User Reviews (1 - 11 of 20)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Imperialism II: very good

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 1 / 1
Date: May 08, 2000
Author: Amazon User

Probably my 2nd favorite game of all time, next to Civilization II. The economic system is well designed, and so is the combat... somewhat more sophisticated than just sending in one unit at a time to attack.

The AI is also very smart... the only thing I would change is adding a map/scenario editor

addictive

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 2 / 2
Date: May 19, 2000
Author: Amazon User

Once I start playing I can't stop. It is much better than conquest and age of empires.

For those who thought history was dull.

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 2 / 2
Date: June 17, 2000
Author: Amazon User

I saw this on the shelf at my local computer games store and though "This looks quite good". I installed it and I discovered that I had bought a game as good as or even, dare I say it, better than Civilization 2. The interface may have its problems, but the gameplay is phenomenal. I would not recommend the game to those who do not like strategy games or history, but as a fanatic for both I have spent many happy hours playing and I really hope there is a sequel coming soon.

This is some gamasm!

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 3 / 14
Date: June 24, 2000
Author: Amazon User

I thought this game was good because the characters in it smelled funny...i thought i smelled booz when i was sitting in my chair next to my computer while playing this game. The graphics were a little bit wavy though...the kind of wave you would get when you were drunk. If I ever played this game again i would again reach a climax of exciting action in this true imperialistic game. Good god, what is that smell?

What that smell is is the best radiation off the computer i felt in years. This is a game and people ought to be glued to it for hours at a time...

Everything the First Game Should Have Been, and Then Some

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 28 / 28
Date: June 27, 2000
Author: Amazon User

Plenty of people have said what's right with this game, so letme take a different tack. What was wrong with Imperialism One was primarily three-fold:

1) Time-frame. By setting the game in the 19th Century, rapid technology change was inadequately represented and often overwhelmed the game. Imp. II two solves that by stretching over three centuries, and not only that, but three centuries where the change is extremely significant and yet not overwhelmingly so (plus Imp. II has a better tech tree anyway).

2) Victory conditions. The victory conditions in Imperialism One were so horribly put together that you almost never got a truly satisfying victory, and "victory" often got in the way of a good game. Imp. II corrects that and then some: the victory conditions are realistic and well-designed, but more than that, they actually drive the game the way it ought to go, and force you again and again to act as you "ought", by which I mean within the economic and political realities of the time you are modeling.

3) Lack of scenarios. Because of all this, scenarios were vital to making the original game work, because you usually didn't want to play the game "as-is". There were a few scenarios included with the game (and two of them were pretty good), but no additional scenarios were ever released, and there was no way to program any of your own. This game, by contrast, is so well done that any scenario would be a waste: simply altering the starting parameters will create just about whatever scenario you're looking for, and I never found myself longing for one the way I did with the original.

(ONE KEY TECH NOTE: I've played this both on a Performa 6400 with a 200MHz 603ev chip and on an iMac with a 233MHz G3. The iMac, which should have been a lot faster, wasn't. The box minimums will work, but you'll be frustrated and it will run almost intollerably slowly. Try to run this game on at least 300MHz G3 machines if at all possible.)

Weak Gamers need not apply

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 12 / 12
Date: July 10, 2000
Author: Amazon User

When I heard about this game I was addicted to Age of Empires 2. I lived AOE2 and my blood was AOE2 I was over at my friends house playing AOE2 24-7. "The most in depth and greatest game ever" Little did I know 6 months later I would be playing a older game that could easily top that hype. This game is by far and away very deep. There is about a hundred techs. that you can get to improve your society, army, and navy. This aspect of the game can give you an early edge over your enemy or a early death sentance. Once that first obstacle is cleared you must also have earned, conquered or aquired, New world countries to supply the home world with materials needed to defeat the other Great powers. While these prior goals were being obtained you must also prepared your great power to be a strong one. Will you be a diplomat or a Glorious General? Will you be a friend or foe of the natives? Will you be strong at sea or strong at land? Will you be a nation of knowledge or simply use knowledge to obtain weapons? These questions face every ruler of the six great powers, and the path traveled is always different. Sound difficult don't fear. You are lead through a easy tutorial which will get you on your feet and walking into a world of depth and endless choices. There is also a multitude of options one being the tactical field option. If this is on you can fight your own battles which adds a very intresting concept of crushing the enemy or being crushed.

While the graphics are nothing to ohhhhh at it works in a turn based world. I feel like I have just covered the surface of this game so just take my word it is awesome.

too complex and confusing

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 1 / 3
Date: October 30, 2000
Author: Amazon User

I own the original Imperialism and found that game quite addicting. So, I thought Imperialism II would be the same. Nope. Imperialism I was OK, but Imperialism II is just a poor game. It's too confusing to actually enjoy the game. While you're worrying about getting your sugar (or whatever) back to Europe, you have to find time to build military units and others to defend yourself against the invincible AI player. The game is very interesting to play, but the realism is lacking. The AI players are perfect and we know that in the real world every country makes blunders. Maybe I'm just stubborn and havn't dedicated enough time to pull apart the game, but man doing that would put you in a state of confusion.

Imperialism II - a review

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 2 / 4
Date: December 24, 2000
Author: Amazon User

I, like many other Imperialism II owners, was brought to the series by the original Imperialism, which, undoubtedly, remains one of my favorite games. However, I do not think the sequel lives up to its predecessor. The second game got rid of some of the most amusing parts of the original. For example, the Industry screen in Imperialism II is bland and uninteresting, and, in my opinion, the addition of emplacerd artillery to the game, however realistic, took away from the enjoyability of playing by making it a little too hard to take land early in the game. And what happened to the wonderful scenarios? The second game, even with its change of setting, is too like the original in my opinion. Granted, designing a game sequel that combines the best of the original while also adding new ideas is hard, but from the team that created Imperialism, it is expected.

One of the best games ever made

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 1 / 1
Date: May 17, 2001
Author: Amazon User

This game is way better than the first imperialism, and has earned the place as my second fav game ever, after Age Of The Empires. I would recomend this to everyone, it is one of the most addictive games I've ever played.

A test of character

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 7 / 7
Date: September 14, 2002
Author: Amazon User

I've had this game for a couple years now, and still pull it out every once in a while, because I know I can still improve and try out new strategies. This game has a huge amount of depth and flexibility; I would say more than Civ II. Exploring and exploiting the new world is a neat twist. I also like the fact that you don't have to micro-manage each city- your nation works as one interconnected machine. You can also set battles to auto mode and computer players make their moves lightning-quick compared to Civ II.

But beware fair weather gamers: campaigns are looooong and slow. If you get in a tight spot with resources, it can take dozens of turns to get back on the right track. The length can make some games boring, but it also allows a lot of changes in the balance of power among nations.

I seriously doubt anyone can beat this game the first try through. After playing Civ II for a couple years, I thought this game would not pose much of a challenge. Well, it took me 4 or 5 times before I learned enough strategy to win. So if it took me a good 20-30 hours per game, then you can see how long you can enjoy this title.

Review Page: 1 2 Next 

Actions