History Channel Civil War: A Nation Divided

by ACTIVISION

Product Features

• Single Player

Product Details

• Shipping: This item is also available for shipping to select countries outside the U.S.
• ASIN: B000GVYYFK
• Product Dimensions: 7.5 x 5.5 x 0.8 inches ; 6.1 ounces
• Media: Video Game
• Release Date: December 14, 2007
• Average Customer Review: 3.4 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (33 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #13,340 in Video Games (See Top 100 in Video Games)
  • #28 in Video Games > PlayStation 2 > Strategy
• Discontinued by manufacturer: Yes

Product Description

Platform: PlayStation2

Fight as a Confederate or Union soldier in 12 of America's most legendary battles including Gettysburg, Bull Run and Antietam!

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

40 of 41 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars A Huge Let Down, November 30, 2006

By 

The Sad Bard (Tennessee) - See all my reviews

= Fun:3.0 out of 5 stars 

This review is from: History Channel: Civil War: A Nation Divided (Video Game)

Like so many other gamers, I was looking forward to a really intense first person shooter set in the Civil War (kind of like a Civil War "Call of Duty"). Well, this game is very short. I zipped through most of the missions in a few minutes. What is so heartbreaking about this game is that you could see all the potential it had squandered. Most of the battles are not really battles, but you on a mission (by yourself) to do something silly like sneak into a tent, or deliver a message to an officer. Many times I found myself under a lot of enemy fire only to look around and think, "where's the rest of the army? Why am I out here all alone?" The battles themselves are short, and I kept thinking, "okay, this is part one of the battle, and now that it's done, I'll move on to the second part of the battle." Uh, no. Once you complete the mission, the battle's over and you move on. The enemy A.I. is botched so that they just run at you in the same pattern over and over, and who knew there were so many Gaitlin guns in use by the Confederacy in 1862? Overall, a disappointment. I really wanted to like this game, and there are a few glimmers of thrills. I enjoyed Chattanooga and moving up the mountain, but the battle of Shiloh (if you could call it that) was terrible (it's just you sneaking about the camp before the battle even starts to sabotage a balloon? Come on! Put me in the middle of the Hornet's Nest, stick me behind the stone wall at Fredericksburg, let me at least blow up some railroad tracks or something!) I don't understand why the History Channel would put their mark on something like this.

34 of 38 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars A mediocre attempt, February 27, 2007

By 

James Hiller (Beaverton, OR) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (TOP 1000 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)   

= Fun:3.0 out of 5 stars 

This review is from: History Channel: Civil War: A Nation Divided (Video Game)

I'm a big Civil War buff, and love learning and teaching about the conflict. For years, I've longed for a game that brings the battles and traumas of life during the war to life. When I found out, by a television commercial, that the History Channel helped to created "Civil War: A Nation Divided", I didn't not hesistate or wait to purchase one. After playing it for a few days, I wished I had waited, or at least read the reviews of the game. Overall, it was disappointing.

The game allows you to play both as a Reb and a Yank, each in about six to seven battles. You are a first person shooter, and are given little tasks to complete as you move through the battle. the tasks are not at all challenging, and it's quite easy to complete them or find out what you have to do. All the time, the opposing army is taking shots at you. I found each level would take me about 10 minutes to get through, and most of them it only took one time. I played at the "normal" level, but could increase it to "hard".

The graphics were okay, and the different battles scenes seemed unique to the area in which I was fighting. Often you have cannon burst or bullets fliyng over you, while the sound of the battle is all around. However, the ease with which you can make it through the game is not at all challenging. Plus, you are basically stuck on a certain course when you get started, and are not allowed to roam around the land very much.

I know there are a ton of really good WWII games that allow you a sense of freedom, and challenge. I would rather have less than a history lesson, and more action. While the intention for this game was good, the result was slipshod at best.

Simply put, it ain't worth the $40,00.

31 of 35 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Huge Disappointment..., December 6, 2006

By 

K. Collins - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

= Fun:4.0 out of 5 stars 

This review is from: History Channel: Civil War: A Nation Divided (Video Game)

I have been waiting for a 1st-person shooter Civil War game since North & South for the NES came out...who knows why it took so long? Who knows why they made this so poorly? And historically accurate? I think not. The game itself is not THAT bad. I do enjoy playing it, but expected SOOOO much more. I want a game like Star Wars Battlefront but with Civil War soldiers and bigger battlefields. This is like a very short version of Call of Duty with worse graphics. VERY linear, I think that is its fatal flaw...I hope somebody reads these things and makes a better Civil War game instead of another WWII game. I was looking forward to Shiloh, but they turned it into a stealth mission instead of the wooded bloodbath that it was...I was looking forward to Burnside's bridge at Antietam, but it's only a footnote in a disappointing level. I was looking forward to Fredericksburg (either defending the wall or fighting my way up the heights), but alas none of that was there. WHY? I didn't pay much for it so $ isn't the issue...it's just a mediocre game.

The only pluses....I found the computer AI to be decent...The atmosphere is good with the ambient sounds and things (unfortunately this is all but killed by the linear gameplay and disappointing level design), and lastly, the HOPE that someone takes this game and improves it to the level of Call of Duty and other 1st person shooters.. PLEASE! Unless you are a Civil War buff like me or need a 1st person shooter other than WWII, you probably won't like this game (and if you are a Civil War buff, like me, you're sure to be disappointed...)

2115|R3SP71VQTG9X7L;2115|R1X38WPDT5ILY3;2115|R1U5G2DDRD51E;