Age of Wonders 3 Reviews

Home Forums Age of Wonders 3 Discussions Age of Wonders 3 Reviews

Tagged: 

This topic contains 113 replies, has 63 voices, and was last updated by  patiponp202 11 hours, 20 minutes ago.

Viewing 30 posts - 31 through 60 (of 114 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #61110

    Tibbles
    Member

    I’m sure that hype will go down very fast.
    It’s a fun game, but not for more than 1 hour.

    #62538

    ten9
    Member

    Dutch gaming site Gamer.nl gives the game a 9 out of 10!

    http://www.gamer.nl/review/454400/age-of-wonders-3-wonderschone-fantasy

    #63356

    MartyD81
    Member

    OK, another review from a major videogames website is up, this time from IGN. The reviewer gave the game a 7.1 score mark, complaining mainly about “poor strategic choices”. Even though I have not touched the game myself yet, this review seems to be kind of reminiscent of the Gamespot one because both have criticised AoW III for the lack of global strategy options and a simplistic economic system encouraging rush mass expansion early on.
    Having read of fan reviews, other professional reviews, and seen a whole lot of LP plus official videos, I do not believe that the two media are right about what they claim in terms of global strategy choices. Anyway, can someone reassure me again and stand up for AoW III’s defense and refute those claims, or is the new AoW game really that poor at global strategy, while being stronger at a tactical level? Oh god, this has made me worried once again…
    Maybe the reviewer is a COD fan, keeping his COD filter all the time while judging all other stuff. COD Ghosts was awarded a 8.8 by the way, which says a lot about IGN’s credibility I guess…
    Thanks in advance for any input.

    #63651

    DadouXIII
    Member

    I just finished reading the IGN review, and I think that their views on the limited strategic choices is VERY interesting.

    – I don’t think they are wrong in thinking this, because I have to agree to an extent about how things are a bit too vanilla when it comes to building construction times and cost, leading to cities that can indeed feel unspecialized.
    – There is also this aspect about how spots where you should build cities are almost telegraphed, because of how resource nodes are bunched up together!
    – Another things I should point out, is how plentiful mana can be past the very early game, as I often find myself swimming in the stuff, even though I cast global spells and summons regularly!

    –> The fact that they pointed out how they like smaller and tighter maps more, make me think that improving map composition will by itself fix a lot of the aforementioned “issues” 🙂

    It goes to show how tweaks are in order to make the game more interesting, favouring strategic choices instead of just massing up huge armies and crushing through sheer number 🙂
    Nothing that can’t be fixed 🙂
    Game is awesome, enough said 😀

    #63724

    LordTheRon
    Member

    I thought that IGN review was incredibly shallow.

    #63746

    Tibbles
    Member

    Well, it’s IGN what do you expect.
    They gave Goat Simulator an 8/10, all credibility lost xD

    Gamespot and IGN aren’t really fair to niche games like this.
    Not that they don’t have good points, I just feel they can’t appreciate titles like this (or play them for more than an hour like Gamespot :x)

    #63871

    Apollo
    Member

    The IGN review was by freelance critic, Rowan Kaiser. He appears to have a reasonable appreciation of the genre and his review is a fair assessment of this game. Tactic combat is amazing, strategic elements are lacking. Interminable campaign? Have yet to complete it but fail to see how this is a negative, would love if it lasted forever. So far the individual missions have had a lot of optional areas to explore but the direct route is also available for the impatient.

    Not sure what kind of maps he was playing where “blindly building everything always seemed like the best choice” but city management is disappointingly simplistic. Buildings do not require maintenance and are relatively cheap/quick to build. The optimal build order is fairly obvious and only delayed by a lack of funds or a need to produce units. There are no intrinsic penalties for owning multiple cities and the added defensive burden is offset by the immediate new source of income and units. Absorbing the population of conquered cities always seems like the best choice unless the former inhabitants were extremely unhappy about their surroundings or you have a desperate need for racial specific unit production in that location. Even the user interface of the strategic map is streamlined, lacking useful information about cities at a glance without consulting the overview panel. Would not go so far as to say the city management detracted from the rest of the game, but it is an obvious weakness and will hopefully be improved through patches or expansions.

