User Reviews (11 - 21 of 66)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

A decent game if you are a fan of star wars

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 8 / 10
Date: April 08, 2006
Author: Amazon User

This game is quite decent and is playable on most computers as it does not have high system requirements.

The developers of this game have tried to create a goood stratergy game but in doing so they have ignored some of the important aspects a gamer looks for.

Firstly the graphics of this game are somewhat bearable and the ships and the units have been made so small that they look like ants!.

The second major flaw in this game is the lack of any challenge the game is very easy to beat even at the highest difficulty and as a result of its not much fun to play it again once you have beaten the game.

The third flaw is that the battles in space and land are claustrophobic and the units are difficult to manage with the mouse.

But there are also some cool features such as the cinematic mode in which you can view the battle like a movie and when you destroy a ship its parts slowly fly in space which gives the space battle a realistic look. The last good feature about this game is the dialogue delivery by the actors which is so good that sometimes its looks as if you are watching a movie.

Another aspect which the developers have overlooked is the lack of any stratergy as in land and space battles the person who has more ships and units wins the fight.

Only buy this game if you are a fan of starwars and can tolerate the poor graphics.

The whole is less than the sum of the parts--and the parts aren't that good

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 13 / 21
Date: March 01, 2006
Author: Amazon User

[revised and extended May 19, 2006]

I wanted to like this game. I really, really wanted to like this game, especially given the $50 I plopped down for it as soon at the game came out.

SW:EAW worked very nicely out of the box (though I did download and install the 1.02 patch before playing it). However, every time I tried to dive into the game, I came up short--like cannonballing into a kiddy pool. Instead of being drawn in, I found my eyes glazing over.

So I wrote my initial underwhelmed review here and put ST:EAW on the shelf for a few months. Just this week, however, I pulled it off again, reinstalled it, downloaded the latest patch, and fired it up--just to see if I had been too hasty or harsh in my judgment.

Nope.

I still don't like it--in fact, if anything, I like it less--and I think I know even better now why.

For starters, in the intervening months, I have spent serious time playing LOTR: Battle for Middle Earth II; Galactic Civilizations II; and Space Rangers II. All three of those games build upon a foundation of excellent game design. That is why they are compelling, whereas I suspect Star Wars: Empire at War has succeeded to whatever extent it has succeed largely because of the allure of 'Star Wars', not because it's a good game.

[Lest fanboys accuse me of being prejudiced, let me point out that I saw all nine Star Wars releases on opening day, including the original back in 1977--something few if any of you can say--and that I have thoroughly enjoyed games such as SW:X-Wing Fighter, SW:Battlefront I and II, SW:Republic Commando, and so on. I bought SW:EAW as soon as it came out precisely because I enjoy Star Wars so much.]

[However, I have never, ever, _ever_ worn a Star Wars costume at any time in my life.]

Here's a simple experiment. Take SW:EAW and strip out all of the Star Wars references, replacing them with some generic SF icons and names. First and foremost, you could do it without any real impact to the game. In other words, there is nothing about SW:EAW in terms of game design that is uniquely "Star-Warsian."

Second, the underlying game design actually goes against some of the strongest elements of the Star Wars universe, to wit:

-- The 'galactic' map is not only not three-dimensional, it's not even two-dimensional; the most appropriate description would be that it's 1.5-dimensional. In other words, to move a ship or a fleet from one system to another, you must go through some arbitrary series of other systems. Furthermore, if there are enemy-controlled systems along that path, they can block you going any farther without having an intervening fight. It is as Luke Skywalker could be blocked in making a hyperspace jump from Hoth to Degobah by Imperial ships in, say, the Genosis system. This also means that you can (and do) have Galactic Conquest scenarios where you have two sets of Rebel worlds unable to reach one another without conquering one or more intervening Empire worlds. I can somewhat understand this approach as a general game abstraction, but it makes no sense within the Star Wars universe.

-- The Star Wars movies always start by showing you these vast planets from space, yet SW:EAW treats all planets as cramped and tiny. You get to build five (5) structures and have ten (10) units on a planet. Ground battles occupy a tiny patch, and outside of that, _you don't even get to see the planet_.

-- There's no politics or influence. It's: move fleet; fight fleets; land troops; fight a tiny battle; presto! You've conquered a world! The Star Wars movies are as much about an ideological and political struggle as they are about open combat.

