R.U.S.E.

5 Review to this product

• 

  Humungousblock
  September 18th, 2010 on 7:15 am

  Rating

  This game is amazing. It takes a little bit to get use to the controls, but after you get the hang of it there is no rts that i have ever played that has been more fun. All about out thinking your opponent and coming up with strategies. R.U.S.E’s add amazing fun to the game and i would recommend this to anyone looking to play an amazing game. GET IT!
• 

  WarCenturion
  September 18th, 2010 on 7:21 pm

  Rating

  This game is amazing. Graphics are good, it’s well-polished, and has very strong multiplayer. It’s a thinking man’s RTS, not a “Micro” player, as you have more control over the strategic actions of your army then micro-control of every individual unit (you do control them, but they have an AI of their own–think End War, but way better, more polished, and on more of a ‘grand’ scale).

  The premise of the game is like chess, except with the old adage from Sun Tsu of “All Warfare is Based Upon Deception”. This game is almost a tactics simulator–do you go for cutting off the enemy supply lines, inhibiting his ability to make new units? Do you use feints or “Ruse’s” to trick the enemy you’re attacking somewhere you’re not? Is that enemy armor attack real that’s about to hit your base, or fake, even though your scouts do not report any enemy armor bases? Do you go for the heart, destroying the enemy HQ directly inhibiting his command/control and logistics?

  I love this game, Well done Ubisoft! Thank you for this sleeper hit!

  Pro’s:
  
  -Strong Multiplayer
  
  -Amazing graphics/detail during combat
  
  -Thousands of different strategy combinations with RUSE system

  Con’s:
  
  -”Micro” type players may be disappointed. This game is less about individually microing every unit (ala Starcraft) and more about thinking before you act (chess), and creating a winning strategy.
• 

  Jacob Letourneau
  September 19th, 2010 on 10:50 pm

  Rating

  This game is like risk, axis and allies, and chess all put into one game with crisp graphics and nice animations. Its the true “thinking man’s” game. By a long shot R.U.S.E. is the best strategy game for consoles yet! The solo campaign is a little weak story wise, but there are levels where you are tested on how well you can command and keep your men alive from ceaseless attacks on key cities. (which is super fun) The multiplayer is very diverse and well crafted. 9/10 for me!
• 

  Lt Vic
  September 21st, 2010 on 5:45 am

  Rating

  I am a Avid Gamer, and i have got to say this is this is one of the best games I have ever played. So much replay value and fun, and the thought into the game is amazing.
• 

  T. Caughey
  September 22nd, 2010 on 11:22 am

  Rating

  I desperately wanted to love RUSE and for the first two hours I did. You begin the game as an (initially) interesting US Army Major of the 1st Armored Division in the infamous Kasserine Pass. At your command are historical units engaged in deliberately paced and tactically based action all presented in an attractive and zoom-able tabletop environment. What’s not to love?

  Unfortunately as the Single Player Campaign progresses the game’s mechanics begin to breakdown. RUSE is a game that wants you to look at the “big picture” but ends up forcing you to micromanage on the ground. The combat revolves around the tried and true “rock, paper, scissors” concept. Here this translates as tank units kill infantry units who kill anti-tank units who then kill tank units. This is then reapplied to air units. Pretty simple right? Well not entirely.

  RUSE is many enjoyable things but a historically accurate or realistic war game it is most defiantly not. Many of your units, which were historically very versatile platforms, are represented in this game as part time assets that must be babysat so as not to turn into total liabilities. It’s very shocking the first time you see armored, self propelled anti-tank units with 88mm cannons and 7.92mm machine guns retreating from Infantry advancing across open terrain because they’re “rock” to the infantry’s “paper”. This creates an environment where the tactical level becomes a burden which must be borne instead of a fun challenge to overcome. The player will also note with frustration that the developers have thrown any and all semblance of historical accuracy out the window at the strategic level as well. Being presented with a situation where you’re asked to take part in a counter offensive after the Battle of the Bulge where the Germans have dominating air superiority would be amusing if said level where not so infuriating.

  Not to say the tactical level is not without its pleasures. The designers made excellent use of line of sight concepts (despite the ability to shoot through forests which is simply bizarre) and the ambush. The first time I saw a light tank from an advance element sprinting down the cobblestone street of a small Italian town and then the whoosh of my waiting infantry’s bazooka and the resulting fireball I had an ear to ear grin of pleasure. This combined with the emphasis placed on recon units allows the true use of enfilade, L-shaped ambushes and some other realistic tactics. Unfortunately, again, as the game progresses you are forced to fumble with poorly grouped and managed units at the strategic level which simply doesn’t allow for the implementation of much of the careful attention required to do these things.

  While I’d like to be able to say that the Campaign is, by far and away, the worst portion of RUSE the truth is that it has some very stiff competition from the poorly constructed, stand alone “what if” scenarios available. Some are embarrassingly easy, others incomprehensibly hard but none of them are actually fun.

  The one aspect of RUSE that does translate well is the multi-player. Because your opponent doesn’t have the ability to simply spam you with units like the computer does the tactical aspect becomes fun again and the strategic level becomes as important as it should actually be. The “RUSE ability”, which is a collection of psychological actions, fakes, feints, espionage and counter-espionage tactics, actually has a use against a human opponent whereas they are often left either forgotten or unpleasantly forced into use in a linear fashion during the campaign.

  The bottom line is that RUSE is not a realistic war or historical strategy game. It’s simply an RTS set in World War II which is usually frustrating but occasionally brilliant. The bulk of the enjoyment the player will get out of the game is in playing other people so I’d recommend a rental to WWII and RTS enthusiast so they can try out the multi-player and before they sink the retail price into the game.

  Pros:
  
  *Looks great with very smooth camera action.
  
  *Terrain details and map lavished with attention.
  
  *When ambushes and complex plans work the game comes to life.
  
  *Tactical mechanics conductive to multi-player.
  
  *A wide variety of units and factions which play slightly different.
  
  *Real time saves/loads.

  Subjective qualities:
  
  *A deliberate, even slow, pace of game play.
  
  *Game play forces player to play on both tactical and strategic levels.
  
  * Campaign missions “unfold” with progressive goals.

  Cons:
  
  *Silly unit attributes and abilities.
  
  *Tedious micromanagement which robs the strategic level of any fun.
  
  *A sub par AI which spams the player with units.
  
  *Really poor level design.
  
  *Some missions are frustrating in their difficulty.
  
  *Obvious, eye roll inducing, storyline.