Call to Arms

About

Call to Arms is a single player and multiplayer real-time strategy game. It was developed by Digitalmindsoft and was released on April 27, 2018. It received positive reviews from players.

"Call to Arms" is a tactical shooter game that allows players to experience a cooperative campaign, play user-generated content, and engage in custom battles. The game features a wide range of customization options for the army, and the Deluxe Edition includes bonus content for expanded gameplay. The developers, with a multi-national team, encourage creating games instead of war.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

+19

Skip User Reviews

81%

Audience ScoreBased on 15,836 reviews

story322 positive mentions

stability404 negative mentions

story
1,676 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
19%
75%
6%
The story aspect of "Call to Arms" has received mixed reviews, with many players noting a lack of a cohesive narrative in the campaign. While some missions feature mini-stories that add variety, the overall campaign is described as thin and loosely connected, often feeling like a series of skirmishes rather than a compelling storyline. Players express a desire for more missions, better integration of story elements, and improvements in mission design to enhance the overall experience.
- “The story campaigns, despite not being some triple-A odyssey, were ironically more engaging and drew me in; the voice acting was passable.”
- “The campaign is actually extremely challenging, especially as far as the tactics you need to use to win the fight. Sure, it has a few quirks here and there, but overall it's one of my favorite RTS-style games!”
- “No story in the campaign, just missions loosely tied together in the form of a war diary.”
- “The plot of the game sucks, but the game itself is good.”
- “The campaign doesn't have a story; its missions are varied enough and have a mini-story in each one to not make it feel like you're just playing skirmishes.”
gameplay
1,430 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
32%
60%
8%
The gameplay of "Call to Arms" has received mixed reviews, with many players appreciating its unique blend of real-time strategy (RTS) and first-person shooter (FPS) mechanics, particularly the direct control feature that allows players to engage in combat from a soldier's perspective. However, criticisms include clunky controls, buggy AI, and a lack of depth in certain gameplay elements, leading to a repetitive experience. While the game shows potential with its modern setting and improved graphics, many feel it falls short of the standards set by its predecessor, "Men of War: Assault Squad 2."
- “Call to arms enhances the gameplay initially brought to you in Soldiers: Heroes of World War II by allowing the player to select individual troops and play in 1st person from their perspective.”
- “The game has a fun, engaging and challenging gameplay which goes from high level 3rd person zoomed-out logistical and tactical management of dozens of units and vehicles down to individual soldiers' inventory management and fps control; it is a bit clunky and rough (especially infantry animations and some gameplay quirks), but its qualities far outshine its issues.”
- “The gameplay is unique in the combination of fps & rts and with all the assets being constantly updated to a higher quality.”
- “Extremely shitty tech demo, missing any features to make it an actually decent or playable tactical RTS. Cover mechanics are buggy, suppressing the enemy is impossible, and the men fight like AI snapping onto targets in milliseconds and taking shots.”
- “Too often I felt like I was babysitting my units, abusing the direct control mechanic to survive.”
- “The gameplay is slow and boring.”
graphics
812 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
48%
45%
7%
The graphics of the game receive mixed reviews, with many players praising the detailed environments and solid performance on various hardware configurations, particularly at medium to high settings. However, some users express disappointment with graphical bugs, dated animations, and a lack of polish, especially in first-person mode. Overall, while the visuals are generally considered good for a strategy game, there are calls for further improvements and optimizations to enhance the gaming experience.
- “The graphics & environments are beautifully rich in detail.”
- “This game is incredibly well made and features great graphics and very good optimisation allowing for massive battles with hundreds of units.”
- “The graphics are astounding!”
- “The graphics are noticeably bad when you enter control mode, which isn't a big issue but still takes a bit to get used to.”
- “The game looks like it's in an alpha stage and needs a lot more polishing in the animations, graphics, and even the bland looking menu screen, and even if the graphics look well everything just feels bland and empty.”
- “The graphics are washed-out and lacklustre.”
stability
410 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
1%
99%
The game's stability is widely criticized, with numerous users reporting frequent bugs, crashes, and performance issues that significantly hinder gameplay. Many players describe it as a "buggy mess," highlighting problems with AI behavior, freezing during missions, and overall poor optimization. While some acknowledge the game's potential and enjoy its core mechanics, the overwhelming sentiment is that it requires substantial fixes and updates to become a fully functional experience.
