Ashes of the Singularity

 PC
User Score
6.8

Mixed or average reviews- based on 90 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 51 out of 90
  2. Mixed: 13 out of 90
  3. Negative: 26 out of 90

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. ndee
    Nov 2, 2016
    2
    A horrible waste of money. The ten-years-old Supreme Commander still is better in every aspect of gameplay. The only thing where Ashes is better is graphics.
  2. generalanesthes
    May 25, 2016
    0
    This is the biggest waste of money i have spent on a game in years. Slow, boring, and massively taxing on a computer yet the graphics are mediocre and the detail isn't that great. I'm shocked at how crappy this game is made. Huge hype for a mediocre game and heres the fun part, it's so full of bugs that you can't ever play a decent round without a crash or some weird glitch happening. IsThis is the biggest waste of money i have spent on a game in years. Slow, boring, and massively taxing on a computer yet the graphics are mediocre and the detail isn't that great. I'm shocked at how crappy this game is made. Huge hype for a mediocre game and heres the fun part, it's so full of bugs that you can't ever play a decent round without a crash or some weird glitch happening. Is your PC overclocked? Better turn that off cause it causes crashes. Direct x 12? May or may not work properly. I can't even shut the game down and close Steam without the game restarting over and over. I tried to get a refund but steam wouldn't let me. I am an advanced PC gamer and I build my own PC's. I have a top of the line Z170 build with all the best hardware and I have never had an issue with any game until this one. Very mad about buying this, and even more mad I can't be refunded. This is honestly a more boring version of Star Wars, Empire at War. It's extremely similar in regards to resources and land control to win. I'm honestly going to delete this and play Empire at War again...which is a 10 year old game. Sad...just plain sad.… Expand
  3. cnckane
    Mar 31, 2016
    4
    As a Red Alert, Dune, Starcraft and Supreme Commander fan I was very excited when this was announced. The final product however is a HUGE dissapointment. Seriously this is more like a techdemo not a game, it doesn't have a great story (less then average in fact) that's "just" one problem, but it's like an empty husk with no purpose at all.
    The graphics looked promising, but once you    As a Red Alert, Dune, Starcraft and Supreme Commander fan I was very excited when this was announced. The final product however is a HUGE dissapointment. Seriously this is more like a techdemo not a game, it doesn't have a great story (less then average in fact) that's "just" one problem, but it's like an empty husk with no purpose at all.
    The graphics looked promising, but once you observe in realtime on your computer you see it's not that great... The level design is boring - sorry there isn't any: You have a huge map with some resources and trees and snow and mud.
    That said, I still think this engine/technology could be a great base for a future game.    … Expand
  4. Stewart97
    Apr 24, 2016
    4
    This game suffers from the same thing as the new Starwars movie "Force Awakens". It is another generic, shallow, RTS, reboot in a galaxy far far away that we've already seen in the 70s. Only in our case the 1970s is the 1990s. We've seen the same plot, same characters and same story. We've seen the whole thing done better and the bottom line everything in Ashes with the single exception ofThis game suffers from the same thing as the new Starwars movie "Force Awakens". It is another generic, shallow, RTS, reboot in a galaxy far far away that we've already seen in the 70s. Only in our case the 1970s is the 1990s. We've seen the same plot, same characters and same story. We've seen the whole thing done better and the bottom line everything in Ashes with the single exception of DX12, we've seen before.

    Just like the new movie, Ashes of the Singularity is flashy, and it is all lasers and wiz bang without really satisfying any whys or hows. Yes you take territory and you gain resources, but you don't do so strategically you do so tactically. The only strategy that works is larger numbers of units overwhelming smaller numbers of units or higher tiered units having the durability to cut through swarms of smaller units.

    Also note there is no water combat. Not a major thing but most other RTS games based on planets have water/land and air but evidently the planets that these battles take place on don't take place anywhere the form of matter necessary for life to exist. Just like the new clones they must be "using the force" at Stardock to suspend your disbelief at just how lacking an RTS can be.

    The thing Starcraft (SC) has going for it is tight matchups between units and twitchy gameplay where micro a handful of units can mean defeat or victory. Matches in SC are typically fast because of this mechanic and it works good. Even the longer matches where two players of even skill, or even mistake making are satisfying. The SC reboot also did what Force Awakens did for better or worse. It didn't reinvent the genre. It kept the game play tightly similar to the original.

