+ $3.99 shipping
Get free shipping
Free 5-8 business-day shipping within the U.S. when you order $25 of eligible items sold or fulfilled by Amazon.
Or get 4-5 business-day shipping on this item for $4.98. (Prices may vary for AK and HI.)Learn more about free shipping
Trade in. Get paid. Go shopping.
Ship it to us for free.
We are unable to process your trade-in order.
Have a question?
Find answers in product info, Q&As, reviews
Please make sure that you are posting in the form of a question.
Braveheart combines real-time strategy with global maneuvering in a sword-clashing re-creation of the battles between Scottish clansman and expansionist English aggressors. The latest 3-D engine and state-of-the-art motion-capture technology give Braveheart serious, make-you-cringe combat realism.
Braveheart is a perfect example of how an ambitious game design can end up being something of a double-edged sword. It combines strategic empire building with real-time 3D combat and takes place in late 13th-century Scotland, the same setting as the Mel Gibson movie. However, despite its intriguing premise, Braveheart's assorted play mechanics coexist about as peacefully as the Scottish clans depicted in the game.
Your goal is relatively simple: As the leader of one of 16 major clans, you must unite the others in order to stave off the invading English army. However, accomplishing that goal is rather difficult, even on the easiest setting. You do most of your work within the game's turn-based clan-management interface. Here you can monitor every aspect of your clan, including your territories, towns, armies, caravans, and spies. You begin the game with a single territory, a pair of armies, and a pair of leaders. From these humble beginnings, you must extend your influence through diplomacy and warfare (but mostly warfare, as you might expect from a game boasting a 3D combat engine).
Leader units can not only lead an army into battle, but also take on a variety of special missions. Without a leader, armies are limited to guard duty, ambushes, patrols, or training. With a leader, an army can engage in full-fledged battles and undertake an array of diplomatic missions and covert operations, most of which can help make your campaign run a lot more smoothly. For example, you can kill an enemy leader to weaken opposing armies, or march into an enemy clan's territory and demand its unconditional surrender.
Missions of this sort are assigned from the turn-based interface. From here, you can also micromanage each of your towns: how much food each should produce, what type of weapons to craft, and what extra buildings and fortifications to construct. The people in your towns also have a happiness rating, which is easy to manage as long as you keep everyone fed. Trade caravans are important to your clan's economic prosperity, though controlling them tends to be a painful exercise in micromanagement. In fact, the process is so clunky, and the automatic control of caravans is so effective, that you'll wonder why manual control is even an option.
Micromanagement is the crux of the turn-based game. You must keep an eye on your clan's daily routine every turn. You have to continually send scouts to explore neighboring territories since you can't automate the process, and apparently know next to nothing about the surrounding lands. You have to keep sending spies to rival towns and then recall them a few days before they get captured - and then send them out again so your information remains fresh.
If you use the game's continuous time mode, the strategy interface updates itself in pseudo-real-time fashion. Unfortunately, this mode doesn't deactivate as described. Instead of simply hitting the continuous time key again, you have to keep clicking on a button to stop the process and regain manual control of your little empire. Since Braveheart moves along at an otherwise slow pace, continuous time mode should have been a good feature; but the awkward on/off process makes it more annoying than helpful.
Army management is also difficult, since your troops will grow restless and desert you after extended periods of inactivity or boring duty, such as guard detail. This is no big deal early on, but as you move further into the game and have dozens of armies and towns to manage, weeding out the discontent becomes problematic. Of course, you can simply disband your army and return all the troops to the nearby town's peasant pool. Then, you can take those peasants right back out of the pool, arm them with the same weapons, and create a new army that's pleased as punch to be on duty. The new army might not be the seasoned veterans they once were, but at least they won't desert. Of course, the other way to liven up your armies is to send them into battle. This won't always make them happy campers, but you'll at least get some use out of them while they're around. Battles occur whenever you enter an enemy town or are on a diplomatic mission and opt to attack.
At this point, the game halts and loads up its 3D combat engine. This usually takes about a full minute on fast machines, so you can forget about smooth transitions. Once in the 3D view, you can control your troops much like you would in Myth or any other real-time strategy game. You can control a lot of troops at once in Braveheart, as well as some pretty cool siege engines, but be warned that even on a fast system the game will slow to a crawl when the real action starts.