    #63919

    LordTheRon
    Member

    Don’t try to make AoW a game it isn’t. Focus for the AoW series has always been this way and I would hate it if city management would become more complex. This isn’t a city management game. AoW isn’t trying to be civ and luckily so!

    #63921

    LordTheRon
    Member

    Well, it’s IGN what do you expect.<br>
    They gave Goat Simulator an 8/10, all credibility lost xD

    Gamespot and IGN aren’t really fair to niche games like this.<br>
    Not that they don’t have good points, I just feel they can’t appreciate titles like this (or play them for more than an hour like Gamespot :x )

    You mean that Goat Simulator isn’t an April Fools joke but a real game???

    #64650

    Can’t believe they gave this an 8…

    #65613

    shimmler
    Member

    Just because you don’t like causing some goaty mayhem doesn’t mean the game is bad.

    #65951

    Magog_77
    Member

    Don’t try to make AoW a game it isn’t. Focus for the AoW series has always been this way and I would hate it if city management would become more complex. This isn’t a city management game. AoW isn’t trying to be civ and luckily so!

    Fully agree.

    #65983

    oasis
    Member

    Do devs have to pay TotalBiscuit to do a WTF for their game? A WTF for AoW3 would be nice, he gets a lot of views.

    #66025

    Kat
    Member

    Do devs have to pay TotalBiscuit to do a WTF for their game? A WTF for AoW3 would be nice, he gets a lot of views.

    I guess contacting him would be enough, you know 😉

    Anyway, I remember TB making one of his content patches with news on AoW3 announcement about a year ago, so I’m damn sure he kept track of the game progress or at least is aware of it’s recent launch and popularity of the series. So WTF is most probably on its way, just wait a bit cause TB makes WTF of stratgy games after playing them for a while, not pure first impressions from the very start of the game.

    #66034

    Tibbles
    Member

    TB is already playing the game, tweeted about it a few times this week, and mentioned he thought it was great so far on his podcast, I think there will be a WTF soon.
    He wanted to spend a good amount of time on it, so it’s taking a bit longer.

    #66229

    Tibbles
    Member

    Just uploaded!

    #66240

    That is quite the glowing recommendation!

    #66469

    Xerberus86
    Member

    hey, total biscuit finally did an first impression video for AoW3:

    …and he seems very satisfied with the game so i think this will additionally boost the sales (and makes my beloved undead race / necromancer class come sooner :D).

    #66501

    Xerberus86
    Member

    damn you tibbles x’D….you posted some seconds earlier than me -.-.

    #66531

    Tibbles
    Member

    damn you tibbles x’D….you posted some seconds earlier than me -.-.

    2 hours is not some seconds null 😛

    That is quite the glowing recommendation!

    Yeah, I’m quite surprised actually, he’s usually not this positive about games 😛

    #66568

    Low_K
    Member

    Excellent review of TB. He has many, many subscribers so hopefully it will boost the sales!

    Great stuff!

    Kind regards,

    Low

    Why is it when I turn off the laptop, after hours of playing Age of Wonders 3, the girlfriend is there waiting? I'll look up and stare at 115 pounds of pure Satan!
    #66701

    Don’t try to make AoW a game it isn’t. Focus for the AoW series has always been this way and I would hate it if city management would become more complex. This isn’t a city management game. AoW isn’t trying to be civ and luckily so!

    I have to disagree. You should be allowed to specialize your cities, and the city building doesn’t have to get much more complex for that. Most of the fun in AoW is, for me, messing around with unit abilities and unit composition on the strategic map so that, when I do send out my army, the tactical combat becomes that much more interesting. The uniqueness of units in AoW is pretty amazing as is, but I think it can be pushed even farther.

    #66934

    Rabiator
    Member

    I think the game has some problems and there are some design decisions which are somewhat bad.

    So far I am on mission 3 of the “high elf” campaign and only the first one was really fun. The second one turned out to be long to be pretty boring (too many cities to conquer and the computer doesnt really attack) and the second one is getting downright tedious with having 8 or so cities to manage “right from the start”.

    The design of the races/classes is an interesting one, BUT I think the effect of the races and the racial units are far too similar. Even the class units for different races should be more different AND I really miss the truly big and very very EXPENSIVE racial units. With the current design of the game it is far too easy to have lots of cities and that makes buying expensive stuff far too easy. The difference between the tiers of units isnt big enough IMO.

    Personally I would have liked each race to be truly special … kinda like WoW does it with “Warriors use rage, Rogues use energy and casters use mana”. Mixing that with the idea of classes would have become a bit more complicated, but there are too many class specific units that are “racialised” (Goblin Succubus, Dwarf Succubus, … REALLY?).

    The army combat is awesome and I really think the ability system is neat too.

    I especially like the mounts (but I think the ability of the Sorceror to summon random mounts is far too cheap/easy … it is a magic item and creating one costs far more than the lousy 40 mana). The magic item creation system seems ok-ish, BUT I wish there was the option to include downsides for more points (kinda like the Unicorn mount has for Blight weakness). For some slots the number of choices is very very limited, more limited than in previous games.

    The “tech tree” is similar to previous games, but I miss the ability to research permanent abilities. This is “hidden” in the standard research options, but there are no “general” abilities to research. This is a lost option and when you get to the end of a tech tree it feels rather disappointing. 100 turns arent that much for a big map and I managed to get through all of them in that time.

    tl;dr
    – Too many cities = too much management required and too much power too fast
    – Not enough distinction between the races = the class defines how a map plays/feels and not the class+race combination.
    – Magic items could use a little tweaking
    – Tech tree “not a tree”

    #67621

    At least Joystiq was able to the delightfully offset those two mainstream sites with 4.5 stars:

    http://www.joystiq.com/2014/04/04/age-of-wonders-3-review-sleep-when-youre-dead/

    #68706

    dallaen
    Member

    I think the game has some problems and there are some design decisions which are somewhat bad.

    So far I am on mission 3 of the “high elf” campaign and only the first one was really fun. The second one turned out to be long to be pretty boring (too many cities to conquer and the computer doesnt really attack) and the second one is getting downright tedious with having 8 or so cities to manage “right from the start”.

    The design of the races/classes is an interesting one, BUT I think the effect of the races and the racial units are far too similar. Even the class units for different races should be more different AND I really miss the truly big and very very EXPENSIVE racial units. With the current design of the game it is far too easy to have lots of cities and that makes buying expensive stuff far too easy. The difference between the tiers of units isnt big enough IMO.

    Personally I would have liked each race to be truly special … kinda like WoW does it with “Warriors use rage, Rogues use energy and casters use mana”. Mixing that with the idea of classes would have become a bit more complicated, but there are too many class specific units that are “racialised” (Goblin Succubus, Dwarf Succubus, … REALLY?).

    The army combat is awesome and I really think the ability system is neat too.

    I especially like the mounts (but I think the ability of the Sorceror to summon random mounts is far too cheap/easy … it is a magic item and creating one costs far more than the lousy 40 mana). The magic item creation system seems ok-ish, BUT I wish there was the option to include downsides for more points (kinda like the Unicorn mount has for Blight weakness). For some slots the number of choices is very very limited, more limited than in previous games.

    The “tech tree” is similar to previous games, but I miss the ability to research permanent abilities. This is “hidden” in the standard research options, but there are no “general” abilities to research. This is a lost option and when you get to the end of a tech tree it feels rather disappointing. 100 turns arent that much for a big map and I managed to get through all of them in that time.

    tl;dr<br>
    – Too many cities = too much management required and too much power too fast<br>
    – Not enough distinction between the races = the class defines how a map plays/feels and not the class+race combination.<br>
    – Magic items could use a little tweaking<br>
    – Tech tree “not a tree”

    I feel like you just turned the game on Easy and went from there. Of course it will be easy and boring on the easy setting. Go up another level or set it on hard and I guarantee the AI will come knocking on your front door frequently.

    The tech tree is quite satisfying once I get to the end of one as the researched spell is almost always quite useful and sometimes devastating.

    I do agree races could be a bit more diverse but it’s not game breaking. However lets not try to say WoW is some kind of diverse game. If anything it’s the guilty of homogenizing every MMO that exists now into a few class/races.

    I’m perfectly happy with the game as it is and it sure beats the last couple of titles I picked up in the past year or so.

    #70013

    Rabiator
    Member

    I feel like you just turned the game on Easy and went from there. Of course it will be easy and boring on the easy setting. Go up another level or set it on hard and I guarantee the AI will come knocking on your front door frequently.

    The tech tree is quite satisfying once I get to the end of one as the researched spell is almost always quite useful and sometimes devastating.

    I do agree races could be a bit more diverse but it’s not game breaking. However lets not try to say WoW is some kind of diverse game. If anything it’s the guilty of homogenizing every MMO that exists now into a few class/races.

    I’m perfectly happy with the game as it is and it sure beats the last couple of titles I picked up in the past year or so.

    The difficulty doesnt change the tediousness of the missions and scenarios one bit. There are a crapton of cities to “manage” and that takes you away from the armies. It isnt very satisfying if you cant really build stuff in 7 out of 10 cities because you lack the funds for it and later on – when your cities are all fully upgraded – you will have so many spell points each round to enable you to practically spam global spells. Fewer cities is better in that case IMO.

    The tech tree isnt really a tree more like a wheat field, because you have choices coming from your class, your specializations and the general stuff … and none of these paths really intermix. That has always been the case in AoW, but here it has become more prominent, because previously only your “magic specializations” gave you an option for choosing the spells you get. Maybe I am complaining because of the lack of a documentation (for Shadow Magic I have this neat book with all the stats in it, but doing the same for AoW III seems impractical due to the load of abilities and update info for the units).

    I was just taking the “power source” of the WoW classes as an example of how classes have a different base mechanic to generate their power and how this can force a different playstyle upon you. In Everquest 2 every class has the same “power source” and this is one of the reasons why that particular MMO is less interesting. It is a lost opportunity. It would have been nice to have the races feel much more different; as it stands they take a backburner to your class units, because the boni you can gain there are “too good”. The only reason to take anything other than class-focused-units is flying … for an “all flying army” when all my heroes have flying mounts (which is far too easy to get with lots of spellpower).

    I am also pretty happy with the game, but the game could have been much more. I guess I need to wait for some really good scenarios. So far I like Archipelago of Hope most, but I think the desire of the AI (on all levels) to have peace is a bit too high.

    #70460

    Went onto Metacritic to see some reviews out of curiosity, even though I have the game. Had a look at some of the negative user reviews, and if you look at the other reviews they have done, all they do is seem to bash on most off the games. why do this? are there lives so empty that they do this to entertain themselves.

    #70947

    ten9
    Member
    #71736

    JamieSI
    Member

    There’s a good review on Strategy Informer that’s given the game a score of 8.5/10! You can read it here – http://www.strategyinformer.com/pc/ageofwondersiii/2319/review.html

    #73237

    Edi
    Member

    AoW3 review at Quarter to Three. Three out of five stars, mainly due to the endgame options being so limited, but otherwise Tom Chick doesn’t hold back on the praise.

Viewing 30 posts - 31 through 60 (of 114 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.