Order of War Review

Recommended Videos

feedy

New member
Aug 31, 2009
26
0
0
Bought Order of War about two weeks ago and spent something like 25-30 hours playing it. Here is my brief review.
First of all, I liked the scale. You have lots of troops on the battlefield simultaneously (in one of my multiplayer battles the stats screen said that I had deployed >1,5K infantry, >250 tanks, > 130 guns, >30 aircrafts) - that makes you feel Patton Jr., at least. Though in some scenarios you start with a small group of troops having something like 2-3 squads of infantry and several tank detachments at command and then gradually build up a bigger army controlling hundreds of units on the battlefield. Some missions (like Will to Win (playing for Wermacht)) are extremely massive, I spent about 3 hours trying to fight of enemy attack and capture all flags.
Secondly, the graphics. I have pretty much experience of playing RTS games, but every time I started one I never forgot that I was playing and that it is just a game and nothing more. Here I was so hipped on what is there on the screen that sometimes it seemed to me that I was watching a new epic war movie. The cinematic camera mode here is something second to none, really!
And the coolest thing for me is the reality of what is going on. I mean the historical correspondence. I have read a lot to the topic of WWII and I should say that I never expected such detail accuracy in the mere entertaining product. All the missions are based on real operations that actually took place during the war and they follow one by one in strict historical order making an impression of a continuous war campaign. Preppy introductory movies give you the short review of preceding events and get you into the battle atmosphere. And you may be sure that all the troops mentioned were really represented in that particular operation of 1944.
I must confess that at first I was rather skeptical about the historical truth. In the Hill of Sorrow, for example, I was surprised to find Americans on the hill instead of Poles, but having turned to the history books I saw that the fact had place! American forces really took part in that battle, so there is nothing contradictory here.
The Game has a WiC-like control point system: you capture flags, get money and bring new troops in action. AI is good, it responds to all your moves and maneuvers (on Hard regularly uses air strikes and is good at setting up defense lines). Though, I once made it do some silly things by launching two simultaneous flanking attacks in one of the missions.
So, my conclusion is that the game is undoubtedly WORTH playing. I can insistently recommend it both to RTS-fans and to those who want to get true impression of how-it-really-was. Straight A from all sides!
 

Warpublicfellow

New member
Oct 15, 2009
5
0
0
Would agree with many author's concerns. Massive scale is the main game's strength. Thousands of units front attacking huge enemy's forces look really impressive. Though, there are challenges with graphics. I do understand that it's out of humans' powers to create such a large-scale game with no graphic flaws, however...What I really see eye to eye with the author is cinematic camera. This feature is pretty cool. Then, I'm not a real buff in all this history stuff but the game seemed realistic for me and even a kind of educating. Cut scenes are top notch, that's true. AI did some odd things, still it's pretty smart. The game is not flawless, sure, however it's pretty fun.
 

Rollerskater

New member
Oct 15, 2009
9
0
0
Was interesting to read your review. I played the demo of the game and quite enjoyed that. Thinking now of buying the game. Just like the author, I was amazed at the truthfulness of the events. I would say we could have children at school play this game at WWII studies))) That would be cool, esp. for the kids.Heh. I mean even if you don't know the history of WWII so well, you could just play the game and learn it. Exagerrating a bit, but still this my opinion.