respond to the prices you set. Hotel revenue is not counted as 'rent' so it is very hard to predict your finances. Overall building a hotel is much less profitable and transparent than building the vanilla ****. Given the price of the DLC, almost as much as the base game, there should have been a lot more content. The UI for menus is still poor - taking up only a fraction of the screen (did they design this for low res or mobiles?). There should have been more depth about how to manage the seasonality and pricing of the hotel rooms. In its current state, I would avoid this DLC, and have fears about the Miami expansion.

A simpler version of Tropico set in space. Good entertainment for about 10 hours. Voice acting is surprisingly good and adds some nice flavour to the campaign. The campaign is interesting. There are not many other city-building strategy games out there right now.

Injects some good new features into the game and fixes a lot of bugs and AI issues. Would happily recommend. Best WW2 strategy game out there hands down. Multiplayer is lots of fun once you have cut your teeth on Single Player too.

Worse than chivalry - there is no objective mode (just push a magic cart along) and the maps are designed for tiny 6v6 battles. The game is technically OK but let down by terrible design decisions. A colossal missed opportunity.

The worst Civ 6 in the series, mainly due to the amount of time-wasting stuff added. Attacking? That's 5 seconds of animation. Want to turn on fast attack? That means you won't even see or know which of your units attacked. The AI players will interrupt you with weird statements that make no sense, and have overly long introductions. The AI in general still fails to grasp 1UPT - and I think it needs to be removed to bring this game back to life. Trying to negotiate with the AI is still a PITA (I captured 70% of your settlements - but you refuse to make peace Montezuma? Now I have to micromanage all of my units through mountains to get your last little **** cities. (No I don't actually - I'll just quit the game and do something better with my time)). Warmonger penalties are still **** in that they last hundreds and hundreds of years with only minor decay. Civic system is nice, though about 20-30% of your time will be spent watching stupid animations of units or leaders, or waiting for turns to compute. How can the AI turn optimisation still be so poor on top-end hardware in 2017? Really disappointing. Its a shame there is no competition, Civ needs it badly. Game has gone downhill since Civ 4.