Rise of Nations

 PC
User Score
8.7

Generally favorable reviews- based on 396 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 335 out of 396
  2. Mixed: 53 out of 396
  3. Negative: 8 out of 396
Buy Now
Buy on

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. chitbazik
    May 16, 2015
    0
    Russian language. Нет поддержки русского языка, а очень много Россиян играют в игру, очень обидно и не удобно из-за этого играть. Если ставить сторонний русификатор, то проблемы с сетевой игрой, что так же портит наслаждение от игры!!!Russian language. Нет поддержки русского языка, а очень много Россиян играют в игру, очень обидно и не удобно из-за этого играть. Если ставить сторонний русификатор, то проблемы с сетевой игрой, что так же портит наслаждение от игры!!!
  2. permafrost
    Dec 7, 2020
    0
    Possibly the best RTS ever made.

    Reaction from Microsoft for a sequel: Crickets
  3. priyodit
    Jun 18, 2021
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Rise of Nations has nothing original, and the game is mediocre. Let me explain why this is particularly true in the case of Toughest difficulty level.
    All the good games have the ability that the players can bounce back and still try to win. Case in point- football, hockey, chess, Age of Empires, etc. Here, in this game, the area of nation is the factor on which collection of resources depend. Hence, if you lose a battle, the economy suffers so tremendously that you can not bounce back from it.

    The rules of the game was designed so that machines could play it, not humans. For example:
    - the concept itself is stolen from age of empires, but they forgot to copy the thought process.

    - the jungles, and all resources can be gathered for infinite time. why is this bad? because at times, due to unending resources, both the sides keep on making military and war goes on for hours at stretch.

    - the armies have a concept of anti - units strongly put in the game. so if you are not making the anti units, whatever be your army size, it will be nullified. imagine this. in a war, a musketeer is reporting to you- "so what captain that we are 100 in number. they have 30 heavy knights, and we do not know how to fire guns just because we are not the anti units of heavy knights!". musketeers are weak against knights, but they are made so weak that the army of such gunmen would fall flat against much lesser knights.

    - the toughest is not the smartest but it is sadist's way of making people go crazy. your resource gathering rate is slowed down, but computer keeps on collecting resources at same pace. if the authors of this games were not sadists, they would have given computer some finite advantage, and then we would see what good is their algo.

    - you can only build inside your national territory: why? because whim!

    -. You can build cities at least X distance away from each other- why? whim!

    - the characters are so small they can hardly be selected with mouse, and while computer can choose them with instructions.

    - the buildings are huge! so if you zoom in for the characters, the buildings become large.

    - if you lose the territory, you lose the city, you suffer economically because even if you are not gathering any resource in the city, your area reduces, and this reduces the gathering of gold etc. so there is not only a single loss but loss on multiple front. Also, the gain of oppressor is huge. so bouncing back is extremely unlikely. hence the game becomes lopsided, and frustrating.

    - there is no strategy in terms of calculable amount of resource required to build a building or military. The prices are dynamic. so if you can not compute how much food or wood would you need to make army how would you make army? the computer has advantage here as well.

    - if you have put the foundation of building, and the area even slightly reduces there because enemy's area increased, and the foundation of your building is even slightly in the enemy territory, the building gets cancelled.

    - the automation of citizens is pathetic. they either stand still but will not work when there are enough slots empty for jungles, metals or farms. sometimes, when you want them to stay when a building is under attack, they will move away to work!

    - the automation of army is pathetic. they engage on their own with whoever they feel like, rather than choosing who they are strong with.    … Expand

Awards & Rankings

7
#7 Best PC Game of 2003
23
#23 Most Discussed PC Game of 2003
15
#15 Most Shared PC Game of 2003

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
89

Generally favorable reviews - based on 30 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 30 out of 30
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 30
  3. Negative: 0 out of 30
  1. FiringSquad
    88
    There is a lot to be said for the city-centric game design, the intricate unit balancing, the smart AI, and the catchy, quickie action, although there isn’t anything here to make the jaded sit up and shout.
    Read full review
  2. GMR Magazine
    80
    Playing Rise of Nations won't make your jaw drop in amazement, but you'll probably still have lots of fun as long as you like RTS games. [Aug 2003, p.74]
  3. Armchair Empire
    90
    The second, more significant disappoint that RON inflicts upon the gamer is the mind numbing singularity of the conquest battles. As much as I love toasting the opposition into roasted marshmallow oblivion, doing so 22 times in a row gets a little old.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »