User Reviews (1 - 11 of 20)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

learn by failing

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 16 / 17
Date: March 28, 2000
Author: Amazon User

Meier's Gettysburg allows you to command CSA or Union troops in a series of scenarios that echo the real fighting if July 1863. As a commander you will learn the proper use of troops, including advancing under fire, defense, artillery use, terrain, maneuver and other techniques. Some scenarios are quite easy to learn and play. Others take more time to learn. There are over 40 scenarios, mini battles that you can play that do reflect aspects of the original battle. Graphics are clear, sounds are realisitic. When you make an error in handling your troops, the computer will say, "can't do that, general." This game is worth owning and worth playing. You can spend five minutes or hours playing. And a multi-player games is included. Can't say enough about the quality of this game which is inexpensively priced direct from the manufacturer, amazon or available at many wal-mart stores. The very clear images and mouse control of troops and artillery make this game a real winner. A great gift for yourself!!! or a friend!!!

Sid Meier Can't Go Wrong

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 13 / 14
Date: March 26, 2000
Author: Amazon User

--Gettysburg! is one of the greatest war games ever made, and easily the best in the realm of Real Time interfaces. Its treatment of Morale, Cover, Leadership, and Flanking tactics is superb. It acheives an extrodinairy level of realism, especially for the typically dumbed down Real Time Strategy genre, but the interface is still extremely fluid and intuitive.

--In the realm of Civil War games, this is the best ever made, much more entertaining than the laborious turn based Talonsoft: Battleground serries. And at the same time far more realistic than the Sierra's painfully unrealistic Civil War General serries. And in the realm of RTS it is a breed apart, as Real Time Strategy rarely has anything to do with real combat tactics of any time-period. Gettysburg! is the thinking gamers ansewer to the C&C/Warcraft serries.

--The bottom line is that this game is a must buy. It is a unique blend of which I would like to see more.

They Came On In The Same Old Way....

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 8 / 9
Date: March 30, 2002
Author: Amazon User

When first introduced this game must have been a revelation and joy to play. Technical development has since overtaken Gettysburg and gamers demand more from a product (especially graphically) than it offers. The first deficiency is apparent in scale. Units are absolutely puny and trying to click on flag bearers when a number of these get clustered is taxing. So long as lines stay static and divisions dont collide maintaining battle order is easy. Using the zoom feature helps somewhat but a cleverer AI would be best. It is vexing when units march into position and align themselves with back to the enemy. For this reason there is the ability to slow the game down or pause. There are three battle formations, not several (column formations are strictly for marching long distance or for speedy deployment). Nevertheless only two battle formations have any use, skirmish and line formation. The tactics are rudimentary, engage the enemy head on and use reserves to flank and rout them. As Wellington said, "They came on in the same old way and we beat them in the same old way." Despite the multitude of battle scenarios the game plays along this simple strategem. Strategists wont be intrigued by this predictability. Trying to manage the ultimate of battlefield tactics, encirclement, is not impossible. It would have been nice if there was a command button to assit this as divisions deploy in the standard thin Gray/Blue line. I've managed to force the surrender of a dozen brigades using this tactic but not without surprises. Often times encircled troops will simply ROUT right through your massed infantry. Routed troops suffer huge casualties but you dont see it reflected here. Often these units redeploy behind your lines and recapture victory locations. Now that's annoying and just plain unrealistic. Routed troops run AWAY from massed infantry not THROUGH them and once separated from their officers no longer present a cohesive threat.. There is a patch for this but I haven't seen it work in practice.Unfortunately the AI doesn't offer much assistance to guide your troops (it only functions optimally when deploying its own. When ordering an advance onto an enemy position many of your units will stop just out of firing range. If you don't babysit you can find units being battered when its neighbours on either side are just standing there bone idle. Most disappointing of all is Cavalry units. When marching they appear on horseback but when engaging the enemy they turn into regular infantry and cannot be distinguished from them. So much for the spectacle of Confederate Cavalry charges, poor Stonewall would turn in his grave. The game is quite fun and despite the deficiencies has moderate replayability but unless the game is overhauled it will fade into history and that would be a shame because it has huge potential.

Wow

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 5 / 5
Date: December 18, 2000
Author: Amazon User

My brother got Gettysburg a few years ago for Christmas. We've enjoyed it immensley ever since. Its graphics are incredible, and so are the sounds. It's easy to control your units, and newbies can adapt to it well. It's historically accurate, and provides sqeculative battles when it doesn't turn out like it did in 1863. This game is a must-have.

Fix the bugs not the bayonets

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 7 / 10
Date: April 01, 2002
Author: Amazon User

Gettysburg is a title which will capture the interest of any strategy buff. Large scale and multiple units to command, what more could you ask for. Well, an AI with a sense of reality would help. Several aspects of the game just don't reflect military logic. Firstly, cavalry march (in column order) as mounted units but when engaging the enemy they dismount and fight like infantry (also looking exactly like them). Sure, mounted infantry were common but gone is the elan of a cavalry charge, the most debonair feature of the era's battles, VERY disappointing. The only advantage cavalry have in this game is their speed of deployment which is scant homage to Custer and Stonewall. Artillery, which are the scourge of infantrymen, cause very little damage. After bombarding a few enemy brigades for a half an hour with over 50 cannon I inflicted a mere handfull of casualties. In this game (historically accuracy, at least on green troops) the major affect of artillery is to lower the morale. Veterans would not be as easily affected but here all suffer to the same degree. The most glaring problem, not limited to artillery alone but endemic throughout the game, is that routed enemy units slip through your ranks (unmolested by your troops I might add!)and disappear behind your lines to reemerge as effective fighting units where they either harass your flanks or recapture abandoned victory locations. This is just plain ludicrous compared to the historical record. Routed troops, separated from their officers, rarely recover their composure. Even when routed (running through your lines or away from them as is the normal thing to do)these units will not be fired upon by your troops. Again history has proven that routed soldiers suffer excessive casualties, which is why they rarely reemerge as combatants. But by far the most annoying thing is to see your men completely surround several regiments and artillery only to have these simply run right through your massed ranks. This happens in every game I have played. There is a patch for this but I haven't seen it eliminate the problem. Artillery is the main culprit here. The AI just refuses to allow these units to be captured. All too frequently they just limber up and saunter through or by my troops without a shot being fired in anger. Unless you close with them when they are unlimbered they are invulnerable to infantry. Indeed, my cannon stand static as they get raked with shot when closed by enemy infantry but when I close with them my soldiers break and run or the battery limbers up and drives off. These are very annoying tendencies which spoil the accuracy of a game which is touted as being close to the historical record. I think they could have done much better. Sure the atmosphere is great: courier messages, bugle calls, gunfire, battle cries, feedback from troopers all add to the spirit of the affair but these are just side issues to the main. Troops are easy enough to deploy so long as you like a box formation. Deploying in lines is all that one can muster and brigades can thus be stretched very thin. In order to compact these you will need to manually adjust their placement. When dealing with several dozen regiments this requires a lot of concentration.The flagbearers are so puny that singling them out in densely packed groups is quite taxing. Also, units will tend to stand where you put them so you will need to babysit as some regiments will stand back from the fray and allow their neighbours to be annihilated by the seemingly more cunning opposition AI. But no mind, it makes scant difference if the enemy is killing you at a ratio of 6-1 as victory is achieved through the capture of LOCATIONS. To this end I doubt if the developers gave much thought to how the game should end. I have played to an outcome where I captured all locations and inflicted losses to the enemy of 16000 to my 2000. With nearly two thirds of his men KIA the enemy still kept on attacking. I wouldn't mind if this involved some sort of clearly defined battle lines but the opponent had simply dissolved into a dozen or so remnants which merely harrased my troops at victory locations. Never saying die is one thing but lets be frank, after suffering a loss of a third of his men any commander would order a retreat: at two thirds he would surrender and then blow his brains out. There is an option to CLAIM victory but I think this applies only to multiplayer. I would like to see this game fixed to show a bit more realism before I can start calling it a great game. As it stands it has limited replayability (it doesn't matter which scenario you play they are all just variations on a theme). If endless sessions of engage, flank and pursue is what your looking for then this is right up you alley. I just think with an overhaul the game could be much more.

Good game, lots of bugs

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 5 / 6
Date: June 18, 2003
Author: Amazon User

I'd like to add to the review of jilesmeacham below, which I think best highlights the shortcomings of this otherwise fine game. These problems are all true, and detract from the experience.

The main bug I encountered not already mentioned was the enormous amounts of casualties the skirmish formation inflicts, and the minimal casualties suffered. I have patched it, and it still happens. Try the three day battle at the easiest difficulty level with skirmish mode. The enemy, whichever side you choose will crumble. A 7-1 kill ratio is not atypical. At higher difficulty levels, this continues, but the skirmish units are very quickly routed, even if the enemy unit attacking has sufferted large casualties, and I've lost five men. This makes the skirmish the strongest formation, if you have a large amount of troops to hold objectives once they've been routed.

