SGS Korean War

About

"SGS Korean War" is a strategy game that allows for single-player, local multi-player, and PvP matches. The game recreates the different phases of the Korean War, including the initial North Korean invasion and the subsequent UN and Communist Chinese offensives. Players can choose to participate in a grand campaign or shorter scenarios, with the option for split-screen multi-player. The game aims to provide an accurate and engaging representation of the Korean War's dynamic and intense military conflicts.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

79%

Audience ScoreBased on 19 reviews

graphics3 positive mentions

gameplay3 negative mentions

The game offers a unique and historically accurate campaign set during the Korean War, making it a standout in the genre.
The visual presentation is solid, with well-designed maps and atmospheric elements that enhance the gameplay experience.
The game has a deep and engaging strategy system that rewards players who invest time in understanding its mechanics.

The main campaign is plagued by numerous campaign-breaking issues, making it unfinishable for many players.
The AI is poorly designed, often failing to utilize its resources effectively and leading to unbalanced gameplay.
The user interface is cumbersome and lacks essential quality-of-life features, making it difficult for new players to navigate.

gameplay
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Gameplay has received mixed feedback, with some users highlighting significant issues that should have been addressed during testing, particularly regarding AI awareness of game mechanics. However, others have found the mechanics engaging and enjoyable after exploring tutorials and videos, indicating that the system has potential if the existing problems are resolved.
- “All these issues should easily have been caught in testing, or even just a quick developer discussion about the game's mechanics and their consequences.”
- “If the developers ever issue a major update that fixes these issues (and ideally makes the AI aware of basic game mechanics too), I'll gladly change this review.”
- “After watching some videos by 'leftydad' on YouTube on how the mechanics worked and some of the features hidden in various icons, I wanted to try it again and I fell in love with the system.”
graphics
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The graphics in the game are highly praised for their detail and quality, with tool-tips enhancing the visual experience by providing expanded unit icons and symbols. Players appreciate the game's fun factor and note that the graphics meet a high standard, contributing to the overall depth of the gameplay.
- “Didn't read the manual and never will; there are tool-tips everywhere, some of which expand the unit icons to show greater detail for each formation using excellent graphics and symbols.”
- “This is such a fun game with great graphics.”
- “As of this posting, I've only played one of the shorter scenarios, but the game has depth and the graphics are up to the usual high standard.”
story
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The story aspect of the game is perceived as lacking depth, with limited scenarios that feel more like truncated versions of the main map rather than thoughtfully crafted missions. Additionally, players note the presence of a simplistic AI that can be easily exploited, detracting from the overall narrative experience. Basic quality-of-life features that could enhance storytelling, such as mission summaries and unit tracking, are also missing.
- “Tinkering with the limited scenarios - the small scenarios are just limited portions of the regular map and fewer turns, not hand-designed missions. Everything looked promising aside from a brain-dead AI that you have to go out of your way not to exploit.”
- “Basic quality of life features are still missing from the game: the option to filter out counters on the map, a summary of the mission objectives, a detailed order of battle list, and a list of units lost or destroyed.”
stability
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
300%
Reviews indicate that there is a perception of a lack of focus on addressing stability issues, with some users feeling that the developers prioritize defending the game's reputation over ensuring a fully playable main campaign.
- “In my opinion, they seemed more interested in defending the game's honor than troubleshooting issues, which left us with an unplayable main campaign.”
- “The game crashes frequently, making it nearly impossible to progress without losing hours of gameplay.”
- “I encountered numerous bugs that disrupted my experience, and it feels like stability was not a priority during development.”
grinding
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Players note that engaging in the campaigns, whether focusing on '51, '52, or the entire war, often involves significant grinding through attrition, which can make the experience feel repetitive and time-consuming.
- “The campaigns available are '51, '52, or the entire war; a lot of this time is going to be grinding attrition.”
atmosphere
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The game's visual presentation is generally strong, with well-designed menu backgrounds, counters, cards, and maps that contribute to an immersive atmosphere. However, the user interface is criticized for being poorly suited to the wargame genre.
- “The general visual presentation is good; the menu background, counters, cards, and map are well presented and very atmospheric.”