Third, if you were to do the above (strip out the 'Star Wars' references) and attempt to market the game, I believe it would be a dud. In other words, without the 'Star Wars mod', I honestly believe that this game would go nowhere. Here are a few of the reasons why (beyond those listed above):

-- Resource management is simplistic (not necessarily a bad thing), limited/limiting (can be a bad thing), and unengaging (definitely a bad thing). In other words, it's essential enough so that you have to pay attention to it, but you really don't have that many options, and it's not all that flexible or interesting.

-- The RTS aspects of SW:EAW likewise aren't that engaging. This may just be personal inclination--I'm not primarily an RTS fan--but on the other hand, I did play LOTR: Battle for Middle Earth I _and_ II to completion. As much as it pains me to say so, I think I found Star Wars: Battlegrounds to be a more engaging SW RTS game, even if it was (as someone else here as noted) merely Age of Empires in a Star Wars setting.

-- At the Galactic Conquest level, much of what you do is click and drag. The RTS aspects (space and ground) start to become a bit tedious, but if I skip them using the 'Auto-Resolve' button, SW:EAW begins to remind me vaguely of the infamous Masters of Orion 3: a lot of button-clicking without much purpose or visible results.

In short, SW:EAW is getting uninstalled and going back on the shelf until I can find a friend or relative to give it to. It's just not particularly fun, engaging, or 'StarWarsian'.

As always, your mileage may vary. ..bruce..

This game is fun, but still has severe bugs after 5 patches.

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 10 / 15
Date: August 03, 2006
Author: Amazon User

I love the graphics and gameplay in Star Wars, Empire at War. The space battles are geat and there is plenty of strategy. Beware, however, that this game has SEVERE bugs. It will crash randomly to the dektop, and freeze to make you restart your computer. You may not be able to complete the campaign because of the bugs and glitches. This already has 5 patches, but they only introduce new issues. BUT, this game is still worth it in my opinion, because it is so fun and strategic. You will have to make that decision for yourself.

A Fresh RTS

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 5 / 5
Date: January 09, 2007
Author: Amazon User

different units in this game are very well balanced out. For this reason, it is difficult to produce only one unit and try to overrun the opponent. The method of reinforcement is also different than anything I've seen before. Units no longer appear outside their respective structure but can be brought out onto the field at different locations, changing the tactical dynamics of the game. The ability to hold units in reserve without having them take up population points also changes the dynamic. Different units can be used better tactically because of this.

Overall the game is very enjoyable and well worth the price. It is surprisingly good for a Star Wars franchise game.

Not your typical RTS

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 5 / 5
Date: March 29, 2007
Author: Amazon User

When I heard about a Star Wars based RTS, I thought about Galactic Battlegrounds, which I didn't buy because it looked like a re-skinned Age of Empires 2 (which I already had). Anyway, I looked into this game and was impressed by the graphics and the description of gameplay. What hooked me was the concept of land and space combat; however, if you've played the Homeworld series, the space combat of Empire at War is nothing compared to Homeworld. The space combat is not done in a completely 3-D environment, it's still done on a single plane. A little dissapointing, but it makes the combat a little faster.

The game has multiple different modes of play, if you want to conquer every single planet mentioned in the Star Wars galaxy, you can. Or, you can take a small corner and use that. Also, if you'd rather just play individual battles, they have that mode too. The game comes with a bunch of pre-made battles set for you to try, both in space and on land.

The campaign mode is a lot of fun. It's basically a large-scale galactic conquest type mode with certain objectives being thrown at you to advance the plot. It takes place in the time before the first Death Star is blown up and eventually that becomes your main objective.

All-in-all, it is a great game. I still get urges to play it, so it does have replay value.

The Successor To Rebellion

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 8 / 12
Date: April 18, 2006
Author: Amazon User

I've played this game for about 2 weeks now, I have to say that I was really looking forward to it since I'm a Rebellion Fan. I thought cool, a Rebellion type game with improved graphics, and the ability to control your ground forces.
Rebellion was cool because the ships took so long to build, The game just seemed more realistic to me. The ground combat in this game is more annoying then fun. Clicking all over the place, and having one unit take out 50 of yours is not cool. The game is Ok, But I still perfer Rebellion over it, even though the graphics are better they seem to have lost a certain fun level of the game. Its too bad they didn't just remake rebellion with improved graphics!