Another problem is that the division, corps, and army commanders, are not very useful, except for boosting morale and rallying troops, and seeing all units under the officer's command.

Also, the lack of friendly fire makes for unlikely movements. You must entirely surround a regiment to have it surrender. When it is routed and has nowhere to run, that is the only situation in which it will surrender. So it pays in the game if you manage to encircle a regiment(s), even if in reality, your own troops would have fired more shots at each other than at the enemy. But if it manages to slip through a narrow gap, which seems like computer cheating, it won't surrender.

And again, artillery and cavalry are not useful. You must mass a large amount of artillery to inflict the amount of casualties a brigade can. The only use is that they lower enemy morale at no cost. They provide opportunities for greater losses as well. Also, it's almost like the computer cheats, when it comes to using a regiment to capture enemy guns, they always run away, or the regiment is "repulsed." Cavalry are only infantry that cost twice as much to lose. They don't lose morale in skirmish mode, but their costliness leads me to pull them off to the or retreat when I have infantry to take their place. They have a speed advantage in column mode that can be used at times to capture unoccupied objectives, such as when a few routed enemy units recover behind your lines.

In the Pickett's Charge scenario, there isn't much Union artillery at the easiest difficulty level, and at higher levels, they don't do the damage that they historically did. It's likely at the hardest level for you to lose disastrously, playing as Union, because your own morale lowers more quickly than that of the computer.

I'd like to reiterate the point already made that the importance of objectives detracts from realism. If you know anything about the Civil War, then you know that, for the most part, successful generals pursued armies and not locations. There are no decisive locations on this map. Lee was trying to push north, and if there are to be any Southern objectives worth a small amount it should be to control roads to the North and the town itself.

The last problem I can think of at the moment is the significance of battle formations. It is difficult to take advantage of holes in enemy lines. You simply amass enough firepower and reserves to lower morale and cause the enemy to retreat, and it's sort of automatic. The enemy is certainly good at finding weak points in your line, however. Also, it is difficult to try moves that could be described as "daring" or "risky." I have attempted to outflank the enemy by swinging an entire brigade(s) to the side of their lines, and the problem is that it takes too long, and the scenario ends before I can get started. Also, realistically, the enemy would remove or realign some of its units from its locations if in a true battle I had troops almost behind it.

Still, given the price now, used or in a store, this game is worth getting. Lots of play on these 3D maps help get you familiar with the battlefield, if you decide to visit. Also, the PDF included has some basic information, as well as battle statistics. If you have a book on the battle, this is a refreshing way to experience it, and, despite the bugs and design flaws-it belongs on the shelf of every Civil War buff and battlefield visitor.

Fills a Niche for the History Buff and Gamer

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 4 / 5
Date: July 05, 2004
Author: Amazon User

Gettysburg has proven to be an excellent game for both the Civil War buff or anyone who enjoys gaming in general.

Several scenarios exist: historical (what acutally happened at the battle) and speculative (fascinating what ifs, for example, a scenario exists for Stonewall Jackson's presence at the battle). The gamer is also allowed to adjust the difficulty level of the opponent (computer) until a better understanding of the game and strategies are attained.

The graphics are excellent and realistic - I have visited Gettysburg 6 times in my lifetime and the game's terrain features are pretty close to the real thing.

There are a few minor bugs, but not enough to detract from the game. Highly recommended. Buy and enjoy!

Fun despite poor UI and technical glitches

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 3 / 4
Date: September 08, 2001
Author: Amazon User

This game is easy to learn and play. There is not a lot of depth in terms of units or strategic elements. I like the simplicity of the game but serious wargamers might find it too shallow.
Gameplay is marred by sound and video glitches, and the UI does not handle mouse clicks accurately, which means you often end up selecting units and issuing commands that you did not intend. All things considered, however, I kind of like the tactical simplicity of the game.

Old but still good

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 3 / 5
Date: August 01, 2001
Author: Amazon User

This game is a tad old and may look outdated but, it is still great. The sounds and sights are excellent and makes you feel as if you are there. Real-time adds so much to this game forcing you to make commands as your troops are getting pounded. A randomize factor lets you keep playing and playing never knowing the enemy's full strength. This a great game at a great price for any Civil War game player.

Also check out Sid's collection of Civil War games.

Brilliant, but not gripping

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 2 / 3
Date: May 02, 2000
Author: Amazon User

I hate to say anything bad about this game, because it really is brilliant. But I simply didn't find that it held my attention that well. It is very easy to pause this game and forget about it, while lesser games keep me riveted late into the night. Maybe this is a good thing....

Review Page: 1 2 Next 

Actions