I have a golden rule when it comes to my enjoyment/review approach to videogames: If I’m not having fun, I’m not playing it anymore. That’s the main reason why you only see positive reviews in Strategy and Wargaming, because I only review games that I enjoy playing.

Is that a good thing for a gaming website? Not sure, but given the fact that this is a one-man show, and that my existence on this Earth is limited, I refuse to spend time playing things I do not enjoy, just to then spend a couple more days putting a review together, while being upset at writing about something I didn’t enjoy.

With that being said, why am I writing about Sudden Strike 5 and calling it a disappointment? Well, when Sudden Strike 4 came out, I wasn’t that keen on it either, and eventually came around to have my fun with it, and realized that while SD isn’t the most in-depth of real-time strategy series out there, it’s a fun, old-school RTS that is decent at being a solid 6 or 7 out of 10 video game.

Having that previous experience with SD4, my first impressions of Sudden Strike 5 were not the most favourable. But, being an avid learner from my previous mistakes, decided to stay a bit longer – “Maybe this is just like Sudden Strike 4, and everything will click, eventually”. Well, it didn’t. Here’s why.

For those who might be unaware of what Sudden Strike 5 is, do let me fill you in: it’s a real-time strategy game set in World War 2 that has a lot of similarities to what I consider to be “old-school” RTSs. I was extremely excited for the release of SD5 for this exact same reason: I wanted to play an old-school RTS like Blitzkrieg, Codename: Panzers, and World War 2: Frontline Command. However, this time I don’t think my first impressions are misleading me, and after staying with SD5 for a lot longer than I would have with any other game, they’re all but confirmed.

Let’s start with the good things first: Sudden Strike 5 looks fantastic and has a great atmosphere for an RTS title. Maps can be bright and gloomy, depending on the setting, buildings, and terrain, which are super detailed, and the units look terrific, especially the soldiers, who no longer look way less cartoony and big-headed than they did in SD4. Controls are tight, units are responsive, so there’s little I can fault in that department, too. And that’s where the good stuff ends, from my point of view.

The new standard camera is pushed so far back that units are barely visible, a fact that’s made even worse when the camo for the unit matches the terrain they’re fighting in. In Sudden Strike 4, units were kind of big and visible, and I went and reinstalled it to make sure I wasn’t hallucinating that, and the two images below do confirm that. Everything looks so small and hard to read. Looks good, there’s no denying it, but what’s the point if most of the time I’m having a hard time finding out where my units are? The problem is so bad that in large maps, I had to use the minimap to locate units I had scattered around in bushes and foliage, and even then, I couldn’t see them unless I did a full-screen select to highlight them. Look at the image below and point out where my two tanks are (one of them even has a damage warning sign). I dare you.

Now, mission and map designed? Who has designed these? Look, I can stomach a bad UI and even hard-to-see units, especially with the game that allows me to pause and search for them. It’s cumbersome, yes, but doable. But boring mission design is too much for me. I started with the German campaign and the invasion of Crete, and boy, did that one stink. The map is gigantic, and there are side objectives scattered everywhere. Sound great, right? Huge map of opportunities to test your tactical mettle. Love that. Well, not so fast, because every objective is as generic as the last. Capture a location, which is always defended by: some trenches with a squad of soldiers, a couple of tanks or armored vehicles, and some dug-in machine-gun and anti-tank positions. There’s almost zero variation on that. Call me crazy, but am I the only one who thinks side objectives should be used to implement new types of challenges? I love attacking a position with my tanks as much as the next guy, but doing that 7 times in a row gets boring extremely fast. At least it’s cool that you get some requisition points to call in some units and air support.

I thought, “Okay, maybe it’s just this mission. I’m sure the others will be different”. No, they’re not. The Soviet first mission is equally as boring, and the British one, also set on Crete, starts off decent, with a good defense, but it then turns into the same “now attack these locations”, and I just checked out. I cannot find any fun in that, no matter how hard I tried. Look, the following missions might be good, but I’m not willing to stay long enough to find out. If you did, please let me know what you think.

I want to talk a bit about the proper usage of units in this game, and how it essentially doesn’t exist. This might be because I have grown used to playing games like Gates of Hell: Ostfront and Company of Heroes, but I’ll be damned if the unit mechanics aren’t as uninspired as its missions. Infantry can chuck grenades (all of which explode on impact, which makes no sense, and it’s impossible to dodge in time), go prone, and scatter. That’s it. You can take cover in some vegetation, too, because that makes sense. This wouldn’t be so bad if the units behaved somewhat competently, instead of having to be micro-managed at every single moment in time. Another infuriating thing is the planes and their bombs. I wasn’t aware that dive bombers had laser-targeted munitions during World War 2, but in Sudden Strike 5, they certainly do, because God forbid the enemy calls and airstrike on your position, and you attempt to move your units out of danger, because their bombs will follow you and hit, no matter what. I have no words for that.

On top of all of this, the game costs a whopping $44.99 with the 10% discount, which is way overpriced for what’s on display. Sure, there are a lot of missions, some 25 of them, which is commendable. But 4 skirmish maps and 4 multiplayer maps? No, thank you. I do hope the game improves over time, and more things get added to skirmish and multiplayer, but for now, one thing I know for sure is that Sudden Strike 5 isn’t going to be ranking amongst the best World War 2 games of all time, and that’s a shame, because I was super excited for this one.

The reason I’m not calling this one a review is that I’m not willing to stay with Sudden Strike 5 any longer than I already have, which is already a bit too much. You know what? I’m leaving to go to the gym, and when I arrive, I’m going to play a couple of missions of Sudden Strike 4, since I already have it installed on my PC, and it’s a lot cheaper and orders of magnitude better. I’ll see you in a couple of days, for my Heroes of Might & Magic: Olden Era review!

Support Strategy and Wargaming

I do what I do in Strategy and Wargaming because I love to do this, and I’m never going to stop. If you would like to support me with that, you can  buy me a coffee for a dollar  if you’re feeling generous.  If you can’t, no worries, Strategy and Wargaming will always be free, and I’d love to have you around!