Scourge of War: Waterloo

78%
Game Brain Score Based on 161 reviews
  • graphics
  • gameplay
  • story
Scourge of War: Waterloo Game Cover
View game
Get on Steam

"Scourge of War: Waterloo" is a tactical strategy game that simulates the famous 1815 battle in detail. Command thousands of troops across a realistic battlefield, with historically accurate units, weaponry, and battle tactics. Experience the intensity of the battle and test your strategic skills in this immersive and challenging game. Fight for glory and historical accuracy in the ultimate wargame simulation of Waterloo.

  • PC
  • Windows
Genres & TagsPlay Modes

Reviews

78%
Audience ScoreBased on 161 reviews
gameplay4 positive mentions
graphics15 negative mentions
  • The game offers an accurate and compelling simulation of Napoleonic warfare, providing a unique experience for fans of the era.
  • The scale of battles is impressive, allowing players to command large armies and experience the chaos of historical battles.
  • The game has a strong community and modding support, enhancing gameplay and providing additional content.
  • The user interface is clunky and difficult to navigate, making it challenging for new players to learn the game.
  • The AI can be frustratingly unresponsive, often failing to follow orders or acting irrationally during battles.
  • The graphics are outdated, which may detract from the overall experience for players accustomed to modern visuals.
  • graphics67 mentions

    The graphics of the game are widely criticized as outdated and mediocre, often compared to visuals from the 1990s, with many players noting poor optimization and clunky UI. While some appreciate the simplistic design for its focus on large-scale battles, the overall consensus is that the visuals fall short of modern standards, making it less appealing for those seeking high-quality graphics. Despite these shortcomings, some players find the graphics adequate for the gameplay experience, valuing historical accuracy over visual fidelity.

    • “I am happy that somewhat simplistic (but still beautiful) graphics were chosen to allow for the simulation of such huge battles.”
    • “The graphics aren't state of the art (the soldiers are sprites, for example), but they are better than I expected for a game of this scale.”
    • “The graphics are beautiful if you recognize what the game is.”
    • “This game is a buggy mess of stupid AI, graphics from 1990, and performance from the Middle Ages.”
    • “The graphics are incredibly outdated; even with low expectations we have for strategic games.”
    • “Graphics are bad, no kidding, they are bad - really bad - as are the animations...”
  • gameplay22 mentions

    The gameplay of the game has received mixed reviews, with some players enjoying the strategic elements and the immersive battle experience, while others criticize the graphics, optimization, and camera mechanics. Many users suggest that the game requires mods to enhance enjoyment and that the battle mechanics can become repetitive after initial learning. Overall, while the game offers notable experiences and depth, it suffers from issues that detract from its playability and enjoyment relative to its price.

    • “I could go on for several more paragraphs of why this game is worth purchasing, as I have piled up quite a few notable experiences in my one hundred hours of gameplay so far, but I think it is best to learn and explore on one's own in such a massive game.”
    • “[b]realtime combat[/b] - bye-bye turn-based gameplay and sayonara to squares & hexes!”
    • “Gameplay wise, not many games give you the feeling of an actual battle taking place, artillery firing, bodies littering the ground, and thousands of sprites firing away at each other.”
    • “Awful graphics, awful optimization, mediocre gameplay.”
    • “The small scenarios are great to learn mechanics but once you get that down, it becomes boring as you watch your 4 or 5 units fire at the enemy and you can do nothing for 10 minutes or more.”
    • “The game mechanics and graphics are worse than Napoleonic games from 10-15 years ago.”
  • story7 mentions

    The story aspect of the game is centered around the historical events of the Waterloo campaign, offering 20 missions split between the two sides. However, players have noted that the narrative experience is somewhat limited, with some missions feeling more like sandbox battles rather than a cohesive campaign. Overall, the storytelling is overshadowed by gameplay mechanics and user interface issues.

    • “Let me tell you a better story:”
    • “The game, from the name, obviously deals with Waterloo; you get 20 campaign missions, 10 for each side.”
    • “This was not a proper campaign mission either, simply a 'sandbox' battle.”
    • “The game from the name obviously deals with Waterloo; you get 20 'campaign missions', 10 for each side.”
    • “I went through a couple of custom games as well as 2 missions from the Waterloo campaign, both at normal mode.”
  • optimization3 mentions

    The game's optimization has been widely criticized, with users reporting significant bugs, outdated graphics, and sluggish performance that detracts from the overall experience. Many feel that the game's technical issues severely impact gameplay quality.

