| | |  | | Home » Tom Clancy's End War | | | | | | | Description: | | The Tom Clancy Universe enters into a new battlefield of epic proportions and blasts its way into the world of War Games and strategy. Guarantee your nation's supremacy and Command the soldiers of the future in the battles of World War III. | | | Product Details: | | | Product Weight:
| 0.25 pounds | | Package Length:
| 7.5 inches | | Package Width:
| 5.3 inches | | Package Height:
| 0.6 inches | | Package Weight:
| 0.25 pounds | | Release Date:
| February 24, 2009 | | Average Customer Rating:
|  based on 26 reviews |
| | | Game Information: | | | Platform:
| Windows | | Media:
| CD-ROM | | Item Quantity:
| 1 |
| | | | Customer Reviews: | |
Average Customer Review:
 ( 26 customer reviews )
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
21 of 21 found the following review helpful:
 Real Time Tactics GameJul 14, 2009
By Lisa Shea
"medieval swordfighting enthusiast"
Based more on games like Ground Control or World in Conflict than Tom Clancy's previous games, "EndWar" is a real-time-tactics game taking place in World War III.
EndWar's depiction of WW3 is fought between the United States, Europe, and Russia after Russia sabotages European missile defense networks to cause them to attack a US spacecraft. The game takes place in the future, and all the units are meant to reflect this. Gone is the modern-day grittiness of most Tom Clancy games, as well as the fairly plausible storylines. What's mostly odd about the plot is that it's meant to take place in the same universe as Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon, meaning that the three main superpowers, despite having worked together for years, decide to go to war at the drop of a hat.
The goal in EndWar's standard mode is to capture command nodes, which are locations scattered around the map. Controlling half of them starts a five-minute countdown timer; controlling all of them leads to instant victory. The player commands up to 12 units, each a platoon of 4 squads or vehicles. There are 6 types of unit. Riflemen (meant to be elite special operatives, not standard army grunts) are good against other infantry and can capture nodes the fastest. Engineers are armed with missile launchers and various tools, but do poorly against other infantry and capture nodes more slowly. Transports can carry infantry and have good anti-air weapons, but are weak against tanks. Tanks do well against ground vehicles, but poorly against air vehicles. Helicopter gunships destroy tanks easily, but are vulnerable to transports and engineers. Finally, artillery is powerful at a distance, but highly vulnerable at close range.
The seventh vehicle type is the command vehicle; you can only have one on the battlefield at a time. The command vehicle offers two major advantages. The first is satellite imaging. The game is viewed with a camera that follows one of your units; there is no "free camera". There is a mini-map, but for practical purposes all the player's orders need to be issued from a third-person camera perspective. With a command vehicle active, the player can go into a more traditional top-down view and see the whole battlefield, as well as issue orders. Losing the command vehicle, or choosing not to bring it, means you don't get access to that ability. Secondly, the command vehicle can launch Unmanned Aerial Vehicles to scout locations or fire missiles at enemy units.
One of the game's main attractions is that it can be played by voice - all units, command nodes, and visible enemies are given a name ("Unit 1", "Point Alpha", and "Hostile 1", for example). By following the game's methodology, in theory it should be possible to say "Unit 1 attack Hostile 1". However, one of the main problems with this concept is that saying all that stuff (for every single action you would take in the game) takes a long time, and it's really just easier to use the mouse. Using the game controller (for the PS3 or Xbox versions of the game) also seems like an unusual hassle; really, as with any RTS, using the mouse is basically the best idea. The voice commands are a neat idea, but also impractical.
The game's other main feature is that units are persistent and unique. Each platoon has its own callsign and matching voice; as you play through the game's Risk-like main game, your platoons gain experience, and gains access to upgrades to attack, defense, mobility, and so on. Therefore, keeping your platoons alive becomes a major priority. If a platoon is injured heavily (having lost 3/4ths of its squads), they are evacuated by helicopter unless the enemy specifically chooses to continue attacking them (which results in permanently losing them). Luckily, the computer does not do that; it's only a risk from particularly cruel players online. The customizability and uniqueness of each unit means that losing a particularly favored one is a direct punch to the player. Unit voices can be either male or female, with a variety of accents; the Europeans, for example, have French, Italian, German, or Spanish accents (Britain is neutral in the game's universe). Therefore, recognizing a unit by its voice can assist in making speedy decisions on the battlefield - if a unit says it's under attack, you can recognize the voice and go to its aid more easily. You can even assign camouflage to your whole unit, to make them distinct from other players' units.
One of the main problems with the gameplay in EndWar is the superweapons. After half of the control points on a map are captured by one side or the other, both sides get access to their superweapons, which include a laser satellite for the Europeans and an orbital missile platform for the United States. These weapons cause massive destruction, and are guaranteed to wipe out any units caught in their range. In fact, they are one of the few sources of perma-death in the game (if the targeted unit is wounded enough). What's frustrating about this is that there's no way to avoid it, you simply have to resign yourself to losing your units once half the map is conquered. It's not like one side has to set up arrays or whatever; once you hit half, everyone gets a nuke.
The other main problem is that the gameplay is very repetitive. The main Risk-style conquest mode has you attempting to take over the entire world, but what it actually pans out to is doing a single play style (capture the nodes) over and over and over until you win. The six unit types mean that there's not a lot one can do in terms of strategy or development, though the unique platoons at least give it some variety.
Overall, EndWar is a good concept, but a lot of its potential was taken out by being adapted for consoles. The controls on the PC are basically good, with some frustrating bits arising from unit selection (you can't select units on the mini-map, for example, and it's hard to drag a selection box over helicopters without selecting units far in the background as well). However, for the most part, EndWar is a good game with a lot of neat elements to it.
7/10.
