Tom Clancy's EndWar

About

Tom Clancy's EndWar is a single player and multiplayer turn-based strategy game. It was developed by Ubisoft Shanghai and was released on February 25, 2009. It received mostly positive reviews from critics and positive reviews from players.

"Tom Clancy's EndWar" is a Real-Time Strategy game set in a persistent online World War III. Command the U.S., European, or Russian brigades and create a tactical army using voice controls for swift command. The unique third-person camera immerses you in the battle, emphasizing terrain and cover for strategic gameplay.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Skip User Reviews

81%

Audience ScoreBased on 667 reviews

gameplay29 positive mentions

grinding7 negative mentions

The voice command system adds a unique and immersive layer to gameplay, allowing players to issue orders verbally.
The game offers a nostalgic experience for fans of strategy games, with engaging combat and unit upgrades.
The campaign provides a decent amount of replayability with different factions and strategies to explore.

The camera controls are restrictive, making it difficult to get a good overview of the battlefield.
The AI can be frustratingly predictable and sometimes unresponsive to commands.
Multiplayer features have been shut down, limiting the game's longevity and community engagement.

gameplay
84 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
35%
61%
4%
The gameplay of Tom Clancy's EndWar is characterized by its unique voice command system and a simplified rock-paper-scissors mechanic that emphasizes tactical depth while remaining accessible. While some players appreciate the immersive experience and unit upgrade options, many criticize the gameplay for being repetitive, shallow, and hindered by poor camera controls and pathfinding issues. Overall, the game offers a blend of engaging mechanics and cinematic elements, but it struggles with depth and complexity, leaving some players feeling that it resembles an interactive movie more than a traditional RTS.
- “The game plunges players into a large-scale war between major superpowers, blending tactical depth with accessible gameplay.”
- “Its immersive voice-command system and engaging tactical gameplay make it a standout for fans looking for a fresh take on real-time strategy.”
- “The three factions—USA, Russia, and Europe—each offer unique units and playstyles, keeping gameplay fresh and rewarding tactical experimentation.”
- “The gameplay is more cinematic but so boring that it felt more like an interactive movie than an actual game.”
- “But overall, gameplay is just too strict with the concept of rock-paper-scissors unit engagement.”
- “Extremely simplistic rock-paper-scissors gameplay could work if it wasn't for the fact that the camera is absolutely abysmal and there's almost no ability to micromanage at all.”
story
78 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
19%
75%
6%
The story in the game is a mixed bag, with some players appreciating its tense and cinematic portrayal of global warfare, while others criticize it for being underdeveloped and repetitive. Although the campaign starts strong with political intrigue and a compelling premise, many reviewers note that it loses momentum and depth as it progresses, often feeling like an extended skirmish mode rather than a cohesive narrative. Overall, while there are interesting elements and some engaging moments, the story ultimately fails to maintain its initial promise, leaving players wanting more.
- “The campaign presents a tense and cinematic story of global warfare with political intrigue and high stakes, supported by strong voice acting and realistic sound design that draws you into the chaos of modern combat.”
- “The story takes you to an alternative future where European countries assemble to form a United States of Europe, while Russia expands its military force thanks to oil.”
- “This game also has three novels, one with the main story and the other two within the overall story, that I believe to be enjoyable reads.”
- “The story is nonexistent too.”
- “A solid single player campaign, aside from them dropping whatever semblance of a story there was at the beginning.”
- “The overarching story is no less ridiculous than it was in the 2000's but after decades of Ubisoft running Tom Clancy's name through the mud, much of the edge has been replaced by dull irritation instead.”
graphics
43 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
40%
44%
16%
The graphics of the game are generally considered decent for its release era (2009), with many reviewers appreciating the art style and aesthetic despite acknowledging that they show signs of aging. While some textures and details are outdated, the overall visuals still hold up reasonably well, especially on higher settings, though they may not meet modern standards. Players note that the graphics contribute positively to the gameplay experience, but a remaster or update could enhance their appeal further.
- “Personally, I love the art style and the overall tone of the game.”
- “The graphics are incredible for its age, the AI is generally pretty smart about combat tactics, and battles change and evolve based on the player's actions.”
- “Use to play it on PS3 and it's even better on PC thanks to 1080p and high graphics with anti-aliasing.”
- “Graphics are dated, textures are old and need modding.”
- “The graphics on this thing are poor when compared with the consoles, weirdly enough.”
- “I would have recommended this game years ago when I played it for the first time (it is from 2009) but now it feels too outdated, both from mechanics and graphical perspective (1080p 30fps).”
replayability
10 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
40%
30%
30%
Overall, the game is praised for its high replayability, with many users highlighting its strategic depth, dynamic features, and added content that enhance the experience. While some players noted the clunky mechanics and repetitive elements, the unique gameplay and solid combat system contribute to its lasting appeal. Despite minor drawbacks, the game is considered a worthwhile investment for fans of the genre.
- “Do yourself a favor and buy this game if you're a fan of strategy, RTS, modern war, etc. 5 out of 5 stars with lots of replay value.”
- “It's clunky and old and a bit repetitive, but it plays differently from any other RTS, has great art and sound design for its era, and good replayability.”
- “I wish you didn't have to go through the prologue missions to replay the campaign. It has a decent challenge with solid replayability for the money you spend.”
- “The replayability holds up, and there were a few features and units that were added.”
- “And, for extra points, it's dynamic, which aids in replayability.”
music
9 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
33%
34%
33%
The music in the game has received mixed reviews; while some praise the unique compositions and standout tracks, particularly the end credits song, others find it forgettable. The dynamic music and effective voice acting contribute positively to the overall presentation, though there are suggestions for improvement in certain areas. Overall, the soundtrack is noted for its ability to enhance the gaming experience, with some tracks remaining memorable long after gameplay.
- “The end credits song is a masterpiece :)”
- “The song that plays in the credits is really amazing with some good guitar solos; I played it at least 6 times just to hear it again.”
- “Good presentation, great dynamic music, and a good overall effort into unit voices.”
- “The presentation: music could use improvement; sound effects and voice acting all make sense.”
- “The music is forgettable.”
- “Too much music.”
grinding
7 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Reviews indicate that the grinding aspect of the game is largely viewed as tedious and repetitive, with many players finding battles to be mindless and lacking depth. While some appreciate the simplicity and macro-focused gameplay, others criticize the controls and unit variety, leading to a generally frustrating experience. Overall, the game struggles to balance engagement with the monotony of grinding.
- “Poor mechanism, slimy controls and tedious battles, proved it to be a piece of junk overpraised by the nostalgic gamer community.”
- “Depth of customization and unit variety is pretty shallow, most battles play out about the same and it can be a bit mindless and tedious.”
- “The game is really just a tedious killing spree.”
atmosphere
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
75%
25%
The atmosphere of End War is highly praised for its uniqueness and immersive quality, with players noting that the world and factions are well-crafted and engaging. Many recommend the game primarily for its atmospheric experience.
- “End War has a unique atmosphere.”
- “If you get this game, get it for the atmosphere.”
- “The atmosphere, world, and the factions are very well done and absorbing.”
stability
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
50%
50%
Overall, the game demonstrates solid stability, running well on modern hardware and older systems alike. However, users have noted occasional pathfinding bugs and issues with the voice command feature, which may detract from the experience.
- “For an older title, it still looks decent for an RTS game and runs great on modern hardware as of writing the review.”
- “It runs great on a dual-core laptop with an Intel 2.1 GHz processor, 4 GB RAM, and a GT540M at 1280x720 with maxed-out details.”
- “Good gameplay, cool aesthetic, but the pathfinding can be buggy at times.”
- “The only downside is that the promising voice command function is buggy, and I advise against using voice control.”
humor
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The humor in the game is noted for its contemporary setting, which adds a layer of absurdity, and is complemented by amusing dialogue from infantry characters, contributing to an overall lighthearted tone.
- “It's a bit funny that some of these events are set in today's calendars.”
- “The humorous banter among the infantry adds a delightful touch to the game.”
optimization
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
300%
The game's optimization has been criticized for being poor, with a locked frame rate of 30fps and noticeable screen tearing.
- “It is locked at 30fps with screen tearing and is terribly optimized.”
- “The game suffers from severe performance issues, making it frustrating to play.”
- “Optimization is lacking, resulting in frequent frame drops and stuttering.”

Skip Critic Reviews

70%Critics’ scoreBased on 2 critic reviews

Skip Game Offers

Buy Tom Clancy's EndWar

12h Median play time

12h Average play time

10-13h Spent by most gamers

*Based on 2 analyzed playthroughs

Skip Videos

Videos

Skip Games Like Tom Clancy's EndWar

67%2.8kreviews

Act of Aggression

2015

Casual Real-time Strategy

79%1.7kreviews

Wargame: European Escalation

2012

Strategy

95%4.4kreviews

Company of Heroes

2006

Real-time Strategy

86%4.6kreviews

Wargame: Airland Battle

2013

Real-time Strategy

84%7.6kreviews

Supreme Commander 2

2010

Real-time Strategy

More games like Tom Clancy's EndWar

Skip FAQs

Frequently Asked Questions

Tom Clancy's EndWar is a turn-based strategy game.

Tom Clancy's EndWar is available on Xbox Series X|S, PC, Xbox One, Windows and others.

On average players spend around 12 hours playing Tom Clancy's EndWar.

Tom Clancy's EndWar was released on February 25, 2009.

Tom Clancy's EndWar was developed by Ubisoft Shanghai.

Tom Clancy's EndWar has received mostly positive reviews from players and mostly positive reviews from critics. Most players liked this game for its gameplay but disliked it for its music.

Tom Clancy's EndWar is a single player game with multiplayer support.

Similar games include Act of Aggression, Wargame: European Escalation, Company of Heroes, Wargame: Airland Battle, Supreme Commander 2 and others.

Tom Clancy's EndWar

Platforms