User Reviews (1 - 11 of 23)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Gary Grisby has done it again!

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 81 / 87
Date: March 31, 2005
Author: Amazon User

You basically cannot go wrong with a Gary Grisby game, but I want to quickly assure those of you who shy away from his "monster" games, like War in the Pacific, that World at War was not designed only for the die hard wargaming grog....World at War will appeal to all gamers for its' relatively ease of play and respect for the historical period. Once you navigate the slightly steep learning curve, you will quickly become comfortable with the gameplay, and realize that many of the rules are intuitive.

One of the problems with buying many games is that after playing around with them for a week or two, you find it sitting on your hard drive, unplayed, to the point that WINDOWS tells you that you have unused desktop icons which can be deleted. This will not be the case with Gary Grisby's World at War. The replayability of this game is very high for the following reasons:

1. You have 5 different sides you can play v. the AI. You can play either Germany, Japan, Russia, The Western Allies, or China. Feeling adventurous? Then play more than one country such as Germany and Japan and see if your strategy for both nations can change the course of history. Want to learn the game mechanics better before playing the Western Allies? Then control China and see if you can withstand the Japanese invasion.

2.The game has 5 default difficulty settings. Winning as the Western Allies at the normal setting? Then crank it up a notch and see the strategies you employed previously crumble to dust as the AI is not only tougher during combat, but new strategies conducted by the AI are opened up as well.

3. Customizing the game is easy to do which will once again increase the difficulty. Just one example: you can increase your enemies supplies and transport abilities or conversely, deny your AI allied partners the same...either way, an entirely new game will result from these changes....these are only 2 of many adjustments you can make to increase your enjoyment when playing World at War.

4. The game supports PBEM play which will result in countless hours/days/months of play with your friends.

World at War is a turn based game, not real time, thus allowing you to pace the turns at your comfort level. The manufacturing and research aspects of the game are handled very cleanly and will not boggle you mind what to do next. The combat system is easy to comprehend and you will quickly understand why a particular attack of yours fell apart. The supply system of the game can be set at no supplies (recommended for beginners and the first game only), standard (where supplies you build for your forces are simply drawn from a common supply pool) or advanced (where you are responsible to create supply chains and physically have supplies present with your forces). These various supply rules illustrates the depth of the game. Finally, you can complete a game in one 4 to 6 hour gaming session.

Gary Grisby's World at War is a breath of fresh air in the stale world of WWII strategy games. Enthusiastically recommended!

Renews the genre of wargames

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 37 / 43
Date: March 31, 2005
Author: Amazon User

This game is the best strategic war game to come out in the last 20 years. On the surface it looks like Axis and Allies but that is only in the way checkers looks like chess.

The game has an in-depth supply system, realistic research rules, amphibious landings, op-fire, Artillery, AAA, and strategic movement. All of that and the entire WWII can be played out in under 4 hours.

The game comes with an excellent 128 page manual and a good community forum at the Matrixgames website. After playing the tutorials for 20 minutes I felt confident that I knew all the basic requirements for movement and combat then quickly got crushed by the AI. This is a game that takes minutes to learn and hours to master.

Strategy at its finest!

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 26 / 27
Date: March 31, 2005
Author: Amazon User

STORY: 5 stars
How can you go wrong with WW2? :P

GRAPHICS: 4
Ok this is a strategy war board-game so theres not much need for great 3d graphics and ooo-ahh special effects. The icons for the units are well done, although I would prefer a different infantry icon that stands out more (this can be modded btw). In fact I think most of hardcore guys shun that kind of stuff because it could mean the game producer didn't spend enough time on what matters most - gameplay. A Combat Animation of your units fighting is ON my default but the units are static and the battle presentation is lacking. It can be turned OFF in the options if you feel like I do so I don't see a problem with it.

GAMEPLAY: 5
If you like games like Risk, Axis and Allies and are looking for more depth then this game is your new best friend. This is turn-based wargaming at its best! Completely engrossing gameplay that covers from 1940-1946 and you can play as either Western Allies, Japan, Germany, China, or Russia. WaW does a good job on the historical accuracy for the most part but still lets you pull off those "what-if" scenarios. There are a number of difficulty options to play around with which makes it super easy to grasp the basics of the game. As soon as your delve into the 126 page manual you will notice though that there are rules for a ton of things and advanced game options that add whole new layers of depth.

SOUND: 3
The sound is ok I guess. I do find myself humming along to the opening tune but its probably not something I will remember the game for. There are a number of sound effects for the combat animations and others that are good quality.

REPLAY VALUE: 5
With 4 different campaigns, 5 different sides to choose from, all the alternate production/research/war strategies this game should last you a long while. Plus, most everything can be heavily modded to your liking by just modifying a text document.
PBEM (Play-By-E-Mail) is the online component included with this game. It allows you to play with 4 other people all controlling a major power. Turns can take from 5 minutes to an 1 hour so PBEM makes sense in this setting.

CONCLUSION:
If you like strategy games then this is a great game to spend your money on. "Gary Grisby's: World At War" really fits "Easy to learn, hard to master!" and provides excellent gaming on all fronts.

Great Turn-based Fun!!!

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 23 / 26
Date: March 31, 2005
Author: Amazon User

This is the game that many of you have been waiting for. People use Axis and Allies as a comparison, but it's nothing like it. It's a lot deeper and more fun. People will also try and compare it to HoI and HoI2 as it is a grand strategy game. Although they both use the drop-down map perspective and both are relatively complex, World at War is a turn-based game, which for me, is more interesting. Granted, the HoI series is fantastic, this is as well. Two main things set this apart from HoI--It is turn-based, and you can finish a game in 2-3 hours as opposed to 2-3 days.

Don't believe the reviewer that gave WaW one star. The reason that PBEM is the only multiplayer option, like MANY other turn-based games, is due to it's complexity of moving your units around the screen. At least with PBEM, you can grab a beer, do some laundry, and watch a little news while working on your turns. I only see this as a good thing.

GGWaW better than A&A

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 17 / 18
Date: December 06, 2005
Author: Amazon User

First off let me say that I have played the PC versions of Axis and Allies, Hearts of Iron II, and Uncommon Valor (another game by Gary Grigsby).

Second: If you do not like strategy board games such as Axis and Allies, Risk, or World in Flames - then this game is not for you.

GG World at War is not as complex as Hearts of Iron II or Uncommon Valor, but is more involved than Axis and Allies. GGWaW allows you to scale the complexity of the game - you can make it as simple as you want it. For example on my first game I only controled the movement of my forces. I did not have to worry about production, supply, advanced supply, or research. After my first game I then incorporated production, research and then regular default supply. I have yet to try Advance Supply. The 4 scenarios are geared toward the actual WWII historic time line. It is easier to win with the Allies, but on some occasions the out come has ended in draws. To have a true challenge is to play as the Axis. As a skilled player it is challenging to win with the Axis, but it is possible and offers an excellent challenge for any skilled GGWaW player.

Why I like GGWaW:
1. The game plays like a board game and theoretically you could play this game as a board game if it were sold that way.

2. It is a more indepth version of Axis and Allies, but not as indepth as Hearts of Iron II or Uncommon Valor.

3. The game is "Turn Based" unlike Hearts of Iron II which is more or less a real time strategy game.

4. The game can be scaled to your skill level. You can make it simple as you want it or control every aspect of game play making all the decisions on production, supply, and research.

5. The different scenarios to play - from large to small (4 different scenarios in all). For example you could play the longest scenario which is the whole length of the war taking 27 turns to finish the game or you could play the shortest of the 4 scenarios which will only take 10 turns. I like these options because of time restraints.

6. Support. The developers are on top of things and are constantly looking for feedback on bugs to correct to make the game even better.

Some people have complained about the Play By EMail feature. I dont see much of a problem with this feature because the game is turn based anyway and the file that you have to email to the other players are small and it only takes seconds to send

Edit: There is a beta patch out for registered users that lets you play over the interenet which gives you another option for multiplayer games other than PBEM.

This game will have a permanent spot on my hard drive.

(...)

So close

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 14 / 15
Date: April 11, 2006
Author: Amazon User

I really wanted to like this game but it's just too slow and limited. (Read the other comments on this.) If you're an utterly diehard wargamer who doesn't mind sitting there while the AI makes all manner of moves might be OK will this. This can't be overstated... following every turn you could eat a meal while waiting on the AI to do its thing. The obnoxious thing is unless you sit and watch you might miss something critical. I couldn't imagine what it would be like with one or more human opponents. Plus as other comments have stated there are the built-in scenerios and that's it. The game's just not worth learning to hack alternatives.

This game should've been so much more. Even just having an option of fast turns with end-phase balloons with blurbs of what happened in each area even would've been enough for me.

Two overall stars for being so close and the work that must've gone in to create it. One for what it's really like to play.