17 of 18 found the following review helpful:
Casual RTSFeb 26, 2009
By R. Ray
End War is mainly a command point capture and hold game. It is much similar to Star Wars Force Commander of years ago. It plays smoothly and has no bugs that I've seen. The developers really did a good job porting this to PC. The game is really light on my cpu and video card given that it's graphics are rather good for an RTS. Part of this is the fact that any one side is limited to 12 units (4 vehicles or fire teams per unit). The voice acting is also noticeably good and varied.
I do not like how the camera angle is set to something similar to an over-the-shoulder 3rd person shooter game like Splinter Cell. I would like the game more if it had an option for a free roaming camera, rather than one locked to the units I own.
It isn't in line with the standard of other PC RTS games in terms of complexity and involvement. Micromanagement is not something this game does much while in combat. I don't like heavy micromanagement, but this game is too light on it. It can be a good introduction to more complex RTS games or can be a game for the more casual player who wants to get a little RTS-like action in, without the tedium. I gave it 2 stars on fun rating and 3 on overall rating because I like more complexity and especially because the camera issue is really annoying.
7 of 8 found the following review helpful:
 Doesnt live up to the Hype- DisapointingFeb 27, 2009
By Steven Gotts
Do we start with the failed activation or the robo support? Then we move on to bad voice recognition and the inability to train that feature. Under cover its a typical Rts in the vein of c and c. The camera view is wild and unwieldly, and the constant pop ups which halt the game, are out of control. I had more fun with the new comand and conquer. their was a strategy there and you had much more control over many more units. The PC version of End War limits you to 5 "rock paper scissors type units, that have to try to capture a majority of check points. ie you have one helocopter unit to cover all the control points on the map. If your into all the between battle cinamatic storylines, you might enjoy the excess of them. Myself I prefer to watch a real movie on DVD, and do battle in a video game. I think the long ago game "real War" was more advanced and fun to play than this. In Conclusion, Ill keep playing, to get my moneys worth. Now I know I wont be tricked into their new soon to be released airfighter program. first time ever in my life Ive been so disapointed. Maybe when its in the $9.95 clearance bin, will I recomend you buy it.
2 of 2 found the following review helpful:
Simplistic gameplay, but excellent voice command.Jul 07, 2009
By G. Wong
Although the gameplay is simplified - there are only a few different types of units and they beat each other rock paper scissors style - the voice command is phenominal. Every so often it will screw up, but it is far ahead of any comparable one. I use a cheap 5 dollar microphone and it works just fine.
Also, the option to upgrade units after each battle is fun and keeps the gameplay interesting. The tactical aids, like airstrikes and WMDs, are very fun to use.
1 of 1 found the following review helpful:
ONE HIT WONDERSep 29, 2011
By Dagger One Bravo
It's an okay game I guess. Graphics are above average and the gameplay is interesting but like just about any other Tom Clancy game it has an air of childishness about it. What it actually is is a very dumbed down RTS game designed to function well on the consoles, which is the real reason there is a voice command system. Beware though, more than a tiny bit of ambient noise can make it malfunction. The good thing is that using the voice command is optional. Most likely on the PC you won't want/need to use it.
So anyway, you can actually finish this game in as little as 3 turns but you can drag it out longer than that and you can play or replay as a different country but what you'll find is that no matter what country you play or what strategy you use the game is always the same. There are some annoyances like the WMD option that you get if you are losing the game but the thing is that once you use it then the other side gets the option too and there's really not much you can do but resign yourself to losing a lot of units. About the only remedies to this is to always attack on two fronts, never jumble up your forces in a small area, and don't try to overwhelm the enemy with sheer numbers. Keep plenty on reserve.
It's cool to be able to upgrade your weapons and armor and the upgrades do work very well, they aren't just for show. You can even change the camo patterns. This feature is, in my opinion, about the best the game has to offer. Enemy AI will at times pull some good tricks out of it's hat but for the most part it's a simple, go through the motions and you're done type of game. Typical of Tom Clancy games in that even on the hardest settings they are never very hard to complete, mostly I think because they were made for kids.
I guess as long as you don't go into this thing expecting large-scale,epic battles that require alot of planning and strategy then you'll be satisfied. World in Conflict this game most definitely is not. To the casual RTS gamer that doesn't have alot of patience for strategic planning and tactical supremacy I would recommend this game but hardcore strategists and armchair generals will probably be highly disappointed. That's not to say that their is no need for strategy or tactics because there is but the game is very light on the amount of them that are required to be successful and there is always, always a workaround for bad decision making.
EDIT: AT RISK OF SOUNDING CONTRADICTORY, AFTER WRITING MY REVIEW I DECIDED I'D ACTUALLY LIKE TO TAKE THE GAME AROUND THE BLOCK AGAIN SO I ENDED UP BUYING IT A FEW HOURS LATER. OH WELL. IT DOESN'T CHANGE MY OPINION OF THE GAME, HOWEVER BE WARNED THAT IF YOU HAVE TREND MICRO AV SOFTWARE PLAYING THIS GAME MAY BE CONSIDERABLY LAGGY, NEARLY UNPLAYABLE. FOR SOME REASON IT CAUSES TREND MICRO AND YOUR EXPLORER.EXE FILE TO CONFLICT AND THAT FILE BEGINS GOBBLING UP CPU. THIS IS WINDOWS 7 64 BIT,BTW SO YOUR EXPERIENCE MAY BE DIFFERENT. AFTER UNINSTALLING TREND MICRO THE GAME RUNS PERFECTLY AND TASK MANAGER SHOWS EXPLORER.EXE HAS RELAXED AGAIN. WELL, I'M OFF TO EDIT MY TREND MICRO REVIEW NOW.
See all 26 customer reviews on Amazon.com
| | |
|