    The thing Forged Alliance Forever (FAF) has are two refined RTS innovations missing in Ashes. FAF relies on a strong balance respecting the effectiveness of the micro and the necessity of the managing your macro. In SC strong micro can mean the difference in outcome of the game. In FAF it can mean the outcome in the battle but you need to win a successive number of battles before it will mean the outcome of the game. This is called refinement and this is lacking in Ashes. While FAF indeed did not launch in its current state but, as Supreme Commander, with a clunky interface and only 3 races. Each race was very different, had different tiers in which they were superior or inferior and the micro vs macro concept was there. Ashes has tiers and it has 2 races, but they are largely the same without anything to distinguish them from the other. In fact another core problem with Ashes is it is hard to while in battle distinguish without constantly moving to select to see who is who. The biggest innovation in RTS since 2005 was the advent of Strategic zoom which allows for very large maps as well as very large battles. SC doesn't come close to FAF when it comes to scope. Ashes only meets FAF at the strategic level by only showing you 1/5 of the battle at once, while also not having the right tools to properly organize or manage forces. Sins of a Solar Empire (Sins) has Strategic zoom and also a good Icon UI system for managing forces. While Sins plays slow like a space opera and FAF plays much faster, Ashes is also painfully slow so lack of tools can be forgiven. What can't be forgiven is how slow the units in Ashes move, and the fact there is no "transport" or teleport of units to the front line. One could point to air units but they are so pathetic as to be essentially meaningless for the cost.

    The other really big feature of FAF is unit wrecks. Everything vaporizes in Ashes. In FAF you can "reclaim" salvage mass on the battlefield. Which create dynamically important locations to hold both tactically and strategically as well as a potential bonus for the victor in battle. Completely missing in Ashes. All "strategic objectives" are pre-positioned and don't change with a changing condition of the battle. They only change when the front line changes. What changes the front line? Without variation it is always more units x>y type number game.

    The only problems of early rushing exists in Ashes but this isn't a main criticism of the game. The main criticism has to be the lack of polish at all levels.

    The sound effects which are annoying to the point you need to turn the sound down, to the "voice overs when you direct units which sound like every single one was recorded though a rusted 30 ft long lead pipe its just not good.

    On the plus side
    The landscapes are good.
    The soundtrack is well somewhat inspiring but not epic.
    Visuals are great if you like shimmering lasers and colorful explosions that dissipate quickly.

    As far as RTS, strategy, tactics, 2 race matchups in RTS where you have a limited view of the battle zone and slow units make for a regression in the genre not an advancement. While the engine may be impressive the game and thereby game play built around that engine is far from impressive.    … Expand
  5. SYLOH
    Apr 4, 2016
    4
    This game is officially out, but it still feels unfinished. They spent all that time polishing the engine, but everything else was abandoned half-way. You can’t rebind the controls. There is absolutely no voice overs in game for the campaign, which by the way is only “Episode 1”. Mechanics are strewn about still needing work.
    For example, the Army system is a very good idea, but is    This game is officially out, but it still feels unfinished. They spent all that time polishing the engine, but everything else was abandoned half-way. You can’t rebind the controls. There is absolutely no voice overs in game for the campaign, which by the way is only “Episode 1”. Mechanics are strewn about still needing work.
    For example, the Army system is a very good idea, but is completely unwieldy. Try assigning multiple dreadnoughts to an army and the thing falls apart. Form an army out of a long stream of units and the ones that are about to take the objective will retreat to some centre of gravity. Still haven’t figure out a good way to detach just a few units.
    The mini-map shows an utter contempt for your desire to have situational awareness. Is that coloured blob territory held? A swarm of factory units? A colossal rush of dreadnought? No idea! Now in supreme commander you could just tactical zoom and look at the icons, but if that’s a feature it’s never been explained.
    The campaign is just "Episode 1". All the missions that aren’t tutorials are basically just a skirmish with some wonky starting conditions. The plot basically starts from nowhere and goes nowhere. None of the character have anything approaching personality, and even if they did, it’d be hampered by the fact they can only communicate by texting you in the midst of battle. The mission difficulty is either laughably easy or face smashingly hard. No, you can’t choose a game difficulty, that wasn’t in it.
    All of this was sacrificed for the graphics, which I admit are pretty, but utterly wasted. In Supreme Commander you got a good sense of scale. People know roughly how big a tank, a destroyer or a battleship are. So when you see that giant mechanical spider stomping a tank, you instantly think “Damn, that’s a big unit!”. Ashes’s units are all some weird sci-fi thingy that’s so disconnected from our experience that scale becomes meaningless. I’m sure that dreadnought is big, but I don’t feel it in any meaningful way. It might as well be dots and blobs.
    I don’t recommend this game. If you want an epic strategy fix just go replay Supreme Commander. The list of things Supreme Commander had that Ashes of the Singularity doesn’t would easily be as long as this review is.    … Expand
  6. tatsu
    Apr 3, 2016
    3
    I'm unhappy thus far. This game is more aiming to please microsoft and AMD than gamers. The prof of concept around directX12 that is this game is always encouraging news and especially when you consider there'll be linux with Vulkan API support.
    But this isn't what us gamers are after. there too many things missing for a 1.0 release even when you consider there's the bulk of the content    I'm unhappy thus far. This game is more aiming to please microsoft and AMD than gamers. The prof of concept around directX12 that is this game is always encouraging news and especially when you consider there'll be linux with Vulkan API support.
    But this isn't what us gamers are after. there too many things missing for a 1.0 release even when you consider there's the bulk of the content yet to be released via DLC. (and I don't even care that it's DLC because I already own them all no matter how many of them and extensions come out)
    When I say there are too many things missing. I refer to better interfacing with the game (things such as map pings; full zoom...); replays (+rewindability and pick up anywhere which are supposed to be norms by now); balance (really hurting the overall fun; broken promises with ascendancy wars and the campaign (this is now a recurrent thing with all new RTSes) the list goes on and on and I'm really tired of talking about this.
    Bottom line is I can exploit the **** out of the cruddy balance in this game I have a 4.3 ladder rating on this game and I never have any fun in it.    … Expand
  7. Honeybadgers
    Apr 3, 2016
    4
    I was hoping this game would scratch the SupCom itch that was left so badly un-scratched by planetary annihilation. By the time I finished the tutorial I pretty much hated the game. Functionally, it's mostly there. Units are slow and dim witted, they do not move in sensible formations (my repair units keep charging to the front of formation) and there is no in-mission voice acting to lendI was hoping this game would scratch the SupCom itch that was left so badly un-scratched by planetary annihilation. By the time I finished the tutorial I pretty much hated the game. Functionally, it's mostly there. Units are slow and dim witted, they do not move in sensible formations (my repair units keep charging to the front of formation) and there is no in-mission voice acting to lend the game ANY degree of interest. But beyond "mechanically functional" my limited praise turns to severe criticism.

