User Reviews (1 - 11 of 23)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

One of the most disappointing games this year.

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 7 / 15
Date: December 22, 2000
Author: Amazon User

As a die-hard SFC fan I eagerly awaited the release of what I hoped would be one of the best games of the year. Sadly however I was woefully disappointed in the "finished product" or should that be unfinished product. To completely list all of the bugs would take more space than I have here. The most annoying is the near total lack of single player missions (you get one with the game) and tutorials. Also the sound effects and music do not work; nor do some of the hot key commands. Also the game crashes regularly and often requires a complete re-boot of the system. In short save your money and get something else or wait until a fixed version is released.

Bugs and More Bugs

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 4 / 8
Date: December 31, 2001
Author: Amazon User

Doesnt work out of the box. I have emailed interplay and have received no response. This game has more bugs then any other i have seen. Each patch promises to fix them, to no avail. The first one was great Empires at war is the worst second i have ever seen in any game. I bought this game for the name. Taldren who actually wrote it is probably the worst company I have ever had to deal with. After getting no response i posted on the forum asking about the bugs and my posts were deleted. All you will see on the forum are filtered messages genereating positve press. The game looks great but after playing it for a while you will lose ships, Lose cash or it will freeze up right when you tink you are doing good. Buy at your own risk.

Complete waste of time...

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 1 / 6
Date: January 11, 2001
Author: Amazon User

After seeing the first one, I thought that this would be a distinct improvement, and the bugs in the first one would be ironed out in the second. Of course, I was completely wrong. The "campaign"-level interface is completely useless: if you think that you are getting some kind of strategic deployment of forces, think again. In fact, the new "Dynaverse" engine seems to do practically nothing except to hand you random and pointless missions that are either way too easy or way too hard.

Due to these inadequacies, coupled with the myriad bugs present in the game (which have not really been fixed with the patches), I would not recommend this game. Stick to the first one.

Bad Outweighs the Good for the Casual Gamer

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 9 / 9
Date: August 10, 2001
Author: Amazon User

Please note from the outset I am approaching this as a casual gamer who was drawn to this game because of my positive experiences with the previous edition. Bottom line: Empires at War offers distinct improvements over the first edition, and glaring problems.

First, what was kept: The basic operation of the controls remains the same. There are little quirks that have changed a couple of things, but nothing glaring. Ships remain similar in appearance and function.

Second, the improvements. Regenerative shields: if your shields get knocked out, they will regenerate, more accurately reflecting activities of repair crews on the starships. Of course, you have either go to keep your good shields facing the enemy, or keep your distance from an engagement. Of course, your opponent has the same advantage/disadvantage, but it is preferable to the permanently dead shield. Also, if you destroy a ship, unlike in the first game if you sit on top of or close to an opponent when you destroy them you can also be destroyed. Another improvement: Accurate photon torpedoes over a distance. In the previous version, unless you fired point-blank, you often saw half or more of your photon torpedo spread disappear into space. In this version, they are actually an effective weapon over distance, with an appreciably high hit-to-miss ratio. Third - missile defense: Missiles are less effective overall, removing to advantage of the heavy missile cruisers from the previous game. They also come in varied speeds, another good thing. Space Monsters: much more varied - often lethal. They are a great x-factor, and wonderful teachers of caution in an engagement. I ran into one that literally destroyed my ship with a plasma volley in the first exchange. Fleet combat - In skirmish mode, I experimented with fleet maneuvering, and found it a distinct improvement over the prior edition. Ships operate with a number of options in terms of control, and seem more responsive to orders - though not all functions seemed to work as they should. Also, visually, the scenarios are much nicer than the old version.

Third, the problems. Where to start? Overall, the gameplay, while in many ways improved (regenerative shields, better torpedoes, greater equity in terms of reduction of the missile effect) is overshadowed by the complexity of gameplay, and overall difficulty presented by the game's progression. One example - Prestige points. While in the first game you had to pay for what you got in terms of supplies and new ships, you could do so in a fashion that assured a steady rise in points that translated into better, stronger ships. In this version, because of the average greater length of battles and commensurate exhaustion of supplies and added repair costs, it is difficult to build significant value. Also, ships lose their value quickly for trade in, and I find I cannot trade a ship in for a new one without first buying the second ship, thereby reducing the prestige points necessary for purchase. Additionally, there is no crew section, where you have officers accruing value that is valuable in trades and/or ship combat effectiveness. Finally, the cost of supplies, as I mentioned, is prohibitive, especially in terms of missiles. Lastly, if you buy something and then decide you don't want it, you can return it but you will not receive the spent value back. This is a glaring weakness in the game, given the increased value of the Capitol ships like Battleships and dreadnoughts.

The interfaces, while serviceable, are a step backward in terms of functionality and clarity. While I like having a greater selection of ships (even though it seems nigh impossible to accrue the Prestige Points needed to acquire them), I feel there could have been modified version of the old interface. Still, I admit that right clicking on the ship type to get the schematics is almost as good and provides a quick method of determining value of the ship.

Replay is no longer offered. Instead, you're dead and you get to go back to the beginning. Now if you are a serious gamer, I suppose this is no big deal. But for the casual gamer, this is a serious drawback. Also, saves are controlled more by the AI than by the gamer, taking away the feature of being able to branch off in a separate direction and experiment with ships in scenarios.

In the end, I won't say don't buy this game. But be warned, in spite of appearances, and some functional improvements, it is not as good, and more important, not as fun.

poor software design

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 2 / 3
Date: August 29, 2001
Author: Amazon User

I would warn anyone to not purchase this game due to the increasing problems I've had with it. I found the game to be a bit plodding over time with no real end goal in sight.
As I continued to play the game it began to glitch more frequently and for longer periods of time to the point where the game would not load but would spool without end. I would have to reboot my computer to disengage the game. I tried the downloads from the net, and that didn't help either. I have sufficient memory etc. on my computer and don't believe I have a hardware problem, Windows 98, 128 ram, 600+ pent processor, 100 mhz clock, etc. I believe this is a poorly designed game. I hesitated buying the game based on prior Star Trek game revues which said the same thing that I am writting now.
If this is the extint of Interplays software capabilities I won't be buying any of their products in the future, as it would be a waste of money.
Oh yea, I am a bit of a Trekkie, enjoy the shows etc.
I very much enjoy the Star Wars simms and have purchased all of them. Needless to say they have all performed flawlessly, hoping that the Star Trek game might do the same I gave it a try.
Be careful what you buy and good gaming.

Wait untill about version 3.0, as the game is full of bugs

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 1 / 3
Date: January 15, 2001
Author: Amazon User

Once you actually get to fight other ships, the game is a blast. Complicated, but learnable. You will spend time mastering stratagy and controls. Unfortunatly, the game crashes A LOT. As you progress through the campaighns, the time between battles stretches to 10 minutes, as the computer does "something" (800 mhz athalon is doing something, as the hard drive and CD aren't doing anything, and the graphics it is changing are minor). It will crash to the desktop with unacceptable frequency. You will reinstall it at least once. And, if you are like me, you will put up with this because the actual battles are visually awesome and really fun. Stratagy is challenging and not covered by any documentation real well (trial and error). I am playing with patch 2.0.0.4 and have read that othe patches are a LITTLE better, but none of them qualify as good. 3.0 will probably be playable.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 1 / 9
Date: June 01, 2001
Author: Amazon User

Play this game for about 20 minutes if you can't sleep. You'll be out in no time.

Many bugs spoil what should be an excellent experience

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 16 / 20
Date: December 29, 2000
Author: Amazon User

As a veteran of the (long to play) board game Star Fleet Battles, I was extremely happy when Starfleet Command came out last year. Although it had glitches and imperfections, the possibilities of finally having starships duke it out in a tactical setting (although real-time) was a joy.

Of course the original Starfleet Command lacked some of the races and other features of SFB, and so, a year later, we come to Starfleet Command II.

SFC II has two new races missing from the original Starfleet Command that are a staple of SFB...the Mirak (renamed from the board game due to infringement--you might know them better as the Kzinti) and the dreaded "evil Federation", the dangerous ships of the Interstellar Concordium. It is their efforts to bring "peace" to the various groups in the game that drives the engine of the missions and the map.

For all of its pluses, however, the bugs and glitches are many and major. The multiplayer "dynaverse" is still in beta due to a licensing problem, and the game itself is very very buggy. The word on the message boards from the designers is that Interplay, the parent company, rushed this puppy out of the door for the Christmas rush...and it shows.

Taldren has a reputation for fixing their mistakes, and so I am pretty sure that in time the game will be working well. Right now, however...it can be painful to wait minutes between turns on the major map and other glitches.

Without the bugs, this game would easily get four stars, possibly four and a half.

On second thought...

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 2 / 3
Date: January 26, 2001
Author: Amazon User

Well here is my second review, This game dosen't hit it's mark, Interplay has once again botched up anouther game(new worlds, Klingon Academy), how may you ask? They kicked this baby out of the crib before it could barely walk, there's only one scirmish, the first one had a bunch, NO officer slection(picking a Vetern or cadet fresh out of the academy, like in the first one), The mission start of good but jump up to higher difficulty way too soon,(after 3 missions I was expected to combate advanced warships with only 2 escourt class vessils, Kobyashi maru any one?) The online world that Interplay was headling for this game is non-exsistant, So now all we have is Star Fleet command gold w/ new lighting and damage, with no scirmishes, multiplayer, with insaine suicide missions.

But keep the faith, Taldren(ppl who actually made it)has completely backed this game, when Interplay's Brian Fargo said " thank god this is the last ST game we'll ever make", Taldren has basicly devoted thier website to help us all make this game better, witch you'll see none comming from Interplay. This will be the last ST game from Interplay, and thank God, Activison now holds the liecences for TNG, Voyager,TOS and TMP, Simmon&Schestur hold the liecence for DS9, and from what I've seen they will and have made much better ST games.

Not the best game for true trekkies.

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 3 / 5
Date: May 29, 2004
Author: Amazon User

I give this game a 3 out of 5. This single player campaigns are severely weak. The only fun there really is are on the skirmish missions. You get to pick your race ship and up to 2 other ships for your fleet. You can also download missions for the skirmish campaigns that can almost make up for the single player campaigns. There are a bunch at http://www.strategyplanet.com/sfc/ along with patches and anything to do with Starfleet Command. It has good graphics but still is in 2-D. If you just want a trek game that isn't hard get this game.

Review Page: 1 2 3 Next 

Actions