Dynasty Warriors 5: Empires

The Good

• Satisfying tactical gameplay.


• Battles are very alive and never feel like you're just repeating the same tactics over and over again.




• Difficulty can be tuned nicely.




• Quirky atmosphere keeps it interesting.




• Tangential learning is nicely implemented.

• Combat is very underdeveloped.


• Lacking presentation.




• Voice-acting made me want to poor acid down my ears.

Beats me.

Dynasty Warriors 5: Empires is based entirely around romanticized (and fantasized) Chinese history, a subject I am very much unfamiliar with. The game features a large number of historical figures and cities, as well as numerous campaigns based on events that occurred in the many chapters of China’s rich past. All of which is stuff that passes me by completely.

The game clearly tries its hand at tangential learning, meaning that the player witnesses events in the game and becomes fascinated by them, which prompts them to further research the material themselves. This works to some degree, I did find myself scouring Google for information on some of my favorite characters each time I finished a campaign, but it also backfires somewhat since there is simply too much to take in to begin with. Even when I did want to self-educate, I had a hard time recalling which of the several similar-looking and often similarly named characters I took a liking to again.

If you are not interested in learning any history, then remember this shorthand: “everybody wants to rule China”. Doesn't matter who it is, which faction he belongs to or what motivation he briefly mentions at the start of the campaign, each ruler is out for domination. Each campaign has some mild variations, but that is the gist of the entire game. From that, you'll probably conclude that the story isn't that fascinating and you'd be correct. It isn't really interesting itself, but the quirky atmosphere and the obvious butchering of historical figures is enough to put some meat around the RTS-skeleton of the game.

Gameplay

Talking about the RTS-skeleton of this game, it is actually remarkably solid. I have been told that this series is primarily a hack&slash, action-game affair and that this is a spin-off game. You wouldn't know that just by playing it, though, since the RTS part doesn’t feel like an afterthought and functions just as well as the actual fighting. The strategy is based around political policies that you must order, such as recruiting new troops, encouraging economic development or suggesting an alliance. The more land you possess, the more policies you can execute each turn. Alternatively, you can follow the suggested policies from one of your officers or not even ask him anything and just delegate the matter to your appointed officer entirely.

As for the tactical warfare, you got a map of China with all of its regions. Each region counts as a land and if you own it, then you can station officers on it (3 generals and 3 officers max). Each officer/general has an army that they command, which has a finite number of troops that the player can increase or replenish through policies. To take over more land, you must end the policy/station phase and enter the battle-phase. You then select invade and choose a region you wish to take over, a screen will then pop up detailing which officers are in connected regions and can participate in the battle. If you are been assaulted yourself, then you can come to the defense by selecting “defend” instead of “invade”. You can also choose to side with any of your allies to send them one officer and help them defend or capture an area they want.

My only real problem with the setup so far is that officers all level separately and only if you actually play as them. This means that you either need to constantly switch between characters in order to keep them all averagely leveled or you must make absolutely sure that you never ever have to defend a front with weak characters on it. None of these options are very fun and I don’t see why officers don’t get experience from partaking in battles with you. I ended up employing a tactic where I would just hire enemy generals after a number of battles and throw out all five officers I had previously used to support the one character I played with and with whom I captured everything.

The actual fighting is also very entertaining, if a little simplistic. Battles involve taking over a number of camps that are placed around the map, you then win if you take over the enemy’s main camp from which they stage their attack. The problem is that you can’t just waltz over their main camp and take it over, you first need to control a direct line of camps from your base to theirs. To take over any base, you first need to kill all the “guard captains” that are present in it, which are slightly more sturdy versions of the basic AI-controlled soldiers. If an enemy officer is present, then you also need to capture him or at least make sure he legs it. The base will then be captured and become yours.

What I enjoyed the most about the combat was that it too had a tactical layer, as you had to adapt to enemy movements and retreat when necessary. You can also issue orders to your troops, but the effects are somewhat minimal and you never really know where they are or what they are doing. The fighting itself is also really simplistic, just keep hitting the square button and everything will die. You can end a string of attacks with triangle for a “combo” and once the meter at the bottom is filled you can press circle for a special attack, but these become just as routine as spamming the main attack.

Presentation

Because the game has to render so many models at the same time, the graphical aspect is not entirely up to par. Dozens of characters are forced to share the same models and even then they are fairly pixelated and bland. The combat also wasn’t as flashy as I was made to belief, which was very disappointing, as that was the main reason for why I got this title to begin with.

The voice-acting is also very underwhelming for pretty much every character, which becomes twice as annoying when you keep in mind that characters never shut up. They spout dialogue so often that sometimes matches suffer from delay as they try to catch up with everything the AI wants to say.

Replay-value

The campaigns in this game are entertaining enough to replay from time to time, especially since different factions have different policies and units. Each one also introduces some new characters and usually these are some of the more entertaining ones, such as Xu Chu. It’s not much, but the gameplay is something you really get into, just like with Civilization. Before you know it, three hours have passed and you missed that important meeting, so you just keep playing instead.

Why should you get it?

Very addicting tactical gameplay, a quirky atmosphere and nicely paced campaigns all make sure that Dynasty Warriors is a blast to play. It’s not as deep and involving as March of the Eagles or even Civilization, but it’s a lot more casual, which in turn makes it easier to pick up and play. Also, Civilization doesn’t allow you to mount an elephant and plow through Chinese infantry.

Why should you skip on it?

The lack of proper localization is rather shameful when you take into account how long this series has been around. If you can’t get quality voice-acting for all your characters, then that is fine, but at least don’t subject us to a constant stream of dialogue. The combat is also very underwhelming and some of the battles don’t support multiplayer, so one player just has to