    • “This game is a buggy mess of stupid AI, graphics from 1990, and performance from the Middle Ages.”
    • “Awful graphics, awful optimization, mediocre gameplay.”
    • “My biggest gripe with the game is the rather sluggish performance at times.”
  • stability3 mentions

    The game suffers from significant stability issues, including numerous bugs, outdated graphics, and poor AI performance. Players report that the campaign map freezes during battles, hindering progress. Overall, it is not recommended for those seeking a polished gaming experience.

    • “This game is a buggy mess of stupid AI, graphics from 1990, and performance from the Middle Ages.”
    • “Time on the campaign map freezes once two armies meet, and will not move forward until you resolve the battle.”
    • “Don't buy this game if the only thing you look for in a game is good graphics and smooth performance, because it's buggy and the AI can sometimes be incredibly stupid.”
  • music3 mentions

    The music in the game is generally well-received, enhancing the immersive experience and complementing the tactical gameplay. While some users note that the overall quality may be lacking, the soundtrack is appreciated for its ability to evoke a sense of realism and engagement. Additionally, the inclusion of classical pieces, like those from Ludwick van, adds to the enjoyment for players.

    • “But it is all compensated through good music, making you feel like you are actually on the field by yourself with good tactical options presented in each battle scenario.”
    • “The music is fine; I love a bit of Ludwig van. The manual and the tutorial are both helpful and needed. It is expensive, but I think it's value for money.”
    • “As the game is extremely interesting, and although it seems lacking in general quality (i.e. music, graphics, etc.), the game makes up for it with its sheer size and potential for new scenarios.”
    • “The music is fine, love a bit of Ludwig van, but it doesn't stand out in any significant way.”
    • “While the game has many strengths, the music feels generic and fails to enhance the overall experience.”
  • replayability3 mentions

    The game offers infinite replayability through its sandbox mode and a variety of challenging scenarios that can be played from multiple perspectives, allowing players to command different army sizes and strategies.

    • “There are lots of scenarios that are not easily winnable, providing replayability for both sides (France/Allies).”
    • “Endless replayability as you can use the sandbox mode.”
    • “There are lots of scenarios that are not easily winnable, which adds to the replayability for both sides (France/Allies).”
    • “Infinite replay value, in any size of army you want to command.”
  • grinding2 mentions

    Players find the grinding aspect of the game tedious and frustrating, primarily due to a poorly designed command control and movement interface that complicates gameplay. Additionally, tracking the status of commanders adds to the overall tedium.

    • “A difficult and poorly designed command control and movement interface makes this a tedious and frustrating game to play.”
    • “Finding out which of your commanders was killed can be tedious.”
  • monetization1 mentions

    The monetization aspect of the game has not been directly addressed in the provided text, which focuses more on the game's graphics. However, the negative tone suggests that players may have concerns about the overall quality and value of the game, potentially impacting their perception of its monetization strategy.

  • atmosphere1 mentions

    The atmosphere is significantly enhanced by the sharp rhythm of musket fire and the booming sound of cannons, particularly when experienced from a ground-level perspective.

    • “The sharp rhythm of musket fire interrupted by the boom of a cannon, especially when zoomed to ground level, really adds to the atmosphere.”
  • humor1 mentions

    Users find the humor in the game to be exceptionally effective, often eliciting strong emotional reactions such as laughter and tears of joy.

    • “Due to overwhelming joy, I'm crying and laughing.”
    • “The humor in this game is absolutely top-notch, making every moment a delight.”
    • “I can't stop chuckling at the witty dialogue and hilarious situations!”
Positive mentions (%)Positive
Neutral mentions (%)Neutral
Negative mentions (%)Negative

Buy Scourge of War: Waterloo

Play time

8hMedian play time
8hAverage play time
8-8hSpent by most gamers
*Based on 1 analyzed playthroughs

Videos

Similar Games