- “Runs great, I'm able to easily get over 120fps using a 1080ti, zero issues so far, other than the sound which appears to be scratchy to a degree.”
- “Game looks good for early beta, hope the developers don't ruin it by simplifying the gameplay. Please fix direct mode properly, leave the game mechanics alone, give us unit unlock in custom mode, and I am a happy camper; it runs great as it is.”
- “Honestly, this game is a buggy mess and it does punish you big time.”
- “We got so frustrated by the bugs (crashing, stuttering, AI being buggy, strong units seemingly spawning infinitely on normal) it was just not fun.”
- “The base game is pretty awful and buggy, almost like they forgot to finish developing the actual game and the AI will make you go insane, mostly your own will be dumb and not shoot an enemy right in front of them while the enemy AI seems to be able to shoot you across the map.”
optimization
334 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
22%
53%
25%
The optimization of the game has received mixed reviews, with many players reporting significant performance issues, including low frame rates, crashes, and lag, particularly in multiplayer modes. While some users noted improvements in stability and graphics on mid-tier systems, others expressed frustration over the game's inability to run smoothly even on high-performance machines. Overall, there is a consensus that the game requires further optimization to enhance the user experience and address persistent bugs and performance drops.
- “The game features an interesting single-player campaign, conquest mode (my absolute favorite part of the game), and is well-optimized with good graphics.”
- “Identical to Men of War: Assault Squad 2 but with a modern war re-skin, much better optimization, a much cleaner UI and menu system, and a new and more fleshed out direct control mode offering better 3rd person and the new first person view.”
- “What an improvement, they have added more content, better optimization, more mechanics, real 3rd person and 1st person.”
- “The optimization is so awful that my computer that meets almost all the recommended specs still crashes.”
- “I love this game but its optimization just makes it unplayable.”
- “This game is buggy, has poor optimization, and lags a lot.”
monetization
154 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
2%
42%
56%
The monetization strategy of the game has drawn significant criticism from users, who describe it as a blatant cash grab characterized by excessive microtransactions, paywalls for content, and a reliance on loot boxes. Many players express disappointment over the shift from a free-to-play model to one laden with costly DLCs and season passes, arguing that these practices detract from the overall gaming experience and exploit early supporters. Overall, the sentiment is that the developers prioritize profit over player satisfaction, leading to a negative perception of the game's monetization approach.
- “I can support microtransactions here and there, especially when you are getting a certain thing (i.e., not loot boxes).”
- “However, looking past those gripes means that you have a campaign that is completely reworked to be unit centralized rather than command centralized, and microtransactions that are benign to gameplay, only affecting cosmetics.”
- “So far, items that are included in these microtransactions are cosmetic things like emblems or logos for profiles, and some XP boost items.”
- “Seriously developers.....no...no....... big no no remove them, remove all microtransactions, you don't need them they ruin the game!”
- “It's a rip off of MOW2 and the devs use the scummiest cash grab techniques.”
- “It feels like a cash grab, especially with the terrible market system/loot crates and the fact that I have to spend $30 on a 'season pass' to unlock campaigns that should've come with the base game in the first place.”
replayability
108 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
44%
49%
7%
The game offers a mix of high replayability through its dynamic campaigns, modding community, and multiplayer options, with many players enjoying the variety and depth it provides. However, some users express concerns about limited single-player content and AI issues, which can diminish replay value over time. Overall, while many find it fun and engaging, the experience can vary significantly based on community involvement and available content.
- “The game is a lot of fun and has tons of replayability with mods, multiplayer campaigns, and so on.”
- “The dynamic campaign mode (conquest) gives an enormous amount of replayability.”
- “I can see the replayability of this game being virtually endless.”
- “There is not enough replay value.”
- “I really want to like this game but with the AI being so abysmal and the lack of replayability due to the fact that there are maybe 10 maps, it gets old quick.”
- “Edit: decided to give this a thumbs down, simply because it has not done a good job of keeping me interested in playing it, and the gaming style got very boring and not enough replayability.”
music
70 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
31%
55%
14%
The music in the game receives mixed reviews, with some players praising the soundtrack as beautiful and immersive, particularly enjoying the main menu theme and the incorporation of intense background music. However, many others criticize it as generic, repetitive, and uninspired, often feeling it detracts from the overall experience. Overall, while some find the music enhances gameplay, a significant portion of players consider it a weak point compared to previous titles in the franchise.
