User Reviews (1 - 11 of 52)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

I overrated it

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 1 / 12
Date: March 14, 2004
Author: Amazon User

If I could rate it any lower, I would. The graphics suck, the plot is dumb, and it gets annoying really quickly. Don't let the ads fool you. All the people have the exact same warrior types, that it's just boring. If you want to see Sci-fi action battles, buy Starcraft because this game truly sucks.

This game is so bad!!!!!!!!!!!!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 11
Date: February 07, 2004
Author: Amazon User

This game is so sucky!!! The units are almost the same and the graphics are not good! The multiplayer is all right but it takes ages to finish! I recommend Warcraft 3 folks. Do NOT buy this game

Love Star Wars... Hate Lucas arts games

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 12
Date: March 30, 2004
Author: Amazon User

I heard of this game and I thought it would be the greatest thing I have ever played. I always wanted a Star Wars strategy game being able to crush the filthy rebels with your imperial army. But I went to the web site I looked at screenshots, played the demo and man this game sucks balls. The graphics suck tremendously and I don't like how they created so many new vehicles and people that aren't really to interesting. If you want to play a decent star wars game get Star Wars Force Commander its not the greatest but its allot better than this game. I swear Microsoft or someone needs to start making Star Wars games, LUCAS ARTS SUCKS.

G-B is a Cut & Paste copy of AOE

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 4 / 6
Date: June 16, 2004
Author: Amazon User

AOE II was one of my favorite games when it came out. It had a well ballanced core game with lots of extras thrown in. When I heard that Lucas Arts had purchased the AOE game engine I expected that they would use to create similar game based in the Star Wars genra, the very best of the sci-fi cult genras.

Boy was I surprised to find that instead of a game similar to AOE, Lucas Arts created a game exactly like AOE. Not only did they take the game engine, but they also copied the tech trees, storytelling style, even the openning menus are exactly the same as those in AOE. All Lucas Arts did was to draw their own starwars bitmaps and sprites to paste over the knights and horses of AOE. This makes for a very disappointing game.

This is not to say that what was kept from AOE is bad or that Lucas Arts did absolutely no original thinking, just that the tech-trees, balance of power, and even the feel of the AOE game just doesn't fit with Star Wars and even seems silly at times. For example: the -monument- structure in G-B is obviously copied from the -wonder- structure in AOE. Now, while a wonder is a demonstration of a civilization's might, a relavent concept in AOE; why on Earth or Tatooine would the Rebel Alliance build an enourmous monument?! And why would that be a definative blow against the Empire?! Its all very silly!

The entire game is done this way, from the graphics, to the game play to the cutscenes. While the game works and is playable, what Lucas Arts should have done was keep the AOE engine, but build the tech trees and story engine from scratch. It would have been truly awsome if the AT-AT's had the same presence on the battle field in the game as they did in the movie. As it is, you get these things which act more like the cavalry they were pasted over from AOE. The infantry is like the infantry for AOE, the "mechs" are really the cavalry, each and every ship has an exact duplicate in AOE, and "heavy weapons" are really just catapults, batteringrams and the famouse AOE trebuchets in disguise. Even the things new, such as aircraft, Jedi, shields and generators feel very artificial in their roles in the game.

The game is playable, But it is not Star Wars, and not a very good RTS. I was sorely disappointed when I recieved it as a gift.

Disappointing

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 0 / 6
Date: November 18, 2003
Author: Amazon User

I love RTS games and i love Star Wars but i did not care for this game. After reading nothing but positive reviews i totally had to buy this game. Little did i know that i would be bored with it after the first day. The next few days i would pop the CD back in the drive and give it another chance, but it is simply boring.

AOK Is Better

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 0 / 6
Date: January 04, 2004
Author: Amazon User

I got this game and I have to ask... WHAT THE HECK??????? This is simply a unit modification for "Age Of Kings". They only changed some graphics,and sounds and released it as a new game.
Don't even bother buying it if you own AOK (or try the Trial Version first)

game out in 2001-2002, still the graphics are horrible

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 1 / 4
Date: January 22, 2005
Author: Amazon User

it lags a lot in graphics. the gameplay is neither good. interesting if you want to know more about the Star Wars stories from Episodes I, II, IV, V, & VI.

i'd suggest to wait for the new RTS "Star Wars Empire at War" coming in 2005 made by the creators of "Command & Conquer Generals" (i'm not talking about publisher EA or Electronic Arts, i'm talking about the once Westwood Studios' programmers)

Campaigns Good, Battles Bad

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 4 / 8
Date: December 09, 2003
Author: Amazon User

If you played age of empires (age of kings) then you will pick this game up quickly, but it is how you play the game that will determine if you will like this or not.

If you like to play campaigns then this is a pretty good game and you will probably recommend it. If you like death matches and battles then this is a "nurfed up" disappointment.

For campaigners this is exactly what you want, age of empires in star wars land.

If you are like me and after you get done with campaigns you want to set up big battles and fight to the death then this is an aweful down grade from age of empires. When I say that it is "nurfed up", what I mean is that different game elements have been altered to supposedly make them better, but ultimately they make for lesser game play. For example: It always seemed unreal that a few guys with swords could take out a building so easily in Age of Empires. Galactic Battle ground went way to far the other way. You will pound on buildings with artillary and bombers forever to get a building to fall (Its like you're firing nurf balls). This draws out battles and makes death matches BORING.

Not to Bad By mike

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 2 / 7
Date: March 21, 2005
Author: Amazon User

I bought this game about 1 month ago, and it is'nt that bad. The graphics could be better, but the reality of the units as far as corresponding to the movies is good. After a while, the concept gets kind of repetitive, but the difference in units depending on the side does liven it up. Also, it's cool to be able to be different sides, rather than just the good guys.(I mean, come on, who doesn't want to kick some rebel dairiair with an AT-AT?) Anyway, the graphics will leave a 2-D aftertaste in your mouth, but for big starwars fans it's definetly worth 10.00 bucks.

Dumb

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 1 / 8
Date: June 25, 2004
Author: Amazon User

Although it is sort of fun, i'd only reccomend it for a 10 year old relation who loves star wars. As other people were saying, yes, this is an exact copy off AOK (Age of Kings. I can even relate a few civies, i.e Trade Federation=Huns. I play this game when im bored and want some strategy gaming, but with AOC (Age of Conquorers, AOK's expansion) for that, this game has stayed on the shelf for many a year. If you need a good futuristic RTS game, your better off with Homeworld or Starcraft.

Review Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next 

Actions