PDA

View Full Version : Settlers 6 /My review



Berndr1970
10-06-2007, 12:39 AM
Graphic in Settlers 6 is the best up to now, and I do believe that flashy video used for advertising the game is selling this game pretty well, but beside that the game is poor beyond disappointment and I don't see why would anyone play it instead of Stronghold- Legend that has got everything what Settlers 6 offers and much more.

Firstly I hate those fixed starting locations, upon arriving on an island (land) I want to be able to explore and chose my own spot where I wish to build my own settlement, just like in first settler's game. That was the whole idea and the heart of the game, to come into the new world and settle wherever we like ... right?
But what's the point of Being a settler if we are already settled,, game might as well be called expanders

Its not that I am only being told where to establish my settlement. I am also told where to hunt where to mine etc .... there is a huge river yet again the fishing spot is already predetermined for us, no freedom no creativity given,,,, everything is monotonous, boring and preset ,,,, this game needs more randomness and options , we are not idiots watching a comedy who needs to be told when to laugh, DEVS might have as well put an option for computer to play the game for us whist we sit on our arses and watch it ,,, ok I am being sarcastic but I trully find it limited and simple. Computer's AI is the worst ,not challenge at all and on a level of an Idiot.

The Economy is dreadfully dumped down, too simple, as if the game was designed to be a city -builder simulation for 4-5 years old .
I used to love , old settlers game with all those different professions and complex economy and wide range of buildings, I want back my wind mills etc ... but why not give us more buildings (someone mentioned houses)for an instance, we have taxes in game ,, so why not also have a tax office buildings and have settler walk around and collect the money, well that's now Caesar 3 but, I do like the Idea they took from Caesar 3 how settlers now need to have a certain products (clothes, soap, food,etc) in order for city to grow and building become richer (sadly appearance of the building does not change as house becomes richer like in ceasar 3,)yet again they barely scratched the surface this could have gone much deeper... settlers should have been given wider range of product to produce and building to build and also much more upgrades .

What happened to the Military buildings???? They are so dull , we used to have all range of military buildings from basic bunker all the way to the castle , and we were able to build as many of them as we want ??????
All I can say is ; Devs do you actually play any games ???? and shame that today with all this modern technology the game- play of your games is not even good for the 90s

I cant even begin to explain how wrong this game is gone, if this game was the first in the series I would not say anything but after all these years they are still lost in the fog and don't understand how to extend ,expand and improve what they already got

cdehferiuherih
10-06-2007, 11:45 AM
I have to agree besides the gfx there is nothing making this so called settlers game worthwhile

BulletProofUnit
10-06-2007, 11:50 AM
the game doesnt even play properly, i get random errors telling me my dvd isnt in the drive, other random blue screen crashes, and for no reason i cant connect to multiplayer :S

ChrisA1964
10-06-2007, 12:04 PM
I agree that the game is a little light on the building content and the point you made about the earlier games where you were just dumped on a beach and had to choose where to build is a good point.
I think a MAJOR point in this game is the lack of player placeble Storehouses (for when you want a small groupe of resource farmers a long way from your main town, you could create a village inside a pallisade for instance then no more long haul for food and goods).
I do think that you should keep in mind that most of the people that buy the game wont be on the forums (forums are mainly used by us hardcore headcases lol)and the games main target audience wanted the game to be simpler (but not really better.....).

exyll
10-06-2007, 12:17 PM
Ok 3 things:

But what's the point of Being a settler if we are already settled,, game might as well be called expanders
1- ROFL!!!

[quote]Devs do you actually play any games ???? and shame that today with all this modern technology the game- play of your games is not even good for the 90s[quote]
2- Bravo. In an age now where my video card has more memory than most systems, there is certainly room for innovation. But hey, innovation doesnt move boxes off shelves does it. Name recognition does. So you (like and probably all of us here) saw the Settler name and already they got the door opened, throw in some really flashy videos for all those new to the genre: BOOM: Instant money. Not instant hit, but surely, instant money.

