But after about an hour you'll realize looks are all it has going for it. They get points for the visuals, it looks pretty. They tried very hard to be the next Action RTS with an IP that was never intended to be such. Finally removed any social aspect from your population. Made military recruitment and combat single unit based instead of squads. They removed the requirement of food for your people. They tried very hard to be the next Action RTS with an IP that was never intended to be To carry the name of The Settlers and provide gameplay this shallow is incredibly saddening. To carry the name of The Settlers and provide gameplay this shallow is incredibly saddening. But it's SO disappointing it's honestly tempting to just slap a zero on it out of disgust. fine I guess, it's just that it's a terrible actual game, so I give it a 3.
3/10, it should be a 2 for the graphics alone but it's also mechanically. A question for you, Ubisoft - how can you monetise a game with in-game transactions when the game is so god-awful that nobody with half a brain could tolerate more than an hour of it? Thankfully I've got Settlers II to get the bad taste out of my mouth from this - yeah it may be around 17+ years old at this point but it has 100x the heart and gameplay of this modern trainwreck. It's like the developers skim read a Wikipedia entry about the series and decided to just plow on making the most basic, uninspired RTS imaginable and slap the Settlers name on it. It looks OK visually, but everything else - everything - is a disaster. I can't even put into words my disappointment this was one of my most anticipated games since 2018 and it's a calamity. It's like the developers skim read a Wikipedia entry about the series and decided to just plow on making the most basic, uninspired RTS Five plus years of development and this is the net result.
Five plus years of development and this is the net result.
0 kommentar(er)