Although Braveheart lets you set your troops in various formations, most of these mean nothing in battle, since your troops won't stay in formation when they move anyway. In fact, one of the game's most disappointing aspects is the fact that battles usually end in a massive free-for-all. In most cases, he who has the most troops wins. Of course, archers help, but since you can't see the enemy until they're very close, they rarely have enough time to deal serious damage before they also begin hitting your own melee troops. There are times when a small group of veterans can hold its ground against a larger enemy force, but these are few and far between.
Another problem is the fact that you must typically seek out your foe, with absolutely no clue as to which direction you should travel over the rolling 3D terrain. Some might call this fog of war, but when you march into an enemy town with the express purpose of conquering it, you might at least know where that town is. In most cases, you can avoid this problem by standing still and waiting for your enemy to come find you, but this is yet another work-around that detracts from the overall experience.
The 3D combat sequences also suffer from poor camera controls, which are much less intuitive and far more disorienting than Myth's. At least the graphics themselves are nice; units are neatly rendered, fight valiantly, and even die dramatically. The weather effects and terrain look good as well, though the trees look terrible.
Braveheart's multiplayer is pretty solid, though it only supports the 3D combat portion of the game. So even though you can play the game with four players over IPX, TCP/IP, and Mplayer, you still have to deal with all the limitations and flaws of a 3D combat engine.
Essentially, Braveheart is a game that tried to do too many things at once. While the turn-based component is very deep, it tends to degenerate into a morass of micromanagement. And while the 3D combat sequences are interesting to look at, they run slowly and suffer from poor controls, slow loading times, bizarre hide-and-seek engagements, and an absence of real tactics. Put the two together and you have a game with lots of potential but not enough chemistry. --Michael E. Ryan
--Copyright ©1998 GameSpot Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of GameSpot is prohibited. -- GameSpot Review
Top customer reviews
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
I received the game and started it up. The graphics a bit outdated and yes the menu screen look very archaic, but hey this game was made in the 90's. I then chose a clan, Wallace. I loaded the game and the first screen was a map. The game tutorial does a horrible job at explaining the game unless you read the manual. The tutorial was garbage overall. I then got deeper into the game(after a an hour or so of reading the manual and going over the tutorial) and i found it was quite interesting. Very in depth and very complex.
After i had played the game for a while i remembered all the negative things the people said about the game. I don't understand. Unless they didn't bother with the manual or they just didn't care. Braveheart is not just a hack through hundreds of people and see their bloody mutilated bodies on the ground. It's see their 3D bodies get hacked up with the bonus of in-depth economics and political situations.
Stay away from the game if you just want a quick, fast paced, hack-em-up game. It's far more complex and it takes more than 3 brain cells to complete.
Ultimately, it introduces a somewhat complex style of playing that still differs from modern video games, whether they're historical, fantastic, or modern, and surpasses regular modes of playing, whether it's RPG, turn-based strategy, or wartime combat. It requires you to use your brain, which is what I have always liked about it, and if you don't watch out and go about every little thing carefully, your entire system and game plan could fall. Perhaps this is why most reviewers haven't liked it, because they were looking for something a bit more simple, like Age of Empires, that just requires you to manage everything with a few mouse clicks. Braveheart isn't all that appealing, I'm sure, to those who can't multitask well.
There are a few other notable features that make the game more enjoyable: the scenery, for instance. It's apparent that the programmers, in their day, made it an effort to capture the Scottish scenery and architecture (like that of London, if you ever get that far). Personally, I don't care whether I'm playing William Wallace or not, but if you want to slip into the role-play side of it, then you can go ahead. But if you work with the less popular characters of Leslie and Argyle, you can train them to be stronger and more levelheaded. Everything is balanced in a very admirable system of economical decision, whether it be financial, military, or geographical.
All in all, this game is a splitter, you either love it or hate it. Being a fan of games that are more usually the underdog in the review world and sales market, this could may be a review of biased opinion. In a last breath, its advantages outweigh the disadvantages. At least give it a try. The prices I'm seeing are unbelievably cheap from when I first bought it.
For the management part: one phrase - no standing orders. You will have to click, and reclick, and reclick each command each and every turn if you want something done continuously. And almost everything demands attention: your countless armies, towns, villages, settlements, spies, harvests, you have to tell each one of them what to do every turn of the game.
Braveheart is a good game turn bad, so bad it hurts to see it.