Fun and Disappointing

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 6 / 8
Date: February 28, 2006
Author: Amazon User

It appears that there is a ton of hype around this game. Commercials are being shown on TV, and SW fans are screaming it's the best thing since sliced bread. Please, don't buy into the hype. There are some things you need to know about this game before you make your final purchase decision.

The nifty graphics you see in the commercials is cinematic mode, where you can't control the battles, so you'll be spending approximatly 0.5% of your time looking at that. The rest you'll be in top down 2D overview.

The game is indeed a decent RTS, but it falls short of that. You see, the real problem is, it's basically Galactic Conquest mode from SW BattleFront 2, in an RTS style, with a few buildings. This is the story line mode. But yet, you can't play Galactic Conquest multiplayer, except a player vs player campaign mode. The other multiplayer features are just space or land skrimish maps. If you were hoping to play Co-Op or against a few friends in Galactic Conquest, you'll have to look elsewhere.

Which brings us to the next point. The skrimish battles in the campaign are indeed fun, but they start to get rather tedious and boring. So I have no idea why you'd want to bother playing multiplayer skirmish games at all. With basically 3 parts of the game to balance and polish, and only one of which being the major draw for storyline mode, it's obvious the only part that LucasArts focused on was Galactic Conquest. Some people like the ground combat, some people like the space combat. Nobody seems to like both equally, and many people don't like them at all.

The storyline was short. I found it rather too easy on easy mode, and very unforgiving of mistakes on medium. The Empire campaign was a piece of cake, and on both campaigns, you'll most likely find yourself bored of fighting the small battles halfway through, and start to auto-resolve every battle you can. You get a lot more losses this way, but half-way through you end up with plenty of resources to waste on ships. I suppose if you fought every space and ground battle yourself, you could drag both campaigns out to around 15 hours each, and I'm rounding up quite a bit. You'll also be bored. With auto-resolving halfway through, you end up with about 4-6 hours for each campaign. 12 hours isn't much gameplay off of a $50 game.

So, if multiplayer is boring and not well done, and campaign mode is short, that leaves us with Galactic Conquest Mode. Much like SW: BF1 and 2, you get set maps and starting spots. Who wants to bother with a small map? The large maps end up with the system being split among the factions, so you start the game with half the galaxy, or one faction controls most, or worse, you end up controlling two areas totally seperate. On the largest map, I tried it once and found myself being attacked on a planet I didn't realize I controlled, as it was on the other side of the map. There is no random map generator, and while I see indications that there might be some kind of campaign editor to create your own (where you don't have to spend 10 minutes on pause to figure out what to do at the start of the game), I can't find any info online or in the CD that it actually exists.

In short, another good Starwars game, but don't expect to be playing this for the 3 months following your purchase. Or possibly even three weeks. You might want to wait for the price to come down a bit, unless you are a die hard SW fan like me and just have to try it.

Too simple, too easy, too hyped

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 6 / 8
Date: March 16, 2006
Author: Amazon User

I had been tracking Empire at War for awhile, and I did note that the developers wanted the game to be accessible to everyone, not just devoted RTS fans. I hoped that it wouldn't lead to an over-simplified game that RTS and Star Wars fans would be disappointed with. I was wrong.

I am a fairly enthusiastic Star Wars fan, and I was annoyed that the developers didn't stay true to the Star Wars universe all the way. First of all, they decided to design new ships exclusively for the game! There are already hundreds of ships in the expanded universe! Why they couldn't just pick some out of that list, I don't know. The new Assault Frigate Mk 2 I am particularly disappointed with, because the original Assault Frigate was one of my favorite ships. Another thing is that the Rebels in Galactic Conquest mode have to STEAL ALL THEIR TECHNOLOGY from the Empire! That just made no sense to me. Now, on to the gameplay.

I looked forward to the awesome space and land battles. I was disappointed here too. The land maps are cramped, leaving no room for combat tactics. Everything is simply a fight to see who has the biggest number of strong units. It's the same way in space. Space combat is entirely 2D! That just killed it for me. Space maps are just as big as the land maps, meaning they are tiny. The unit cap in space battles is a mere 25 for the Rebels and 20 for the Empire! Also, Star Destroyers and Calamari Cruisers take up 4 slots, so there will never be any real big fights.

(Note: If you own Homeworld 2 and are looking for the best Star Wars space combat RTS to date, check out the Star Wars Warlords mod for Homeworld 2. http://warlords.swrebellion.com It's amazing!)