I forgot 3 because of that 'expanders' line, but basically it amounts to they will never go back to the S1-4 type of gameplay because that would require thought, and for many people that's asking WAY too much. If you want to go mainstream with a game you have to make it really pretty and really REALLY easy. Like brainless zombie easy

Berndr1970
10-06-2007, 04:08 PM
Thank you guys for your replies, I am glad to see that I am not alone here, Original Settlers was one of the first games I have ever played on my old C64, and that game had a special spot in my hart ,now seeing that every new version instead of getting better is getting worst seriously pains me .
I wish Devs would read our comments and try to make a game that people wants to play not a game that's easy to make .
Thanks

djfusion
10-06-2007, 05:15 PM
I have to agree with you on the graphics - they are the best seen in The Settlers and indeed most games around.
Im sorry you think that the game is "poor beyond disappointment" but if you look at the game without comparing it to others you may see what exactly it has to offer. I have heard the game being compared to ANNO 1701, Stronghold, Age of Empires and even at one point The Sims! Granted there may be similarities but at the end of the day it is a Settlers game.

I dont remember much at all about Serf city as it was many moons as when i played it - I never really got into it until Settlers II. But every sequel to the game has had pre-determined starting points. In some they were built ready to go and in others you had to "acquire them".

In a similar way the resources have been fixed in all previous versions - granted in the last 2 versions you no longer need the help of the geologist to hunt out minerals but they have always been in the same place.

More buildings would be ok - I agree - but they would have to be period specific. In the time that RoaE is set people lived in their workplaces, taxes were collected by the King and therefore no need for a tax office. Dont get me wrong, maybe more interlinked production buildings would be good.
The storehouse used to cause me a few problems but having managed to work it right I really dont see the need for any more - its all about management and trade - storing the resources you will need and trading those you have extra of.

In some respects I do agree with you on the military front, although, this game is more about building your settlement and making sure it runs properly, rather than set out to fight. Changes, like more military, various military buildings and maybe the opportunity for soldiers to bring down walls act would be great - and may be planned for an expansion - we will have to wait and see. In RoaE you can build as many of the military buildings as you like - they are only limited by space and building resources.

I do not believe the game has gone "wrong" in any way, I think its a great Settlers game and many of the older Settlers fans have welcomed it. it isnt a clone of the original games but it has the basic elements. The developers and publishers have to move a series forward if they are to continue it and i personally believe they have done a great job. They havent completely forgotten about the whole series as you can see from Settlers II - 10th Anniversary, but if they were to make clones all the time with maybe updated graphics ect the series would have probably died out long ago.

It is impossible to please everyone - especially if you are used to the original games but it would be interesting to hear what exactly you like about the game (apart from the graphics) - start the game and try and play it without thinking of other games or the rest of the series and you may find thatit is actually a very enjoyable game.
i understand that it is your own poinions that you have voiced (as this post is mine) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

megg
10-06-2007, 06:24 PM
We http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif ll said, djfusion. For someone who hasn't played, the ANNO 1701, Stronghold, AoE, etc games, I am finding this quite challenging enough. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

mdelvalle
10-06-2007, 07:43 PM
I have to agree with you Bern, I never played the other settlers, I bought this game on the strength of Ubisoft past titles and the fact that I love RTS, I thought this was something new, but nope I got jerked, nothing new, it's pretty, and the bard is funny as hell, I like how you make grain farms or sheep pens from the building themselves but the good just doesn't make you stop cringing from the bad, the slowness the crashes, the voices cutting each other off during mission briefings (maybe that's just my PC, lol). But yeah the game is not difficult and the military options are terrible, I just want to group certain units, I want my thieves to stay put and I want to be able to change the half dead group protecting my Knight. I hate that damn military button that summons all your guys, why couldn't the developers make it possible to just make groups like AOE, anyway, sorry, just venting now,

Hey Ubisoft, this game is ok, but its maybe $19.99 ok, not $50.00 ok. Hopefully some of you people had discounts or hookups; this game is not worth 50 bucks.

