PDA

View Full Version : Settlers Series Since Settlers 4



shopD6CFA304
12-27-2010, 09:20 AM
The Settlers series has gone down hill in my opinion ever since they left the game mechanics and dynamics of Settlers 4 and previous Settler titles. Every title since has been a modified version of AOE and other MS crap. Settlers 4 is the best of the series and if Ubi had any wisdom they would return to those mechanics and dynamics and forget trying to mimic MS titles.

If you haven't played S4 you should. It's too bad ubi ignored what was the best of a series and deviated to copy other crap out there.

shopD6CFA304
12-27-2010, 09:20 AM
The Settlers series has gone down hill in my opinion ever since they left the game mechanics and dynamics of Settlers 4 and previous Settler titles. Every title since has been a modified version of AOE and other MS crap. Settlers 4 is the best of the series and if Ubi had any wisdom they would return to those mechanics and dynamics and forget trying to mimic MS titles.

If you haven't played S4 you should. It's too bad ubi ignored what was the best of a series and deviated to copy other crap out there.

ammods
12-27-2010, 08:34 PM
couldnt agree more, they bought anno series, and look what they did to that..

ugh

xNimmeRx
12-29-2010, 03:03 AM
I couldn't agree more, other than the best title being settler 3 :-P

/ChaZ Dixione.

GeneralIdea1964
12-29-2010, 03:34 AM
I've got Settlers 6 and I think it's fine, but you are right, Settlers 4 is a different game.

They really have got it wrong with V7 ... that is impossible to understand, you have no control and you can't even see the little men doing their jobs. Thought V5 was quite bad as well, but looked more like Stronghold to me. Again suffered cause you could not see the individual settlers doing their work.

GeneralIdea1964
12-29-2010, 03:38 AM
Oh and one more thought ... I like the idea in V6 of a lead knight with special abilities.

Still think that V4 is a great game, but I never finished all the campaigns. It is quite slow and may not be as good on-line. V6 is good for on-line play ... once all the schoolboy politices have been settled and you get to play. :-)

shopD6CFA304
12-29-2010, 08:12 AM
S4 is closer to real life running of a 'city/community' game. You drop a work building in the prescribed area in S4and then the citizens take care of things. All this detail management in S7 is not like real life, it's forced micro management. The constant notifications about resources is annoying as hell. The constant running out of resources is annoying as hell. Constant full storage buildings- annoying, no ability to trade what you want to trade- annoying, maps without building room-annoying.

The graphics are better and the castle/towers +fortifications and leaders are a good idea but ffs get rid of the detailed micro management shyte, attached work yards and full armies? WTF is that about? Settlers was about creating armies, not micro managing bread makers.

They could have added new buildings or bridge builders just as a war machine would need, or created new civs/races.

S3 is good too, so was anno. These guys (video game writers at ubi) are MicroSoft rejects it seems, copy MS games, copy simcity and forget what made the Settlers series great. I doubt they even played the original games, much less understood the dynamics and mechanics or the idea of races.

shopD6CFA304
12-29-2010, 08:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GeneralIdea1964:
Oh and one more thought ... I like the idea in V6 of a lead knight with special abilities.

Still think that V4 is a great game, but I never finished all the campaigns. It is quite slow and may not be as good on-line. V6 is good for on-line play ... once all the schoolboy politices have been settled and you get to play. :-) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That was the only prob with S4, that could be fixed with upgraded graphics, memory handling, online play. This is common in older games though, not the fault of the game idea at all.

S4 has superior map editing (for it's time) as well and a site where you can get hundreds of user made maps, most of them really good. In fact I think this site has more members than all of ubi forums put together.

Haakon1232
12-31-2010, 04:36 AM
I have settler 4 and i think It`s great but then I lost my key and now I`m playing The Settlers Rise of an empire the 6`th one and I think that is one of the best! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

evilsooty999
12-31-2010, 04:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Settlers was about creating armies, not micro managing bread makers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Perhaps in Settlers 3 until now, but the original Settlers (which I played when it came out on the Amiga 500!) and its sequel were all about building up and micro-managing your economy; there was no control over your settlers or army besides telling them what to build and attack.