The Galactic Conquest mode is where this game really shines. If you have ever played the old Star Wars strategy game Rebellion, things will look slightly familiar. You'll see a map of the galaxy, with a number of planets that you will fight for. However, in Rebellion it was turn-based. In Empire at War, it is real time. I thought I would like real time gameplay more, but when you have control of 25 planets and have multiple fleets and armies to manage, turn-based gameplay would feel like heaven.

AI is one of the major faults of the game. The computer opponents have no real tactics or strategy in the land/space battles, they simply throw their units at you, or wait for you to come engage them. You'll also occasionally find some enemy units sitting in the corner of a map, doing nothing. It's good that there's multiplayer available.

The cinematic camera is one of my few personal plusses to this game. When I'm sure I'd be able to defeat the enemy army/fleet, I simply give out a few last orders and kick back to watch the cinematic view.

To conclude, Star Wars Empire at War will feel more like an appetizer to RTS and Star Wars fans. If you are not really experienced to RTS's or to computer games in general, Empire at War will probably be fun. But for the rest of us, we will wait for the main course, if there ever is one.

"Was More Than I Expected"

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 5 / 6
Date: June 04, 2006
Author: Amazon User

I am an avid gamer and have been a real RTS fan even before I graduated to PC games from PS2. I have played only a few space based RTS games and none have kept me immersed as EaW. Me personally do not like games that can be overly challenging and taxing I work too much and too hard to do that much thinking if I wanted to think that hard I would play chess. EaW is a good game in my opinion. The game has has a good play balance between flow of game vs. diffculty. I own empire earth II, Rise of Naions, the whole command and conquer series(cant wait for the new one coming this fall),etc etc. I mentioned those because all 3 have that flow of game vs. diffculty working really well. In other words I can set the difficulty level to tailor my style of game play. EaW does it as well as the others except it being space based. Its true the land battles pale in comparison to say C&C generals, no flanking nor near the options of tactics because of map size and basic mechanics. The land battles while fun are very limited giving them an almost small skirmish or covert ops feel. There are no 2 and 3 prong spectacular assaults with ensuing large scale battles such as in C&C generals,EEII or RoN. But the space battles are very spectacular and the cinamatic option makes it even more so. I played a few other space games and none of the space battles came close-to me. The space battles show ships breaking up people flying out followed with spectacular and color filled explosions complete with visibly impressive pressure shock wave. I was in awe when I first saw that. Now I run a 1.5g of ram with a Nvidia 6800gt which I am sure helps the game look like it should. Even my 17yo daughter who hates pc games and star wars even more so sat and watched me have a space battle the graphics caught her eye she thought I was watching a dvd. You can hide from your opponents in the gas nebulas and pounce if they flinch first I thought that was a cool twist. I think that the population cap is a little low but it makes you have to do more planning for an offensive that could be thrown off by annoying attacks by the AI or your opponent. All 'n' All EaW is a fine addition to my library.
Overall- its worth buying especially if your a star wars fan.
Rating 1-5 -- i have to give it a 3 simply because I think they could have left out the weak land battles and given more content to the economy aspect and the already spectacular space portion of the game all said its a decent game with some cool visuals.

jimbob#1

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 5 / 6
Date: March 25, 2006
Author: Amazon User

This game was awesome. I like the ability to play in many different battles and arenas. The game makes you build up your forces, and yet try fend off the enemy while doing so. When you invade either space or land, the only forces you get are the ones you bring with you. So if you don't have a big enough force, then you better be prepared to retreat. I like the fact that you get to use the Death Star. If you play as the Empire and build the Death Star before the Rebels defeat you, there is no chance for the Rebels. Basically as long as you have a large enough space fleet to protect the Death Star, you will win the game. As the Rebels, you feel the stuggle for survival in the Empire controled galaxy. The Rebel campaine is very hard, even in the easy mode, but winable. Unlike when you start the Empire campaign, the Rebels have very little as far as a fleet goes. You have scronge for ships and troops. I had to play and loss many time before I figured out how to beat the empire. It took a a lot patience and time. The one thing about this game is that sucks you in and before you know it, hours of play have gone by. I would have rate this game as one of the best Star Wars Game, if not the best games of all. I am big fan of both Battlefront games, but this one takes the cake. I would recommend this game to everyone who likes stragegy type of games. I give it a five star rating for fun, difficulty, length of play, and the many different battle arenas both space and land.

Review Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next 

Actions