You know what sad, I see an expansion within the next six months and it will be about 30 bucks and won't have much but the fixes this game needs to run smoothly on most people's computer and most of us will go and buy it, DAMN I hate being an old addicted gamer, this game could have bought me a nice tie instead.

zy1980core
10-06-2007, 08:32 PM
Originally posted by megg:
We http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif ll said, djfusion. For someone who hasn't played, the ANNO 1701, Stronghold, AoE, etc games, I am finding this quite challenging enough. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

I have played all of these games and I still find The Settlers 6 enjoyable. Yes it needs patching and could use some added features. I tend to look at things objectively and focus on the good instead of the bad. I can not compair The settlers 6 to any of the other Settlers games but I already bought The Settlers 4 gold and plan on enjoying it as much or more than Settlers 6. Give the game time to get patched and Modded.

Berndr1970
10-06-2007, 08:49 PM
You want to know what I like in this version of settlers???????
Well ,I love the best the trailer itself,, the life of settlers seen in the trailer is so vivid and beautiful that my heart has almost stopped for a second when i ve seen it for the first time,,,, the interactions amongst settlers in the trailer was so beautiful but that sadly did not make it into the game ,

As I said I liked those few things taken from Caesar 3 .....Such as when settlers have more products they become richer but again sadly unlike in Caesar 3 , the building either rich or poor still looks the same and do not change the appearance


You said that with each new version of Settlers game something new arrived, well there I disagree.
There is nothing new or Innovative about this version neither was in settlers 5 ...
It seems that each version is just copying elements from the other games that were popular at the time, but nothing ve haven't seen before and certainly nothing groundbreaking.

I also do love graphic and animation

And I truly think that simplicity of the game is quite immature and seem to be designed to appeal for children around age of 5 and

To explain that what I am saying is that game is failing on two major aspects;
Creativity and strategy
Creativity is limited by few buildings and preset locations,
It misses the Creativity seen in games like roller coaster tycoon , where you can choose over 300 different shops or rides to build , and each preset type of roller coaster can be adjusted , changed or built from the scratch, with endless possibilities and variations .

Military and strategy option are again too limited.
It misses the options seen in games such as stronghold, where you have a huge option of units, traps walls and towers, for an instance the walls in stronghold can be used in so many different ways, that with combination with stairs, towers and canals you can create endless variations of buildings (from simple walls to forts , keeps , mazes etc ) which gives you a nice variation of creativity and strategy

Scooby4ever
10-08-2007, 04:35 AM
Iam one of those who really enjoyed sellters 5 +all datadisk and now this settlers 6. I love the easy gameplay becasue iam not a brainer but love rts games. Settlers 6 was easy to start playing and manage and iam still replaying old levels just for the fun of it. I still have settlers5 installed. ;-)

Good work devs. At least for me.

If i wanted a edit resources game it would be a civ, rome, caesar type of game game but that is not my type of candy. It should be easy to use and play. Thats why i allways come back to settlers games.

UltimateFlipper
10-08-2007, 10:12 AM
i hope BB picks up all these idea's and start making a huge patch or a addon CD/DVD to make all the new functions possible.....

But first of all the should release a patch for the freezing problem!

mdelvalle
10-08-2007, 05:39 PM
hello, i must say, the other settler games must have been nice cause im seeing a lot of people who are playing or played a bunch of diffrent RTS's and are still showing this game love and you know what thats a good thing i guess, i like coming here and not seeingg rants and flames from one person to the next, and on the note, i would like to use this forum section to ASK A QUESTION: Anyone ever play the Sid Miers Alpha Centaurie games i love some SMAC and would love to play some now, i have the disk still but they dont work on my machine anymore, if anyone has some know how on this i would love you to death brother/sister, LOL

Scooby4ever
10-08-2007, 06:17 PM
Originally posted by mdelvalle:
hello, i must say, the other settler games must have been nice cause im seeing a lot of people who are playing or played a bunch of diffrent RTS's and are still showing this game love and you know what thats a good thing i guess, i like coming here and not seeingg rants and flames from one person to the next, and on the note, i would like to use this forum section to ASK A QUESTION: Anyone ever play the Sid Miers Alpha Centaurie games i love some SMAC and would love to play some now, i have the disk still but they dont work on my machine anymore, if anyone has some know how on this i would love you to death brother/sister, LOL

Yes settlers is an fine example why gamers keep comming back who played the earlier ones i think.

Cheers.