- “Best game ever fighting the enemy while listening to songs 10/10”
- “The graphics aren't bad and physics are ok, I really like the music though, especially the one that plays in the main menu.”
- “Overall not a bad game with great music and interesting mechanics.”
- “They're soundtrack budget was 0, as with many strategy games.”
- “The music here is so boring and soulless.”
- “Combined with the background music (which has never been anything special in previous titles either, but now it's even worse than before) makes this game have absolutely zero immersion besides hearing the same recycled death, hit, explosion and gunshot noises over and over again.”
humor
60 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
97%
5%
The humor in the game is frequently highlighted as a standout feature, with players finding the janky AI, absurd animations, and quirky voice acting to be genuinely funny. Many reviews mention that the game's chaotic and buggy nature leads to hilarious moments, especially when playing with friends, making it an entertaining experience despite its flaws. Overall, the humor adds a layer of enjoyment that keeps players engaged, even amidst criticisms of the game's technical issues.
- “The first mission made me feel like I was back in the sandbox, lmao... and the fact that you can take direct control over your little guys and just punish people is hilarious and amazing.”
- “Sure, anything is fun with friends, but even when the game gets janky, it's the funny kind of jank as opposed to the infuriating type that just wears you down over time.”
- “There's room for improvement; there are a couple glitches here and there (donkeys walk backwards and funny sometimes :p), but the overall experience is great fun and entertaining. This is the main reason why I play video games.”
- “I was hoping for a game that would make me laugh, but instead, I found a collection of stale jokes that fell flat.”
- “The humor in this game feels forced and out of place, making it more cringeworthy than entertaining.”
- “I expected clever writing and witty banter, but what I got was a series of unoriginal gags that missed the mark.”
grinding
58 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
5%
29%
66%
Players consistently express frustration with the grinding mechanics in the game, describing them as tedious and time-consuming, often requiring excessive effort to unlock units and progress. Many reviews highlight the repetitive nature of missions and micromanagement tasks, which detract from the overall enjoyment and tactical depth of the gameplay. While some appreciate the game's mechanics and potential, the overwhelming need for grinding is a common point of criticism, suggesting it could benefit from a more streamlined approach.
- “You'll need a second life for grinding.”
- “A bit grindy sometimes.”
- “You'll need a second life for grinding.”
- “The story missions are filled with endless wave grinds that are more tedious than tactical.”
- “Uninspired campaign missions that become insanely tedious thanks to aforementioned bullet sponges and crappy design.”
- “Thankfully there are only two of them but Battle of Alberes is so tedious, boring, and frustrating that I feel that mission alone drags my game score down by a point or two.”
atmosphere
16 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
50%
31%
19%
The atmosphere of the game receives mixed reviews, with some players praising its immersive qualities reminiscent of war-torn settings, while others criticize it for lacking depth and clarity. Many feel that despite the game's modern graphics and fast-paced gameplay, it fails to deliver a compelling atmosphere, leading to a significant drop in overall enjoyment. Overall, the game's atmospheric elements seem to vary widely among players, with some finding it engaging and others deeming it nearly non-existent.
- “Very atmospheric, like the gates of hell.”
- “In general, CTA has a great atmosphere going for it, very much akin to Arma 2 BAF's Takistan with a mix of the Second Chechen War and the Middle East.”
- “CTA is a very contemporary game; the atmosphere is relevant, the tech is modern, it’s faster-paced than its ancestor games, and it plays well.”
- “Controls are clunky beyond belief, the vision of the game appears blurry at best, unit variety is very constricted, and the atmosphere is pretty much non-existent.”
- “There is no atmosphere, no story, nothing.”
- “I really love this game, just the atmosphere and audio for all of the guns makes this game an easy 9/10, but it lowers drastically to a 3/10.”
emotional
10 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Players express a mix of humor and frustration regarding the emotional impact of the game. While some find joy in the sandbox-style gameplay and the ability to control characters, others feel disappointment and heartbreak over monetization issues, leading to a desire for emotional catharsis. The emotional experience is thus characterized by both laughter and a sense of loss.
- “I want to cry when I play the stealth missions.”
- “Since Steam won't refund me, I looked into what could be done to help with my problems so I can achieve some sort of emotional catharsis and feel like my $15 was somewhat justified.”
- “Coming all the way from Soldiers: Heroes of WWII and Men of War, it's disappointing and heartbreaking to see entire factions paywalled by edition tiers, season passes, and the fact that loot boxes are present at all.”