User Reviews (1 - 11 of 279)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

don't be fooled!!!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 2 / 25
Date: November 26, 2002
Author: Amazon User

yes I gave it one star. You probably want to know WHY I gave it one star. Their are many reasons:
1. useless game modes. Their is one game mode where all you have to do is surrvive for half an hour and then you win. How pointless!!!!
2. In most RTS games each side is very different from the other and therefore has differnt tactics. In AOE 2 this is not true. I mean the sides are almost identical. Microsoft tried to impress us by claiming "13 UNIQUE sides."
3. lack of unit variety

4. graphis- the terrain looks terrible (cliffs trees ground and water.)
5. units-the physics in this "RTS" is terrible. I mean a catapult moves on its own as if it is powered by a gass engine. Yeah right. Some of the units are just about the same darn thing (turtle ship and elite turtle ship)
6.resources-it is practicaly impossible to maintain a steady flow of money in this game.
7.campaign- it is really boring. Some of the names sound so stupid (william wallace learning campaign)ThE ONLY WAY TO WIN IN gameis to send lots of units at your enemy.
8. more gameplay-terrain has absolutely no effect on the battles. Building an impressive strong civiliATION CAN TAKE HOURS. The ai for the enemy is horrible. With the exception of trees the terrain is not deformable. Units and gameplay is horrible balanced. Also no air units. Low unit limit (200.) When your little soldiers hit buildings with their swords the building goes on fire. Why is that? Don't expect a challenge in the skirmish games. None of this has to do with my system. I have a 1.3 gigahertz processor with a 32 megabyte video card. The battles, even the larger ones, look pathetic. Terrible lighting effects and no weather. Their is no in-game music. Too much micro anaging in everything. In terms of game play this game looked like it was rushed. Microsoft just does not make good RTS's

I think there's more that I could list but I'v said enough. Lots of other people say that this game is stunning or tthe best. This game isn't as bad as starcraft but it is still really bad and is really boring. What game should you buy? Try C&C Renegade or Dark Reign 2. In Dark Reign 2 u can see tracks made by vehicles no such thingg like this in AOE 2.

All thumbs down!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 2 / 23
Date: May 02, 2000
Author: Amazon User

This game totally s****, when I bought it I thought It will be better.When I installed and started to play it, then I have found out thatthe buildings are so sick and big that you cant see your guys! There is not a lot of civiliazation's for this game only 13, I mean for Poland they put Goths that live somewhere in the Balkans! That is so messed up! Dont buy this game, it is totally messed up you will only loose your money. Another thing is that its impossible to beat all the scenerios on even medium! Thats insane! This game is too complicated and hard, and you always dont have enough of food! Please people dont buy this game. I would rate this a big zero...

A Poor Sequel

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 19
Date: July 18, 2004
Author: Amazon User

I bought this game because I really like the first one. This one doesn't compare. The maps are darker, the movement stilted and clumsy. There are some good additions to game play, but the scenes and population are inferior IN USE, if not to the eye. I was really disappointed.

i have more fun climbing trees than playing this!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 3 / 57
Date: December 13, 1999
Author: Amazon User

If you are looking for a good buy you have come to the wrong place. The graphics is the only advantage to the really bad game. Microsoft should be ashamed. the buildings were too big, the game ran too slowly and the CD is made of really bad material. it isnt worth its money

This is the worst Real Time Strategy Game Ever Made!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 2 / 57
Date: November 24, 2000
Author: Amazon User

Microsoft is the worst operating system ever. MACINTOSH is more efficent! Don't buy this product! It keeps saying Direct X error. It won't ever run! I would stick with Warcraft, not Ages of Empiers II. My advice would be to buy Warcraft III, when it comes out!

Age of Empires: The 13 and a Half MInute Age of "Kings"

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 1 / 9
Date: August 16, 2002
Author: Amazon User

An extremely addictive game with lots of customization settings and an interesting way to take the RTS format and do something different with it.

Then why did I give it only One star?

Because Microsoft forgot you can only go so far when it comes to false advertising.

The game claims to span over a thousand years, when really all it is is a Warcraft rip-off with history instead of fantasy. In trying to combine these two elements together, (history and fantasy/RTS) Microsoft has created an abomination of a game likely to dissapoint real-life historians everywhere. Instead of a 1000 years, it spans over twelve minutes with the click of a button bringing you up 250 years. What kind of history simulation is that?!
Also, there's nothing less realistic than seeing a single peasant building the Great Wall of China in about 10 minutes. This is because of all those Warcraft elements of "Real-Time Fantasy". If I want an RTS game, I'll go play Warcraft because at least that has Orcs, instead of 13 different races which look exactly alike (except for the buildings).
So the way I see it, if you want an RTS game, go buy Warcraft. If you want a simulation game, go buy Civilization. If you want both, do not buy Age of Empires because it destroys and embarrasses the simulation aspect, and all you're left with is a complex foolishly made RTS.

more hyped than linux and java! , isnt amazing?

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 5 / 16
Date: November 12, 1999
Author: Amazon User

OK,OK ,I should not rate this with one star but I have to equilibrate other reviews.

Prettier Graphics than its predecesor, more sound, but gameplay just the same thing, terrible disappointement.

Quantity of Units and technologies to research just the same, same unfair gameplay againts computer, same way of getting resources. Certanly a most buy if you dont have Age 1 already or if you desesperatly want to improve graphics a bit.

Not a big deal if you have Age 1.

I thought this game needed a lot of work

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 16
Date: November 12, 1999
Author: Amazon User

This game seemed rushed. I couldn't figure why the producers would put it out so soon if they weren't finished with it. However, the graphics are good.

AOE is boring and needs more than 128 meg of ram to run well

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 12 / 108
Date: November 19, 1999
Author: Amazon User

build build build build build build build. fight. build build build build build build build. lose. that's about it for the Age of Kings from Microsoft. MS just can't get it right with games.

I don't see the big deal

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 4 / 22
Date: June 15, 2000
Author: Amazon User

This game has to be one of the most overrated ones in recent history. The graphics are simple, 2D, and not very detailed. The least Ensemble could have done is add visual effects, such as weather, to make the game realistic. The civilazations give you close to no variety except for one unique unit which doesn't make a big difference and some special abilities that don't make a difference either. There is also too much micromanaging that you must do to suceed which gets boring after about ten minutes. I played this game for about three days and stopped because it just got frustrating. With four different resoures the game can get very time-consuming and complicated. Add that to wimpy weapons and a lack of strategic elements and you have one pointless game that takes up a ton of unesscesary time. Go buy Tiberian Sun instead.

Review Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next 

Actions