I find myself agreeing with PC Gamer's review. Personally, I'd have rated it higher, in the 70's somewhere, by their standards, but I still agree with their take on it.
Looking at my own experiences, I personally have only had one CTD with either my desktop or my laptop. But, my friend has CTD about every two hours when he plays. We both use 1.02, and his computer makes mine look obsolete, especially my laptop. But, he continues to play, as he loves the game. But, many of my other friends wouldn't even think of playing this game. I know a lot of active gamers, especially ones who are into content above fluff, who look at this game and go cross-eyed. The sheer number of mouse clicks involved in building a good railroad system or the amount of micromanagement in building successful industries are enough to put them off. As a note, I use the railroad bit as just one example of mouseclicking volume.
And, for my friend and I, there are points that diminish the game for us. The partisans are an incredibly infuriating problem. But even worse is the naval system, as we are both history majors in college, and have always loved naval history. But, even in 1.02, few nations build modern navies, and even then it varies from game to game. And, honestly, when they build navies they build nothing but major vessals. This makes perfect sense gameplay wise, but kills historical accuracy in naval terms. Obviously, in a game of this size one cannot go into a full, detailed system on navies. But, I find it incredibly historically innacurate not to simulate naval blockades, outside of stopping transports. In the American Civil War, for example, the blockade was a key, and I stress key, component of the American plans. Both the Atlantic blockade and the control of the Missippi cut the South off from considerable resources. But, from all that I can see, that is not simulated in Victoria. Obviously it is not impossible, as it was simulated in HOI.
What I'm getting to with that rant is that, even patched to 1.02, the game is far from complete. It is still fun and addictive to a person interested in the subject matter. But, even a fan can find faults that affect his ability to have fun. Frankly, I haven't touched the game for a couple weeks. I've been busy, but I also am now waiting for 1.03 (and eagerly anticipating the VIP, though not waiting for it) before I'll go back into playing it regularly. And honestly, the naval part of the game will continue to bug me.
Back to the subject at hand, the chance of an average reviewer being in this game's niche is not highly likely. And frankly, if games were just reviewed by their fans, what kind of reviews would you expect to see? A reviewer is expected to write his review to inform the average game player of a given game. Some reviewers will be biased either for or against a game. But, in Victoria's case, this game is not for everyone. It's for a set niche. And most reviews (not all, I know) show this. If Vic's your particular cup of tea, you'll get it. But most people won't.
Looking at my own experiences, I personally have only had one CTD with either my desktop or my laptop. But, my friend has CTD about every two hours when he plays. We both use 1.02, and his computer makes mine look obsolete, especially my laptop. But, he continues to play, as he loves the game. But, many of my other friends wouldn't even think of playing this game. I know a lot of active gamers, especially ones who are into content above fluff, who look at this game and go cross-eyed. The sheer number of mouse clicks involved in building a good railroad system or the amount of micromanagement in building successful industries are enough to put them off. As a note, I use the railroad bit as just one example of mouseclicking volume.
And, for my friend and I, there are points that diminish the game for us. The partisans are an incredibly infuriating problem. But even worse is the naval system, as we are both history majors in college, and have always loved naval history. But, even in 1.02, few nations build modern navies, and even then it varies from game to game. And, honestly, when they build navies they build nothing but major vessals. This makes perfect sense gameplay wise, but kills historical accuracy in naval terms. Obviously, in a game of this size one cannot go into a full, detailed system on navies. But, I find it incredibly historically innacurate not to simulate naval blockades, outside of stopping transports. In the American Civil War, for example, the blockade was a key, and I stress key, component of the American plans. Both the Atlantic blockade and the control of the Missippi cut the South off from considerable resources. But, from all that I can see, that is not simulated in Victoria. Obviously it is not impossible, as it was simulated in HOI.
What I'm getting to with that rant is that, even patched to 1.02, the game is far from complete. It is still fun and addictive to a person interested in the subject matter. But, even a fan can find faults that affect his ability to have fun. Frankly, I haven't touched the game for a couple weeks. I've been busy, but I also am now waiting for 1.03 (and eagerly anticipating the VIP, though not waiting for it) before I'll go back into playing it regularly. And honestly, the naval part of the game will continue to bug me.
Back to the subject at hand, the chance of an average reviewer being in this game's niche is not highly likely. And frankly, if games were just reviewed by their fans, what kind of reviews would you expect to see? A reviewer is expected to write his review to inform the average game player of a given game. Some reviewers will be biased either for or against a game. But, in Victoria's case, this game is not for everyone. It's for a set niche. And most reviews (not all, I know) show this. If Vic's your particular cup of tea, you'll get it. But most people won't.
Last edited:
