the artwork and animations seem to have enough effort put into them
im not exactly sure from what i saw from footage of it how in depth it is but it at least seems as in depth as other recent settlers, but ive never played the original 2D ones
do i have to wait for those c**ts to release this a year later on Steam like they did with Anno 1800? I guess not that it matters because whether you buy on steam or epic you still use the fricking ubi store launcher anyway
>only 13 mission campaign and it's piss easy even on hardest difficulty >streamlined production chains like removing water and slaughterhouse >miners don't need food to work >skirmish is only 1v1 and can't choose AI difficulty or map, AI is stupid as shit >in-game cash shop
Nice try shill but this is just another AAA live service shit game.
>Settlers was supposed to be relaxing
As far as Settlers 3 & 4 are concerned, the pace was slow, but there was certainly some sort of challenge to be found.
And everything beyond 4th are just settler's in name only.
2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. they’re all different and all worth it. only 2 and 3 are remotely similar.
I played them all as a kid when games still came on discs and you could get most of these in 5-10€ collection bundles.
Settlers 2. The one with 2D sprites. Anniversary always crashed on my PC.
If several of them are so different from each other, what makes a Settlers game a Settlers game vs an Anno game or a Caesar/Impressions game?
Hard to say. Probably the general gameplay design of the kind of cities and buildings you build and how you build them. The later games are more RTS like while the earlier ones are more classic.
Nonetheless all of them have elements which differentiate them from other strategy games and city builders. Most telling is that you can see this transformation of the series with every title. It’s hardly good to make the same game over and over again. That’s why you return to original aspects with later titles or make remakes.
Actually looking into it further I don’t think I‘ve played Settlers 3, so that’s the only one I can’t recommend.
maybe anno is about logistics between islands and grid based placement with more focus on your pops. settlers is also about logistics but in land and good economy is needed for military. they have production chains which is not like say, aoe
>only 2 and 3 are remotely similar.
Wait what? I would have argued that 3 and 4 are the most similar of all with the least amount of sweeping changes in between them.
3 felt like a huge break from 2 if solely for the automatic road creation.
>For those who tried it, tell me more about this shitshow
You'd have to be moronic to buy the game, so here's thoughts of some Settlers3-4 fanboy instad.
Settlers 3-4 fanboy because this game is definitely built as a modernised version of those two.
Which is really the whole thing. They took Settlers 4, enacted modern game design on it (streamlined it, mostly) and that killed what was good about that game.
All those details added up and made the experience fun. They thought they were shaving fat off and by the time they were done, they were left with nothing but bone.
The shitty campaign, ugly UI and ridiculous restrictions like not being able to add AIs on your side in SP are just a topping on the cake.
Basically, Settlers 1-2 are very well designed games and any moron can tell what makes them click. But they already made 4-ish sequels to those.
Settlers 3-4 are different. They work as games, but it's not as obviously clear what makes them fun. And many people just straight up did not find them fun.
They tried to apply stricter, more contained design to them and missed the mark completely (not that hard, it takes a special kind of autist to enjoy those over the ones with roads and less spammy military), removing the little things that made them fun in their own way.
>They took Settlers 4, enacted modern game design on it
Holy hell ubishit moronation truly knows no bound and if it was a blue byte idea they should have nipped that in the bud.
Seconding 7, but you won't get to play multi unless you trick your friends into it, since the game has been dead since shortly after release because of the most moronic DRM ever. Which is why you should pirate.
>release a new settlers game >no review copies >no marketing campaign >unironically nobody even knows the game exists >charge full price for it >add microtransactions >literally feels like a shitty MOBA game
What the frick is Ubisoft's problem? I doesn't even feel like Settlers.
The game was in development hell. Initially it supposed to come out in 2019. We didn't hear about it for two years and there was a rumor that it was cancelled, but in 2022 we got closed beta tests. And the feedback from it was so negative that they delayed the release date from March 2022 to current year.
So yeah, I think Ubisoft at this point doesn't have faith in this game, didn't want to wast money on marketing it and pushed it out only because it's already somewhat finished functional game.
>For those who tried it, tell me more about this shitshow
You'd have to be moronic to buy the game, so here's thoughts of some Settlers3-4 fanboy instad.
Settlers 3-4 fanboy because this game is definitely built as a modernised version of those two.
Which is really the whole thing. They took Settlers 4, enacted modern game design on it (streamlined it, mostly) and that killed what was good about that game.
All those details added up and made the experience fun. They thought they were shaving fat off and by the time they were done, they were left with nothing but bone.
The shitty campaign, ugly UI and ridiculous restrictions like not being able to add AIs on your side in SP are just a topping on the cake.
Basically, Settlers 1-2 are very well designed games and any moron can tell what makes them click. But they already made 4-ish sequels to those.
Settlers 3-4 are different. They work as games, but it's not as obviously clear what makes them fun. And many people just straight up did not find them fun.
They tried to apply stricter, more contained design to them and missed the mark completely (not that hard, it takes a special kind of autist to enjoy those over the ones with roads and less spammy military), removing the little things that made them fun in their own way.
If anything, Settlers as a series was doing just about fine, until Ubi decided to make 5 some sort of generic medieval RTS. And from there on, they were struggling to get it back on track.
The series never recovered. Sure, 4 was already a dead-end (something very similar happened to Tropico, where 3-4 were basically the logical conclusion of what to make with the game as such) from development stand-point, but they decide to "shake things up" by throwing away the bath water with the fricking baby still inside.
>until Ubi decided to make 5 some sort of generic medieval RTS. And from there on, they were struggling to get it back on track.
If you completely ignore Settlers 2 20th Anniversary, Settlers 2 20th Anniversary: Vikings and Settlers: Aufbruch der Kulturen, then yeah.
The issue is they've already remade new Settlers 2s which worked, people just stopped buying those. Hence why they started flailing about trying to make something different and falling face-flat in the process.
This game is simply an attempt to do with 3/4 what they did with 2 in Anniv/AdK. What they wienered up was trying to modernise it without finding out what made them work. It's still Settlers 4 all the way down, just one that's lost a bit of the autism and all fun with it.
>Game got marketing and hype >They postpone it >Then few more times >Completely forgot it was even a thing >HEY GUYS, IT"S OUT >Oh, right, the new Settlers that were to came out a decade ago and then got changed 5 times are finally out >I learn about it from /vst/
Ubisoft was a mistake.
>release settlers 1-4 >everything is fine and people love the series >release settlers 5 which is basically just Warcraft 3 but dogshit >the series almost dies >attempt to regain the favor and rebuild the brand with 6 and 7 >suddenly this piece of shit comes out
You hate to see it. The Settlers died 22 years ago with 4.
If anything, Settlers as a series was doing just about fine, until Ubi decided to make 5 some sort of generic medieval RTS. And from there on, they were struggling to get it back on track.
The series never recovered. Sure, 4 was already a dead-end (something very similar happened to Tropico, where 3-4 were basically the logical conclusion of what to make with the game as such) from development stand-point, but they decide to "shake things up" by throwing away the bath water with the fricking baby still inside.
Explain in detail how 'in name only' Die Sielder 5 was in contrast to previous titles that even S7 is considered a superior game?
I mean, you can just google a lets play of both 4 and 5, after comparing these two you'll have a basic understanding of what the frick went wrong. They're completely different games on a fundamental level. I can't remember much from 5 myself because I never returned to it after playing it initially, but I played it side by side with Warcraft III back in the day and it's obvious that Ubisoft was trying to turn Settlers into their Warcraft.
Broken AI, focus on combat instead of economy, direct control over not only soldiers but hero units, resources no longer physically present on the map, focus on a serious story. I could go on but you get the point.
>Broken Ai >Settlers 5
Looks like you never played it then. There never has been an ai on the engine, it's all timed event triggers & scripts spawning enemies / patrolling certain areas only. Which is why there's not even a skirmish mode available.
Wasn't there a skirmish mode though? The opponent just wouldn't move at all since it wasn't scripted to do anything. I just now remembered how heavily they operate on scripts.
Really, just do yourself a favor and play 4 or 2, these are Settlers at their peak. The series is never going to recover, Ubisoft has ran it into the ground just like they did with the HoMM series.
The only right thing they did was releasing the history collection, which has all the settlers games in it and they all work on modern systems straight out of the box. So at least going back to the roots doesn't feel like fighting against the current.
the artwork and animations seem to have enough effort put into them
im not exactly sure from what i saw from footage of it how in depth it is but it at least seems as in depth as other recent settlers, but ive never played the original 2D ones
do i have to wait for those c**ts to release this a year later on Steam like they did with Anno 1800? I guess not that it matters because whether you buy on steam or epic you still use the fricking ubi store launcher anyway
>a year later
anno came out like 3 years later anon
What do I get out of this game that I can't get out of watching someone else play it once?
>ubisoft anything
Into the trash it goes
>New ~~*Allies*~~
troony pozzed shit
how long is the singleplayer campaign? looks kinda cool
>only 13 mission campaign and it's piss easy even on hardest difficulty
>streamlined production chains like removing water and slaughterhouse
>miners don't need food to work
>skirmish is only 1v1 and can't choose AI difficulty or map, AI is stupid as shit
>in-game cash shop
Nice try shill but this is just another AAA live service shit game.
>it's piss easy even on hardest difficulty
has this not always been the case?
AI at least attacked you in previous campaigns...
I remember Settler 2 and 4 being weirdly hard. But I also sucked at the game.
don't need food to work
actually food is just a booster in this game
>only 13 mission campaign and it's piss easy even on hardest difficulty
Wait, i thought Settlers was supposed to be relaxing. Was it not intentional?
hes a asiaticclicker adhd zoomer
>Settlers was supposed to be relaxing
As far as Settlers 3 & 4 are concerned, the pace was slow, but there was certainly some sort of challenge to be found.
And everything beyond 4th are just settler's in name only.
Settlers 4 was really hard, in my memory.
It really is
>Nice try shill but this is just another AAA live service shit game.
came here to read this exact comment, thank you anon
What Settlers games are worth playing?
I'd like to know this too.
They're all pretty cheap on gog but not sure which one to try.
2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. they’re all different and all worth it. only 2 and 3 are remotely similar.
I played them all as a kid when games still came on discs and you could get most of these in 5-10€ collection bundles.
2 or 2 "anniversary edition"?
Settlers 2. The one with 2D sprites. Anniversary always crashed on my PC.
Hard to say. Probably the general gameplay design of the kind of cities and buildings you build and how you build them. The later games are more RTS like while the earlier ones are more classic.
Nonetheless all of them have elements which differentiate them from other strategy games and city builders. Most telling is that you can see this transformation of the series with every title. It’s hardly good to make the same game over and over again. That’s why you return to original aspects with later titles or make remakes.
Actually looking into it further I don’t think I‘ve played Settlers 3, so that’s the only one I can’t recommend.
2, 4, 5, 6 — and 7 is it’s own beast.
If several of them are so different from each other, what makes a Settlers game a Settlers game vs an Anno game or a Caesar/Impressions game?
maybe anno is about logistics between islands and grid based placement with more focus on your pops. settlers is also about logistics but in land and good economy is needed for military. they have production chains which is not like say, aoe
>only 2 and 3 are remotely similar.
Wait what? I would have argued that 3 and 4 are the most similar of all with the least amount of sweeping changes in between them.
3 felt like a huge break from 2 if solely for the automatic road creation.
>They took Settlers 4, enacted modern game design on it
Holy hell ubishit moronation truly knows no bound and if it was a blue byte idea they should have nipped that in the bud.
3,4, and 7. Yes, 7 is fun especially mp and this is against the "general opinion"
Seconding 7, but you won't get to play multi unless you trick your friends into it, since the game has been dead since shortly after release because of the most moronic DRM ever. Which is why you should pirate.
Knights & Merchants
I've only played Settlers Rise of the Empire, but I really like it as a kid. Never played an of the other ones
Is it kino?
>release a new settlers game
>no review copies
>no marketing campaign
>unironically nobody even knows the game exists
>charge full price for it
>add microtransactions
>literally feels like a shitty MOBA game
What the frick is Ubisoft's problem? I doesn't even feel like Settlers.
The game was in development hell. Initially it supposed to come out in 2019. We didn't hear about it for two years and there was a rumor that it was cancelled, but in 2022 we got closed beta tests. And the feedback from it was so negative that they delayed the release date from March 2022 to current year.
So yeah, I think Ubisoft at this point doesn't have faith in this game, didn't want to wast money on marketing it and pushed it out only because it's already somewhat finished functional game.
I'm torn on trying it since it looks fun but I also hate giving Ubisoft money.
is it piratable yet
doubt that troony empress gives a frick
Bump
For those who tried it, tell me more about this shitshow
>For those who tried it, tell me more about this shitshow
You'd have to be moronic to buy the game, so here's thoughts of some Settlers3-4 fanboy instad.
Settlers 3-4 fanboy because this game is definitely built as a modernised version of those two.
Which is really the whole thing. They took Settlers 4, enacted modern game design on it (streamlined it, mostly) and that killed what was good about that game.
All those details added up and made the experience fun. They thought they were shaving fat off and by the time they were done, they were left with nothing but bone.
The shitty campaign, ugly UI and ridiculous restrictions like not being able to add AIs on your side in SP are just a topping on the cake.
Basically, Settlers 1-2 are very well designed games and any moron can tell what makes them click. But they already made 4-ish sequels to those.
Settlers 3-4 are different. They work as games, but it's not as obviously clear what makes them fun. And many people just straight up did not find them fun.
They tried to apply stricter, more contained design to them and missed the mark completely (not that hard, it takes a special kind of autist to enjoy those over the ones with roads and less spammy military), removing the little things that made them fun in their own way.
If anything, Settlers as a series was doing just about fine, until Ubi decided to make 5 some sort of generic medieval RTS. And from there on, they were struggling to get it back on track.
The series never recovered. Sure, 4 was already a dead-end (something very similar happened to Tropico, where 3-4 were basically the logical conclusion of what to make with the game as such) from development stand-point, but they decide to "shake things up" by throwing away the bath water with the fricking baby still inside.
>until Ubi decided to make 5 some sort of generic medieval RTS. And from there on, they were struggling to get it back on track.
If you completely ignore Settlers 2 20th Anniversary, Settlers 2 20th Anniversary: Vikings and Settlers: Aufbruch der Kulturen, then yeah.
The issue is they've already remade new Settlers 2s which worked, people just stopped buying those. Hence why they started flailing about trying to make something different and falling face-flat in the process.
This game is simply an attempt to do with 3/4 what they did with 2 in Anniv/AdK. What they wienered up was trying to modernise it without finding out what made them work. It's still Settlers 4 all the way down, just one that's lost a bit of the autism and all fun with it.
no, you don't
you hate it
>Game got marketing and hype
>They postpone it
>Then few more times
>Completely forgot it was even a thing
>HEY GUYS, IT"S OUT
>Oh, right, the new Settlers that were to came out a decade ago and then got changed 5 times are finally out
>I learn about it from /vst/
Ubisoft was a mistake.
>release settlers 1-4
>everything is fine and people love the series
>release settlers 5 which is basically just Warcraft 3 but dogshit
>the series almost dies
>attempt to regain the favor and rebuild the brand with 6 and 7
>suddenly this piece of shit comes out
You hate to see it. The Settlers died 22 years ago with 4.
Explain in detail how 'in name only' Die Sielder 5 was in contrast to previous titles that even S7 is considered a superior game?
I mean, you can just google a lets play of both 4 and 5, after comparing these two you'll have a basic understanding of what the frick went wrong. They're completely different games on a fundamental level. I can't remember much from 5 myself because I never returned to it after playing it initially, but I played it side by side with Warcraft III back in the day and it's obvious that Ubisoft was trying to turn Settlers into their Warcraft.
Broken AI, focus on combat instead of economy, direct control over not only soldiers but hero units, resources no longer physically present on the map, focus on a serious story. I could go on but you get the point.
>Broken Ai
>Settlers 5
Looks like you never played it then. There never has been an ai on the engine, it's all timed event triggers & scripts spawning enemies / patrolling certain areas only. Which is why there's not even a skirmish mode available.
Wasn't there a skirmish mode though? The opponent just wouldn't move at all since it wasn't scripted to do anything. I just now remembered how heavily they operate on scripts.
Really, just do yourself a favor and play 4 or 2, these are Settlers at their peak. The series is never going to recover, Ubisoft has ran it into the ground just like they did with the HoMM series.
The only right thing they did was releasing the history collection, which has all the settlers games in it and they all work on modern systems straight out of the box. So at least going back to the roots doesn't feel like fighting against the current.
Just listen to this fricking soul man.
settlers decided to become irrecoverably pozzed.
get widelands for free
I hate how s7 chronicles dlc doesnt work on mine being stuck on the fricking loading screen. Frick Ubi.
>tfw forgot how stupidly difficult 4 was
it's only the 3rd Trojan mission and I'm already getting shit on, what the frick