With this in mind Settlers 7 is a return to the core gameplay of the original, which you of course may or may not like. Personally, I love that they have ditched the RTS war elements and gone back to the series' roots; I never thought they sat comfortably in a game that is primarily about economy building.

Keep up the good work, Blue Byte!

Coolworm
01-01-2011, 04:48 PM
I've played Settlers v1 (the original classic on the Commodore Amiga back in the late 90's), Settlers 2 (albeit 10th Anniversary edition), Settlers 6 (Rise of an Empire) and finally Settlers 7 (Paths to a Kingdom) the latest.

I missed out on Settlers 3 and 4. I tried Settlers 5 briefly but found it incredibly slow, unengaging and boring and so drop-kicked it, Jonny Wilkinson style.

I loved Settlers 1, and Settlers 2 (10th Anni) built on that, it used the same mechanics and overall strategy.

Jumping to settlers 6 was a different beast entirely. Nice graphics, good gameplay but it seemed overly rigid. Once you figured a few tips there was almost no way you could lose, regardless of the map. It was too set in stone, and not variable enough. The "Eastern Realm" expansion for S6 was much better, tougher, but still the 'same-old' after a while.

Settlers 7, for me, is by far the best one I've played. The micro-management is incredible, offering near infinite different strategic ways to play, and you have to stay alert every minute. The graphics are absolutely captivating as well, so long as your graphics card can hold up (my nVidia 512mb 8800GT just about manages).

Only problem I'm finding is that now I've completed the Campaign and essentially learnt the basics (tech, trade, military, economy) of the game I want to play with other people but can't find others online.

Antiscamp
01-02-2011, 06:17 AM
I played the old Settlers 1 on amiga as well and loved it. I left the series after that, and returned just a few days ago with buying Settlers 6.

I really like Settlers 6 and think it's an excellent game and I'm having lots of fun. There is a map editor as well, and downloadable user-created maps and campaigns which will prolong replayability.

I won't buy Settlers 7 at all, since it just seems to be split up into expensive DLC to cash in on the name. And wot!? Someone up there said that you can't even see the little men working in Settlers 7! What's up with that? I thought that was the very core of any Settlers game.

Coolworm
01-02-2011, 07:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Antiscamp:
I played the old Settlers 1 on amiga as well and loved it. I left the series after that, and returned just a few days ago with buying Settlers 6. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hehe, exactly the same with me. I left Settlers after the first version as I went to University for many years, and only bought Settlers 2 10th Anniversary, Settlers 6, and 7 recently, in that order.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I really like Settlers 6 and think it's an excellent game and I'm having lots of fun. There is a map editor as well, and downloadable user-created maps and campaigns which will prolong replayability. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Settlers 6 is indeed very good, I enjoyed it. But it is almost a different game to the original Settlers. It's a different beast.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I won't buy Settlers 7 at all, since it just seems to be split up into expensive DLC to cash in on the name. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bought mine for the astonishing price of 10 ($15) from Amazon.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">And wot!? Someone up there said that you can't even see the little men working in Settlers 7! What's up with that? I thought that was the very core of any Settlers game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Whoever said that is absolutely, completely wrong. They must be thinking about another game entirely! Watching the people work are the entire focus point. It's the most animated Settlers ever, by a huge margin. You can see all the little men (and women) doing absolutely everything. Nothing is hidden. You can zoom right up close to them and watch them as if you were standing next to them. There's great humour in what they do when they work. The graphics quality and animation of all the little people and the environment is captivating.

Like you I bought Settlers 6, enjoyed it and downloaded the demo of Settlers 7. I found the demo and video extremely frustrating as it didn't show you what to do. It was too confusing. I bought the game on a hunch, as it was only 10, and luckily the game itself actually has excellent tutorials and teaches you everything step-by-step, starting right from the basics. It was very welcome as the game can initially seem overwhelming. For me the rest is history.

Settlers 7, for me, completely returns back to its roots - the original Settlers 1 and 2. Instead of having flags on roads that you transfer one goods to another, you have storehouses instead. If you imagine the storehouses as flags, the parallels between S7 and S1 and S2 are enormous.