    The sound design is nothing short of appalling. Units make strange, irritating noises, with such little variety there's no audible way of distinguishing them. There are two types of noises, explosive or lasers, and they pew-pew-pew and explode with limp, uninteresting flatness. The "AI" narrator has this weird, pseudo-compressed audio feel that in no way matches the game we're playing. Explosions feel flat, guns feel weak, unit barks are nothing short of OBNOXIOUS to listen to. The music is bland at best, obnoxious and not matching the game at worst.

    The visual design seemed good in small video clips, but again, it's just bad. Textures and colors are very low quality and not well matched to create any sense of artistic cohesion. Everything is just a boring, stupid, simple hovercraft or a plane that flies like a ground unit in the sky. It may sound petty, but in this day, I expect guns to look like they're shooting the projectiles that are leaving their barrels. They do not. Projectiles just emerge from vehicles, sometimes not even from their guns. Maps are just flat out ugly, and wouldn't look out of place in 2002, only with worse actual level design. Overall, visually this game is a drab, clashing mess with no sense of personality or character.

    The UI is terrible. Everything has a delay that just doesn't feel right like it does in some games. the visual and interactive components to the UI are all over the screen and horribly, horribly communicated. You cannot tab switch between unit classes when more than one are selected.

    Strategically this game has absolutely nothing to offer. Visually, it's bland, unoriginal, and uncohesive. Audibly, it's downright obnoxious. Avoid this game, period.    … Expand
  8. liakovich
    May 5, 2016
    2
    Guys why publish a new title with crap AI,instead of making an 64bit version of Sins of a Solar Empire (lag-free) more ships,more details,maybe some planetary indepth exploration or who knows.I would buy that, no matter what.I played ashes for 2 hours and i ve uninstalled it
  9. hpstr
    Apr 4, 2016
    2
    The basic concept is interesting but the low production values keep the game from reaching its potential The game is very, very unpolished: everything looks / sounds dull and missing gameplay features make getting into some kind of flow very hard, e.g.:
    - multiplayer coordination features like beacons
    - basic gameflow features like: select all idle workers / military - basic overview    The basic concept is interesting but the low production values keep the game from reaching its potential The game is very, very unpolished: everything looks / sounds dull and missing gameplay features make getting into some kind of flow very hard, e.g.:
    - multiplayer coordination features like beacons
    - basic gameflow features like: select all idle workers / military
    - basic overview features like: group icons on main map
    - the "army" feature is buggy and unnecessarily complicated
    - in some situations it is nearly impossible to distinguish between friend and foe
    - the game seems to be very unbalanced in favor of "the bigger the better" units.

    Not 1.0 worthy.
    Will re-review after the next patches.    … Expand
  10. AthanasiosT
    Mar 17, 2017
    2
    I want to apologize to the developers for the low specs monitor I currently have, which is the main cause of my inability to read the ultra small fonts they incorporated in this game. I promise that after I spent an enormous amount of money on three ultra HD screens and install them side to side, I'll raise my score.

Awards & Rankings

78
#78 Most Discussed PC Game of 2015
17
#17 Most Shared PC Game of 2015

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
69

Mixed or average reviews - based on 24 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 24
  2. Mixed: 16 out of 24
  3. Negative: 1 out of 24
  1. Riot Pixels
    Aug 12, 2016
    58
    Ashes of the Singularity, like a time machine, brings us back to the era when every RTS clone wanted to look unique and innovative.
    Read full review
  2. The Escapist
    Jul 11, 2016
    90
    Ashes of the Singularity has limited depth in some aspects, but as an RTS experience, and particularly as a first showing for its Oxide Engine foundation, it is absolutely stellar.
    Read full review
  3. CD-Action
    Jun 29, 2016
    65
    It’s a competent game but it won’t show you any tricks you haven’t seen in the genre. [06/2016, p.46]
See all critic reviews »