Gary Grigsby's World at War

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 9 / 9
Date: February 23, 2006
Author: Amazon User

I had high hopes for this game and I still do.

GGWW is a hybrid of the easier level game Axis and Allies and the harder level game World in Flames. Once you learn the icons and get the feel for moving units around, supplying them, and researching new weapons and technology, the game flows very well.

However, the somewhat fixed scenarios tend to lock the game into what really happened during the course of World War II, so you can't change alliances (for example, England attacking the USSR). Also, the allied side can be incredibly frustrating in the first couple of years because the USA and USSR are politically frozen, France seems to get knocked out right away, and the Chinese just doesn't have much of a capacity to do anything.

In some ways, a hex type game using "chit" counters with the actual military unit designations might be more realistic for an advanced wargamer. However, I think GGWW should appeal to a new generation of wargamers more used to icons.

All in all, it a good game, but there are some flexibility issues that might need to be addressed. I hear that the open source code should allow some mods in the future.

If you are an Axis and Allies fan, I would certainly recommend this upgrade!

Sorry, for fanatics only

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 14 / 18
Date: May 05, 2005
Author: Amazon User

Warning, warning! This game is for feverish GROG fanatics only. The game play allows for absolutely NO deviation from the historical reality of WW2. If you want to play a game with an inevitable result and no variation or creative strategy, this is for you. The game starts you after the beginning of hostilites, with your production already set, and no pre-maneuvering possible. Countries make war and fight battles, based on actual dates from history, not on what is going on in the game. Some of us find this unbelievably boring.

Having said that, I understand there are board-game fanatics out there (you know who you are - the guys who loved spending a weekend trying to figure out the rules to Axis & Allies)who will probably love the agonizing supply rules and micromanagement. If that's you , have fun.

The game worked on my 930mghz, 256 meg machine, even though it told me it wouldn't when I loaded it! If you have a slow machine, you should change the scroll speed to 7+ and you can make other graphic changes to smooth things out.

World at War is not for the "DIE HARD" wargamer

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 13 / 17
Date: September 10, 2005
Author: Amazon User

I have been wargaming for over 30 years. I do not care for this game as there is no diplomatic abilities what-so-ever. There is no way to persuade Spain to join the Axis. Yugoslavia signed the Tri-partite treaty and became a member of the Axis, even if only for a short time due to a British led Coup d' Tat. Turkey massed 3 million men on the Russian border waiting for Germany to win at Stalingrad. so they could join the Axis by declaring war on Russia.
The game is very complex, not realistic and to stiff to play. As a member of the Europa Association in the early 90's and the flexibility and freedom that a board game gives you. This is not for a person that wants flexibility and the ability to change history.
I was expecting to much from this PC game. If you want flexibility and the opportunity to change history, do not buy this game because it is not there. you can be the Germans and lose every time...you can be the Japanese and fair worse than they did in real life. If you only ever want to be the Allied powers then this is the game for you because you can destroy the Axis each and everytime.
This game was a waste of money.
if it is Axis and Allies you want then buy it and save the money for something more worth while

Good game, but a few comments

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 8 / 8
Date: June 07, 2005
Author: Amazon User

This is not going to be the end all and be all of WW2 Strategy games. It is good? Yes. Is it fun? Sure. The setup looks a lot like an Axis and Allies board where you can play one of Five major powers: Germany, Japan, Russia, China or the Western Allies. As mentioned above, the AI is very scripted on the actions it will perform unless you do something that makes it impossible (Japan will attack Pearl Harbor in Winter 41, Germany captures Denmark, Norway and France early, etc). However, you can change history. I played on Germany and was able to conquer all of Africa, Britain and Russia.

Everything is turn-based and there is not much interaction with your units. Battles entail you gathering a force and sending it against another force then the computer rolls some dice and the battle is decided. Coming off of playing games like Rome: Total War and Imperial Glory where i can get my turn-based strategy and a fun 3D interactive battle, I have to say i'm pretty spoiled from them.

Does it have a lot of replayability? Not really because the AI is so scripted in it's actions that the replayability is low because you know exactly what Russia, China, Japan etc..are going to do every time. This is the main factor I look for in strategy turn-based games. I don't want to just beat it, I want to be able to pick it up a few months later and have a game.

Overall, it was good for about a week. Playing the Germans was very fun and challenging, but once you get the hang of it there is no real desire to play it over and over again.

Review Page: 1 2 3 Next 

Actions