Antiscamp
01-02-2011, 07:11 AM
Thanks for your input. Settlers 7 seems more attractive now all of a sudden. I will indeed give it a go when I tire of Settlers VI and when one of those Steam special offers pop up.

Antiscamp
01-02-2011, 07:16 AM
Blimey! Settlers 7 is 50% off on Steam right now! Is this Divine Intervention or what? I'm getting it right now.

What will the wife say? I've spent masses of dosh on games this Christmas and New Years. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

Coolworm
01-02-2011, 08:13 AM
Haha, I'm sure you'll love it. Your missus might get jealous of the computer though. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Make sure you make it up to her.

One thing when you get it - the "Campaign" effectively doubles up as the game tutorial, each successive map adds new elements and it teaches you about each and every one of the elements, step by step, it's really well supported (with mini videos and explanations), so it all builds up as you progress through the campaign. While teaching you what each element does, it still gives you all the space you need to think of your own strategy and attempts in completing the actual maps. It gets really exciting when everything (all the buildings, military options, technologies, trade options, etc.) eventually become unlocked as it progresses.

The main difference to Settlers 1 (and Settlers 6 which you've just been playing) is the Victory Points system. Rather than just using military to win the game, like in previous Settlers', the new VP system gives you other ways of achieving the same aim. It makes the game a lot more open-ended and heavily strategic.

The winner is the first one to reach a given number of Victory Points. Each VP is a quest - such as being the first to reach certain criteria, capturing specific sectors, delivering resources (military, goods, etc.) to others, establishing additional trade-routes, or researching new technologies (to help you in military, agriculture, or prestige), etc. - and you fight it out between you to steal or obtain victory points off of each other. Some VPs are once-only (first person to achieve it keeps it), while others are stealable. Might seem strange at first but it's quite involving and the fact you can steal VPs from each other means the end of the game is nail-bitingly variable and different each time, depending on your strategy.

However if you want to simply annihilate your opponent into oblivion, like in Settlers 1, you can do! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Hope you enjoy it.

shopD6CFA304
01-03-2011, 11:21 AM
Oh NO! Your opponent just made a better post than you. Oh No! Your opponent can now trade with the devil. Annoying in game msgs.

I don't see the point in winning through trade or tech. That's a Sid Meyers Civ. scenario. Already been done. In the end in the real world you have to whoop your opponent. End of story. The real winner is the one who isn't dead.

Oh No! Your opponent won by trading jackets and jewelry! LOL

When I do my own maps (in S7) I wipe out any chance of trade, special points or tech victory points, then put one star sector right beside each player's castle, so the players have to defeat all the opponents, not woos out on jewelry delivery.

Where's my thieves and saboteurs?

Oh No! Ubisoft removed everything you ever liked about Settlers.

FIreDragonS3
03-28-2011, 03:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xNimmeRx:
I couldn't agree more, other than the best title being settler 3 :-P

/ChaZ Dixione. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Settlers 3 was the best of all settlers game! Still playing it online haha, only a few of us left but still fun

GacekSSJ4
03-30-2011, 04:39 AM
I still have both installed, 3 and 4 since those are epixes!! Even my younger brother (at age of 14) is starting to paly 4 now http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif /proud
As for 5 and 6.... I couldn't agree more. You can feel Microsoft's ideology in it... it was completly unplayable for me.
On the other hand, i think 7 went back a bit to 1 and 2 system, dont know why but i feel it a bit and I quite like the 7 and now going to buy it today/tommorow.

@FIreDragonS3 I'm with u! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
PS Can't decide which one is better :P Probably 3, since 4 was a almost same game. It was 3rd part that was so innovative and i spent on it so much time.

I cant forget those times. Practically didn't know english, was playing like a blind. I got demo of the game right after i got my first PC, and was sitting only on this game. Even tho it was demo, i loved to play tutorial again and again.... one mission with amozons that was available.... i was corndering Romas and left them one tower, then expanding and creating 600 armies XD And was looking at that small part of land i left to romas with hope they will send creaty at last one soldier, was sending them goods, weapons only so they build some army - they didn't tho http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

LoL - I'm stupid, but can't forget this game http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif