Age of Mythology: Extended Edition

 PC
User Score
7.6

Generally favorable reviews- based on 198 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 139 out of 198
  2. Mixed: 30 out of 198
  3. Negative: 29 out of 198

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. Tomle1202
    Mar 22, 2021
    7
    The gameplay remains as fantastic as ever, but anyone who said that it was lag-free deserved a punch in the mouth.
  2. spreadsheeticus
    May 7, 2015
    5
    Ensemble Studios, the original AoM developer, was closed by Microsoft in 2009. Extended Edition is basically a cosmetic upgrade by SkyBox labs. I, fortunately, was given a leftover promotional copy from a friend in the industry. I mean fortunately because the price tag is pretty outrageous. This is basically like buying a loaf of bread for $2, then charging $10 a slice because youEnsemble Studios, the original AoM developer, was closed by Microsoft in 2009. Extended Edition is basically a cosmetic upgrade by SkyBox labs. I, fortunately, was given a leftover promotional copy from a friend in the industry. I mean fortunately because the price tag is pretty outrageous. This is basically like buying a loaf of bread for $2, then charging $10 a slice because you toasted it......just shameless.

    5/10 because the game is still a great game, but can only give half points because it is neither original, nor is it truly the work of the developer taking credit.    … Expand
  3. PrincessRose
    Jan 13, 2016
    6
    This is an old RTS game from 2002
    I usually refrain from buying old games that were released before 2007 as most have been a terrible disapointment. Even though the graphics look old, out dated and haven't been improved much at all, the game is ok to play.
    I find the game mostly enjoyable to play even though it is an ugly game with graphics from 2000. And with AOM Extended Edition,    This is an old RTS game from 2002
    I usually refrain from buying old games that were released before 2007 as most have been a terrible disapointment. Even though the graphics look old, out dated and haven't been improved much at all, the game is ok to play.

    I find the game mostly enjoyable to play even though it is an ugly game with graphics from 2000. And with AOM Extended Edition, doesn't seem like much has been added or changed/improved. It says improved graphics, but it doesn't look like it, all that seems to have improved is a bit of water texture, shadow and some lighting and it's still ugly old outdated textures.

    I like how there is a mythological aspect to the game, it makes it more interesting for me, to choose a god and have various powers you can evoke, though rather limited, powers such as call down a bolt of lightning to instant kill a enemy. And a devastating meteor that will destroy a small area. These powers are very limited though, only being able to use once per map, so should be used wisely.
    I also like that there are heroes and myth units, creatures like minotaurs and hydra that become stronger and grow another head after a kill.

    I get bored playing too much, usually after a couple of hours, as all it is, is fighting and nothing much else. And I feel happy when I complete a campaign scenario and then feel disapointed that there's another one to complete. So I probably don't like the campaign game much as it drags on and on.
    The campaign takes way too long to complete, usually I like lengthy games, but not when the story involved is rather boring and the scenario missions don't differ much as every one is mostly just build your base up, build army, attack and defeat. I just want it to hurry up and be over already. The campaign should be 15 to 20 scenarios at most, not 32. I prefer to play just random maps in short bursts.

    And it's frustrating when you get halfway through a scenario, only to have the game crash and you try and reload a recent save but the save file is stuffed and wont load so have to start the scenario from the beginning again.

    I liked the game over all and say it's worth getting and playing at a discounted price for $10 or less, but not for full price as it's just an old rehashed game which has out dated graphics and not many improvements. Nothing that modernises or makes it feel worthy of the so called Extended title.    … Expand
  4. rgiublin
    May 25, 2014
    6
    A great game, as the original AOM, but have a terrible multiplayer support, with a lot of lag, almost impossible to connect to a game, old bugs even worse and a bad rank mode. Also, the new graphics have no improvement (in my opinion, worse than the old one), except by the resolution.
  5. DarcReaver
    May 11, 2014
    7
    Overall, it's a faithful remake of the original game. The visual improvements are pretty minor, but the new features (including league-quickmatches, achievements, ratings and some other stuff) are pretty good.

    Some people experience bad performance and/or lag, but this is mostly related to either using unfitting hardware or playing with people who they have a bad connection to. The    Overall, it's a faithful remake of the original game. The visual improvements are pretty minor, but the new features (including league-quickmatches, achievements, ratings and some other stuff) are pretty good.

    Some people experience bad performance and/or lag, but this is mostly related to either using unfitting hardware or playing with people who they have a bad connection to. The "laggy animations" are caused by the bad connections, because it seems like the framerate from the game is connected to the netcode. People who played p2p games like Battle for Middle Earth 1&2 and C&C Generals online might know this system (game "lags" at 22 frames/sec when a person with bad connection is ingame to avoid disconnection screens every few seconds).

    I have had no problems so far except for having some bad connection games with animation lag, and quickmatches are quite fun to play.

    I hope that the netcode will be improved with the next patches, and after that it'll be fine.
    As for people saying "30$ is a ripoff" - well, they're imo wrong. But that's personal opinion.    … Expand
  6. mugen_is_here
    Mar 7, 2017
    5
    It's just an HD remake to the original version. I didn't feel any difference frankly speaking. It's good that they put in effort for the game but frankly speaking I would much rather have had a new god power, or a new civilization or some new units or some new kind of game balancing or better villages that self-manage themselves rather than we having to micro-manage them.

    But instead we    It's just an HD remake to the original version. I didn't feel any difference frankly speaking. It's good that they put in effort for the game but frankly speaking I would much rather have had a new god power, or a new civilization or some new units or some new kind of game balancing or better villages that self-manage themselves rather than we having to micro-manage them.

    But instead we got some graphics updates for which you need to shell out money. It's just okay.    … Expand
  7. Voyou
    Sep 6, 2016
    5
    The overpriced rehash of AoM gets the same rating as the original, because it's the same game with barely noticeable cosmetic changes. An RTS that uses the same classic concepts as pretty much every other game in the genre, because they work well, AoM distinguishes itself by being heavy on the fighting and light on the building.

    If you want to create a great city, look elsewhere. Here    The overpriced rehash of AoM gets the same rating as the original, because it's the same game with barely noticeable cosmetic changes. An RTS that uses the same classic concepts as pretty much every other game in the genre, because they work well, AoM distinguishes itself by being heavy on the fighting and light on the building.

    If you want to create a great city, look elsewhere. Here the choice is mostly about which kind of barracks or other recruitment structure you want. You can't rotate any building, no ma'am. You're not in charge of building roads either; these are already there and purely cosmetic.

    The game is not about economy and management. The only alternative to fighting is to watch the villagers ravage the land out of trees. Same as in Rapa Nui except that you'll never lack of food since fields thrive everywhere. In total, you've got 3 resources, 2 of which deplete in a matter of virtual weeks. The 3rd one is gold, because of the famous Gold Age, just after the Stone Age, as most books from prehistory will remind you. And because, as you well know, you can't build a wood tower without gold.

    Anyway, if it's all about fighting, fighting must be great then, no ? Ahem. Well, if a misclick doesn't eradicate your troops, the incompetent path finding will. Or the AI. You'd better micro manage if you don't want your fighters randomly running after harmless villagers or hammering houses instead of, you know, actually fighting. Believe it or not, you'll find more choices of tactical formations and AI scripts in the Baldur's Gate series.

    So what is good then ?, you ask, since I don't give a bad note. Certainly not the tutorial, which teaches you everything you would understand by yourself in 2 seconds but none of the specifics. Not the alarm system, which warns you when watch towers detect invaders, but still requires you to manually ring another bell to tell your villagers to hide instead of stoically suicide. Not the descriptions of spells, or of why they refuse to work. Not the keyboard mapping; it would be a very good mapping if it existed, but it doesn't. Not the interface, which doesn't have a pause button. Not the pause key, which isn't easy to find, specially when it doesn't exist on your keyboard. In short, if your keyboard is too small, you can be obliterated while sneezing or reading a building's description.

    All right, enough pointing at the flaws, the game still works decently and one can have fun with it. Specially a casual player: don't bother with most buildings, use your limited gold to build walls of fortified towers to defend your base, and do all your recruiting in temples using your unlimited food, you'll be just fine. Because what it's really all about is the beasties, the cyclops, crocodiles, flying horses, giants and whatnot. They sure have picked Ray Harryhausen as their main source of mythological vision, and that's an excellent choice. I've got a soft spot for the hydra, personally.    … Expand
  8. GriefSeed
    Dec 2, 2016
    7
    Warning: I have not played this game in years, so my memory of it may be somewhat nostalgic.

    I remember first being introduced to this game at a friend's house. I instantly fell in love with the portrayal of the mythological creatures. Controlling Hydras, Chimeras, Gorgons, and Pegasuses made me feel as if I were in another world. I ended up staying awake playing hours after my friend    Warning: I have not played this game in years, so my memory of it may be somewhat nostalgic.

    I remember first being introduced to this game at a friend's house. I instantly fell in love with the portrayal of the mythological creatures. Controlling Hydras, Chimeras, Gorgons, and Pegasuses made me feel as if I were in another world. I ended up staying awake playing hours after my friend had gone to bed.

    I got the game for myself as soon as possible and spent hours building up fantastical armies and crushing my opponent. Looking back, I did not engage in much strategy other than winning through overwhelming force as a drawn-out build up. I do not know if this is because the game lacks strategic depth or because I was not aware of it as a young teen. Regardless, it was fun but I do not think the gameplay itself was ever what was enjoyable for me.

    I would recommend this game if you are big into the aesthetic, setting, and mood of your games, and if you would enjoy controlling large armies of cool monster. Ff you are looking for engaging mechanics other games in the rts genre will most likely serve you better.    … Expand
  9. aecsuter
    Aug 17, 2022
    7
    For those who have never played, I think it's hard to play today due to the graphics, but the main campaign is very cool and yielded many hours of gameplay 15 years ago.
    I didn't find anything new compared to that time.

    67 out of 100

Awards & Rankings

94
#94 Most Shared PC Game of 2014

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
66

Mixed or average reviews - based on 7 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2 out of 7
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 7
  3. Negative: 1 out of 7
  1. CD-Action
    Jul 25, 2014
    70
    Extended Edition is addictive, but owes it to the brilliance of Ensemble (the developers of the original AoM), not SkyBox, who basically put their name under someone else’s work after introducing changes so marginal that you might not even notice them. [07/2014, p.70]
  2. Games.cz
    May 27, 2014
    40
    Such derring-do from developers. They grabbed an excellent strategy game, they broke the most important part of it, and they are selling its outcome for a ungodly price. A copybook remake of how to not redo the old games. It's a great disappointment indeed.
    Read full review
  3. InsideGamer.nl
    May 19, 2014
    65
    Age of Mythology: Extended Edition is an excellent strategy game in its core. The scanty treatment it got for this Extended Edition makes this pretty disappointing. A few additions and graphical updates don't justify the high price tag.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »